Category: Harvard

Harvard. General Examination in Macroeconomic Theory. Spring, 1991

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2019-05-22

We turn our attention now to relatively recent Macroeconomic Theory. The immediately preceding post provides a transcription of the Spring 1991 General Examination in Microeconomic Theory at Harvard.

This post represents the second artifact from the Abigail Wozniak collection of Harvard graduate economics general examinations from Spring 1991 through Spring 1999. Future installments will be posted, though not on a regular schedule.

From the different formatting and fonts seen in the original copies, we can conclude that Part I (questions 1-3), Part II (questions 4-6), Part III (questions 7-9) were each written by different sets of examiner(s).

___________________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS
ECONOMICS 2010d: FINAL EXAMINATION and
GENERAL EXAMINATION IN MACROECONOMIC THEORY
SPRING, 1991

Instructions for all Economics Department graduate students:

The examination will last four hours.

Answer all three parts of the examination (Parts I, II and III).
Within each part, answer any two of the three questions given (so that, in all, you will answer six questions).

Use a separate bluebook for each question. Clearly indicate the question number and your identification number on the front of each bluebook.

Do not indicate your name on any bluebook you submit.

Instructions for all other students:

The examination will last three hours.

Answer Parts II and III only. Within each part, answer any two of the three questions given (so that, in all, you will answer four questions).

Use a separate bluebook for each question. Clearly indicate the question number and your name on the front of each bluebook.

PART I

Question 1

“Old Keynesian” models were often criticized by their detractors for their apparent reliance on counter-cyclical real wages to generate fluctuations in output. Write a well crafted essay giving several examples of how more modern models (both Keynesian and non-Keynesian) have dealt with this issue. Explain the mechanism by which each model yields output fluctuations without counter-cyclical real wage fluctuations.

Question 2

Suppose that the simplest Lucas model describes the economy:

(1) ${{y}_{t}}={{m}_{t}}-{{p}_{t}}+{{\nu }_{t}}$ , quantity theory in logs

(2) ${{y}_{t}}=\alpha \left( {{p}_{t}}-{}_{t-1}{{p}_{t}} \right)+{{\varepsilon }_{t}}$ , Lucas supply function.

where _t_-1p_trepresents the mathematical expectation as of period t-1 of the price in period t, and ${{\nu }_{t}}$ and ${{\varepsilon }_{t}}$ are i.i.d. disturbances.

Suppose, however, that private agents, in their ignorance, believe that the economy is described by (1) and:

(3) ${{y}_{t}}=\beta \left( {{p}_{t}}-{}_{t-1}{{p}_{t}} \right)+{{\varepsilon }_{t}}$ , bogus supply function

where $\beta \ne \alpha$ .

(a) Will this ignorance lead to any real effects of anticipated money under any of the following monetary policies? “Where relevant, assume the central bank knows that (2) is true but that people believe (3).)

(4.1) ${{m}_{t}}=\bar{m}+{{u}_{t}}$ , constant money supply

(4.2) ${{m}_{t}}=\rho \left( {{m}_{t-1}} \right)+{{u}_{t}}$ , gradual adjustment

(4.3) ${{m}_{t}}=-c\left( {{y}_{t-1}} \right)+{{u}_{t}}$ , lagged feedback rule

Here u_tis a random error, and $0<\rho <1$ .

(b) Now suppose agents make a different mistake. They think the supply function is

(5) ${{y}_{t}}=\alpha \left( {{p}_{t}}-{}_{t-2}{{p}_{t}} \right)+{{\varepsilon }_{t}}$

That is, they know the parameter, but get the lag structure wrong. Answer the same question again.

Question 3

Consider the following simple growth model:

The economy is comprised of a single representative agent, who divides his labor between two activities. A fraction ${{\theta }_{t}}$ of labor is spent producing goods for consumption at time t, while a fraction $1-{{\theta }_{t}}$ of labor is spent producing capital goods at time t.

Suppose that the production function for consumer goods is.

${{c}_{t}}={{\theta }_{t}}k_{t}^{\alpha }$ ,

where k_tdenotes the capital stock as of time t.

The evolution of the capital stock is given by,

${{k}_{t+1}}=\left( 1-\delta \right){{k}_{t}}+\left( 1-{{\theta }_{t}} \right)k_{t}^{\alpha }$

where $\delta$ is the constant rate of depreciation, and $0<\alpha <1$ .

(a) If $\theta$ is constant for all t, what happens to k_tas $t\to \infty$ ? What happens to c_tin the long-run equilibrium?

(b) Suppose that consumer preferences are given by,

$\sum\limits_{t=0}^{\infty }{{{\beta }^{t}}}\ln {{c}_{t}},$

Where $0<\beta <1$ is the discount factor. What is the path for $\left\{ {{\theta }_{t}} \right\}$ which maximizes utility?

Before calculating this algebraically, explain the basic trade-offs involved in selecting and optimal $\theta$ . What must happen to ${{\lim }_{t\to \infty }}{{k}_{t}}$ under the optimal policy? Now using the first order conditions, derive an expression for the optimal time path of the ratio ${{{\theta }_{t}}}/{{{\theta }_{t-1}}}\;$ . What happens to this ratio as $t\to \infty$ .

(c) How does an increase in the depreciation rate $\delta$ or an increase in the discount factor $\beta$ affect the long-run equilibrium fraction of labor engaged in consumer goods production. Interpret your answers.

PART II

Answer any two of the following three questions. Be sure to use a separate bluebook for each answer.

Suppose that a nation’s government seeks to influence its level of aggregate demand so as to keep it as close as possible to the “full employment” level of output, which is determined independently of government actions. Suppose also that the government has two ways of affecting aggregate demand. Government spending closely and reliably influences aggregate demand; money growth also influences aggregate demand, but in a highly unpredictable manner. At the same time, there is a specific level of government spending that is deemed appropriate for reasons having nothing to do with its effect on aggregate demand; by contrast, the rate of money growth is of no consequence except insofar as it causes aggregate demand to be above or below “full employment” output. How can the government take account of these considerations in its conduct of fiscal and monetary policy?

What aspects of economic behavior determine whether monetary policy should tighten, ease, or remain unchanged when the economy experiences an adverse shock affecting its aggregate ability to supply goods and services on the basis of given labor and capital inputs? Be specific about the policy objective that your answer assumes.

Under what circumstances will a tax-and-transfer system intended to buffer the economy against shocks (of whatever origin) be unable to affect the distribution describing real economic outcomes? Show clearly that the set of assumptions you posit is sufficient for this “ineffectiveness” result. What are the major correspondences and contrasts between this set of assumptions and the conditions under which actual tax-and-transfer systems typically function in most industrialized economies? What conclusions do you draw from any contrasts?

Part III

Question 7

Consider the following model of a small open economy under flexible exchange rates:

I = I₀– r,
S = r,
X = R,
M = –R,
F = – $\alpha$ r, $\alpha$ ≥ 0
[S– (G– T)] – I = X – M,
F = X – M,

Where I = domestic investment, S = domestic private saving, X = exports, M = imports, F = capital outflow, G = government spending, T = tax revenues, r = domestic real interest rate, and R = real exchange rate. I₀is a shift variable representing investment demand shocks, and $\alpha$ indexes the degree of international capital mobility (when $\alpha =0$ , capital is completely immobile; when $\alpha =\infty$ , capital is perfectly mobile). In order to eliminate problems related to the negativity of some variables, think of all magnitudes as deviations from some unspecified values. The world interest rate is equal to zero. Domestic and foreign assets are perfect substitutes.

Suppose that fiscal policy is exogenous, in the sense that

G – T = G₀– T₀, G₀, T₀given.

What are the equilibrium effects of an investment shock (a change in I₀) on national saving and investment? Is a positive investment-national saving relation an indicator of a lack of perfect capital mobility? Explain.

Suppose now that fiscal policy is endogenous, in the sense that

G – T = [G₀+ $\beta$ (S – I)] – T₀, G₀, T₀given.

where 0 < $\beta$ ≤ 1. Answer the same questions as in 1. Explain.

Can the presence or lack of a crowding out effect of fiscal policy (resulting from changes in G₀) be used to empirically discriminate between the exogeneous and endogenous policy hypotheses? Why or why not?

Comment on the potential theoretical and empirical implications of this exercise.

Question 8

The “twin deficits” hypothesis asserts that U.S. Federal budget deficits are responsible for U.S. trade deficits.

Present two models, one which supports and one which invalidates, this hypothesis.
How could a proponent of the model which does not support the twin deficit hypothesis account for the recent coincidence of budget and trade deficits?
How would you test empirically each of your proposed models?

Question 9

What are the effects on consumption and capital accumulation of i) a proportional labor income tax, and ii) a proportional capital income tax in:

A life-cycle (overlapping generations) model;
An economy with infinitely-lived consumers.

Source: Department of Economics, Harvard University. Past General Exams, Spring 1991-Spring 1999, pp. 89-94. Private copy of Abigail Waggoner Wozniak.

Image Source: View of Widener Library from Harvard Campus, Cambridge, Mass. from Boston Public Library, Tichnor Brothers Collection of Massachusetts Postcards.

Exam Questions Harvard

Harvard. General Examination in Microeconomic Theory. Spring, 1991

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2019-05-21

The following general examination in microeconomic theory (Spring 1991) comes from a collection of nine years’ worth of general exams at Harvard from the last decade of the 20th century shared by Abigail Waggoner Wozniak (Harvard economics Ph.D., 2005). Abigail Wozniak was an associate professor of economics at Notre Dame before she was appointed senior research economist and the first director of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis’ Opportunity & Inclusive Growth Institute. Economics in the Rear-view Mirror is grateful for her generosity in having a copy sent here for eventual transcription.

The “Wozniak collection” is over 90 pages long, so it will take some time for all the exams to appear. But for now I can at least promise that the Spring 1991 macroeconomics examination will be posted soon.

______________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS
GENERAL EXAMINATION IN MICROECONOMIC THEORY
SPRING, 1991

Instructions:

For those taking the generals in microeconomic theory:

You have FOUR hours.
Answer a total of five questions subject to the following constraints:
at least two from Part A;
at least one from Part B;
exactly one from Part C.

For those taking the final exam in Economics 2010B, but not the generals:

You have three hours and ten minutes
Answer a total of four questions subject to the following constraints:
at least two from Part A;
do not answer any questions from Part B;
at least one from Part C.

Please use a separate blue book for each question, and please put your name (or number) on each book.

Unless otherwise specified, the parts within each question will be equally weighted.

PART A (questions 1, 2,3)

Consider an economy composed of a large number of consumers who differ in their tastes and endowment. The preferences of each individual are described by , where and endowments are
1. Write the excess demand function for good x and y as a function of the prices of the goods p= (p_x, p_y, p_z), using a knowledge of the statistics of the distribution F.
2. Find an expression for the equilibrium price system.
3. Show that it is unique.
4. Suppose that the price system p is out of equilibrium at time t = 0 and that for each commodity price adjusts proportionately to excess demand. The constant of proportionality d_k>0 for k= x, y, z is known to be positive but is not known to you. Can you nevertheless be sure that the price system will converge to the equilibrium found in b)? Explain
Consider a firm with production function f(x) which is uncertain about the price of its product p. This uncertainty is summarized in the distribution function G(p). The firm wants to maximize its expected profits. The workers of this firm, represented by their union, want to make a contract with the firm that will guarantee them a certain level of expected utility. The union’s von Neumann-Morgenstern utility function is u(c,x), where c is the total payment received by the union and x is the quantity of labor provided by the union to the firm.
1. Show that a contract in which c and x are specified in advance of the firm’s learning p is worse than one in which c and x can be chosen after p.
2. Assume that the realization of p from the distribution G is observable to both the firm and the union and that contracts c(p), x(p) specifying the payment and employment as a function of p are possible. Describe an optimal contract mathematically as it depends on f, u and G.
3. Now suppose that only the firm can observe p and that it must propose a contract c(x) which gives the compensation level as a function of labor demanded, and that the firm retains the right to choose x (and hence c) after the value of p is known. Write the problem of finding an optimal contract. What are the constraints?
4. Now suppose that there are only two possible prices p, call them p_H,p_L. Moreover, assume that x is a normal good in the union’s utility function. Show that the constraints found in part c are binding. Relative to an efficient situation, compare the value of the marginal product of labor to the marginal rate of substitution between x and c in the union’s utility function.
Consider a region consisting of three towns in which a jail must be built. The towns are configured as shown below:

1. The towns do not want the jail located in their borders. Moreover they do not want it in the town adjacent to themselves. Assume that utilities are quasi-linear, so that we can speak of the willingness to pay to avoid having the jail in or near a given town in units of money, which is transferable among the towns. Each town has a willingness to pay for avoiding having the jail in its borders of 10. Their willingness to pay for having it in an adjacent town are:

Town	Willingness to pay to avoid jail in a neighbor
1	5
2	3
3	0

Where should the jail be located on efficiency grounds? (.15)

1. Assume that the towns could freely bargain about the location of the jail, and that they can make deals involving monetary compensation among themselves. Describe the set of such arrangements that are robust against defection or recontracting. (.60)
2. Now assume that each town is populated by an identical number of citizens with identical utility functions such that their individual willingnesses to pay sum up to the town willingness to pay as given in part a. Could some type of competitive market be arranged to produce an efficient outcome? How would you organize it? (.25)

PART B (questions 4 and 5)

There are two firms, an incumbent and a potential entrant. To produce at all, a firm must install at least k_ounits of capacity. The cost of capacity is q (>0) per unit. A firm that installs k units of capacity (k ≧k_o) can produce up to k units of output. The marginal cost of output is c. Inverse demand is given by p = a – bx, where x is total output (the sum of the two firms’ outputs). The incumbent moves in period 1 and selects its capacity level k^I. The entrant then moves in period 2 and either chooses not to enter or else selects a capacity k^E. Finally, the two firms select output levels simultaneously in period 3. Subgame-perfect equilibrium is the solution concept.
1. What level of capacity must the incumbent install in order to deter entry? (Note: you need just set up the equation; it is not necessary to solve it explicitly). Will the incumbent ever choose to install capacity that it does not use in equilibrium?
2. If the incumbent chooses to accommodate entry, how much capacity will it install? Again, just set up the maximization).
3. Under what conditions on the parameter values will the incumbent act to deter entry rather than accommodate it?
4. Now suppose that demand is random and that the uncertainty is not resolved until the beginning of period 3.
  Specifically, suppose that inverse demand is $a-bx+\varepsilon$ or $a-bx-\varepsilon$ with equal likelihood where $\varepsilon$ is “small”. Assume that firms are risk neutral. Does the uncertainty increase or decrease the capacity needed to deter entry? (It should not be necessary to perform any computations to answer this question).
Suppose we are in a three commodity market. Good 3 is a numeraire and the demand functions for the other two goods are:

x₁(p,w)= a₁+ b₁p₁+ c₁p₂+ d₁p₁p₂
x₂(p,w)= a₂+ b₂p₁+ c₂p₂+ d₂p₁p₂

1. Note that the demand for goods x₁, x₂does not depend on wealth. Write down the most general class of utility functions whose demand has this property.
2. Argue that if the above demand functions are generated from utility maximization then the values of the parameters cannot be arbitrary. Write down as exhaustive a list as you can of the restrictions implied by utility maximization. Justify your answer.
3. Suppose that the conditions identified in (ii) hold. The initial price situation is
  p= (p₁, p₂) and we consider a change to p´= (p´₁, p´₂). Define the concept of consumer surplus generated in going from p to p´.
4. Let the value of the parameters be
  a₁= a₂= ½ , b₁= c₂= -1, c₁= b₂= ½, d₁= d₂= 0. Suppose the initial price situation is p= (1,1). Compute the consumer surplus for a move to p´ for each of the following three cases: (1) p´= (2,1), (2) p´= (1,2), (3) p´= (2,2). Denote by CS₁, CS₂, CS₃the respective answers. Under which condition will you have CS₃= CS₁+ CS₂. Discuss.

PART C (questions 6 and 7)

In both neo-Marxian and neo-Keynesian theories there is, to paraphrase Schumpeter, no growth without profit and no profit without growth. But the interaction between profit and growth is different in the two theories. What are the most important differences?
Consider the problem of predicting the shots made by an expert billiard player. It seems not at all unreasonable that excellent predictions would be yielded by the hypothesis that the billiard player made his shots as if he knew the complicated mathematical formulas that would give the optimum directions of travel, could estimate accurately by eye the angles, etc., describing the location of the balls, could make lightning calculations from the formulas, and could then make the balls travel in the direction indicated by the formulas.
It is only a short step from these examples to the economic hypothesis that under a wide range of circumstances individual firms behave as if they were seeking rationally to maximize their expect returns (generally if misleading called “profits”) and had full knowledge of the data needed to succeed in this attempt; as if, that is, they knew the relevant cost and demand functions, calculated marginal costs and marginal revenue from all actions open to them, and pushed each line of action to the point at which the relevant marginal coast and marginal revenue were equal. (Milton Friedman, “The Methodology of Positive Economics,” in Essays in Positive Economics, pp. 21-22).

What are the most important criticisms of Friedman’s position? What would be lost for economics, normative as well as positive, if the maximization hypothesis were abandoned?

Source: Department of Economics, Harvard University. Past General Exams, Spring 1991-Spring 1999, pp. 84-88. Private copy of Abigail Waggoner Wozniak.

Image Source: Abigail Wozniak webpage at the University of Notre Dame.

Gender Harvard Radcliffe

Radcliffe. Economics Course Offerings, 1920-1925

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2019-05-20

The following lists of courses available to Radcliffe women for the academic years running from 1920/21 through 1924/25 differ from earlier postings at Economics in the Rear-view Mirror in two respects: (i) I did not find course enrollment numbers in the annual Radcliffe presidential reports for these years, and (ii) I list both the courses offered to the Radcliffe women together with those graduate economics courses that “competent students in Radcliffe College” were allowed to attend. There is a self-own in these double daggers (‡), because one might just conclude that some incompetent (ahem, male) Harvard students had been allowed to attend the courses. Not all Harvard economics graduate courses were open to Radcliffe students.

The annual Radcliffe course catalogues have been corrected according to information provided in the Report of the President of Radcliffe College. Those courses listed in the catalogue that were not offered in a given year without being officially announced as [“bracketed”] have been crossed out below. There were actually very few such corrections needed.

___________________

Here are seven previous installments in the series “Economics course offerings at Radcliffe College”:

Pre-Radcliffe economics course offerings and Radcliffe courses for 1893-94, 1894-1900, 1900-1905, 1905-1910, 1910-1915, 1915-20.

__________________

The courses marked with a double dagger (‡) are Graduate courses in Harvard University which are open to competent students in Radcliffe College. No student will be admitted to any one of these courses unless she can satisfy the instructor that she is entirely qualified to do the work of the course.

__________________

1920-21
ECONOMICS

Primarily for Undergraduates

Economics A. Principles of Economics

Tu., Th., Sat., at 9. Asst. Professor Burbank.

Course A cannot be taken by Freshmen without the consent of the instructor.

For Undergraduates and Graduates

The Courses for Undergraduates and Graduates, unless otherwise stated, are open only to students who have passed in Course A. Economics 1a, 1b, 2a and 2b may be taken, with the consent of the instructor, by students who take Course A at the same time. Economics 8 is open to Juniors and Seniors of good standing who are taking Course A. Other courses in the group can be taken at the same time with Economics A only by special vote of the Department.

Economics 1a ¹hf. Accounting

Half-course (first half-year). Mon., Wed., Fri., at 2.30. Mr. Shaulis.

Economics 1b ²hf. Statistics

Half-course (second half-year). Mon., Wed., Fri., at 9. Asst. Professor J. S. Davis.

Laboratory work I the solution of problems and preparation of charts and diagrams will be required.

Economics 2a ¹hf. European Industry and Commerce in the Nineteenth Century

Half-course (first half-year). Tu., Th., (at the pleasure of the instructor) Sat., at 10. Dr. E. E. Lincoln.

Economics 2b ²hf. Economic History of the United States

Half-course (second half-year). Tu., Th., (at the pleasure of the instructor) Sat., at 10. Dr. E. E. Lincoln.

Economics 6a ¹hf. Trade-Unionism and Allied Problems

Half-course (first half-year). Mon., Wed., Fri., at 10. Mr. ____.

Economics 8. Principles of Sociology

Tu., Th., Sat., at 10. Professor Carver.

Economics 10 ¹hf. Economic Thought and Institutions

Half-course (first half-year). Tu., (and at the pleasure of the instructor) Th., at 2.30. Dr. A. E. Monroe.

Primarily for Graduates

ECONOMIC THEORY AND METHOD

‡Economics 11. Economic Theory

Mon., Wed., Fri., at 2.30. Professor Taussig.

‡Economics 14. History and Literature of Economics to the year 1848

Mon., Wed., and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Fri., at 11. Professor Bullock.

APPLIED ECONOMICS

‡Economics 31. Public Finance

Mon., Wed., and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Fri., at 10. Professor Bullock.

‡Economics 32 ²hf. Economics of Agriculture

With special reference to American conditions. Half-course (second half-year). Tu., Th., Sat., at 12. Professor Carver.

‡Economics 33 ¹hf. International Trade and Tariff Problems

Half-course (first half-year). Tu., Th., at 2.30. Professor Taussig.

‡Economics 34. Problems of Labor

Tu., Th., at 1.30. Professor Ripley.

‡Economics 35a ¹hf. Business Corporations

Half-course (first half-year). Tu., Th., Sat., at 10. Asst. Professor J. S. Davis.

‡Economics 35b ²hf. Business Combinations

Half-course (second half-year). Tu., Th., Sat., at 10. Asst. Professor J. S. Davis.

STATISTICS

‡Economics 41. Statistical Theory and Analysis

Mon., Wed., Fri., at 9. Professor Day.

‡Economics 42a ¹hf. Statistical Tabulation

Mon., Wed., Fri., at 1.30. Professor Day.

‡Economics 42b ²hf. Statistical Graphics

Mon., Wed., Fri., at 1.30. Professor Day.

Course of Research in Economics for Graduates

Graduate students pursuing research may register in the following course, which has the same status as any of the other graduate courses in Economics. Such research will be under the direction of members of the Department, and may lie within any of the fields recognized as appropriate for candidates for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy:—

‡Economics 20. Economic Research

Professors Taussig, Carver, Ripley, Bullock, Young, Persons, Day, Sprague, and Cole.

Source: Catalogue of Radcliffe College, 1920-1921, pp. 56-58 with corrections from Report of the President of Radcliffe College, 1920-1921, p. 23.

__________________

1921-22
ECONOMICS

Primarily for Undergraduates

Economics A. Principles of Economics

Tu., Th., Sat., at 9. Professor Day and Mr. Meriam.

Course A cannot be taken by Freshmen without the consent of the instructor.

For Undergraduates and Graduates

Economics 1a ¹hf. Statistics

Half-course (first half-year). Mon., Wed., Fri., at 1.30. Mr. Berridge.

Economics 1b ²hf. Accounting

Half-course (second half-year). Mon., Wed., Fri., at 2.30. Professor Cole.

Economics 2a ¹hf. European Industry and Commerce in the Nineteenth Century

Half-course (first half-year). Tu., Th., (at the pleasure of the instructor) Sat., at 10.Dr. Lincoln.
Omitted in 1921-22.

Economics 2b ²hf. Economic History of the United States

Half-course (second half-year). Tu., Th., (at the pleasure of the instructor) Sat., at 10. Dr. Lincoln.
Omitted in 1921-22.

Economics 6. Labor Problems

Mon., Wed., and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Fri., at 9. Mr. Meriam.

Economics 8. Principles of Sociology

Tu., Th., Sat., at 10. Professor Carver.

Economics 10 ¹hf. Economic Thought and Institutions

Half-course (first half-year). Tu., (and at the pleasure of the instructor) Th., at 2.30. Dr. A. E. Monroe.
Course 10 is open to undergraduates who have passed in Economics A and are concentrating in the Division of History, Government, and Economics; and to others with the consent of the instructor.

Primarily for Graduates

ECONOMIC THEORY AND METHOD

‡Economics 11. Economic Theory

Mon., Wed., Fri., at 2.30. Professors Taussig and Young.

‡Economics 14. History and Literature of Economics to the year 1848

Mon., Wed., and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Fri., at 11. Professor Bullock.

APPLIED ECONOMICS

‡Economics 31. Public Finance

Mon., Wed., and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Fri., at 10. Professor Bullock.

‡Economics 32 ²hf. Economics of Agriculture

With special reference to American conditions. Half-course (second half-year). Tu., Th., Sat., at 12. Professor Carver.

‡Economics 34. Problems of Labor

Tu., Th., at 1.30, or by arrangement. Professor Ripley.

‡Economics 35a ¹hf. Business Corporations

Half-course ( first half-year). Tu., Th., Sat., at 10. Asst. Professor J. S. Davis.

‡Economics 35b ²hf.Business Combinations

Half-course (second half-year). Tu., Th., Sat., at 10. Asst. Professor J. S. Davis.

STATISTICS

‡Economics 41. Statistical Theory and Analysis

Mon., Wed., Fri., at 9. Professor Day.

‡Economics 43a ¹hf.Statistical Graphics

Mon., Wed., Fri., at 3.30. Professor Day.

Course of Research in Economics for Graduates

‡Economics 20. Economic Research

Professors Taussig, Carver, Ripley, Bullock, Young, Persons, Day.

Source: Catalogue of Radcliffe College, 1921-1922, pp. 60-62 with corrections from Report of the President of Radcliffe College 1921-1922, p. 57.

__________________

1922-23
ECONOMICS

Primarily for Undergraduates

Economics A. Principles of Economics

Tu., Th., Sat., at 9. Mr. Meriam.

Course A cannot be taken by Freshmen without the consent of the instructor.

Economics B ¹hf. Economic Thought and Institutions

Half-course (first half-year). Tu., (and at the pleasure of the instructor) Th., at 2.30. Dr. A. E. Monroe.
Given in alternate years. To be omitted in 1923-24.

Course B is open to undergraduates who have passed in Economics A and are concentrating in the Division of History, Government, and Economics; and to others with the consent of the instructor.

Economics C hf. Theses for Distinction

Half-course (throughout the year). Hours to be arranged. Members of the Department.

Economics C is open only to students in their last year in College who are candidates for the degree with distinction in Economics. Students wishing to enroll in the course should consult with Dr. A. E. Monroe.

For Undergraduates and Graduates

Economics 1a ¹hf. Statistics

Half-course (first half-year). Mon., Wed., Fri., at 1.30. Professor Day.

Economics 1b ²hf. Accounting

Half-course (second half-year). Mon., Wed., Fri., at 2.30. Professor Cole.

Economics 2a ¹hf. European Industry and Commerce in the Nineteenth Century

Half-course (first half-year). Tu., Th., (at the pleasure of the instructor) Sat., at 10. Dr. A. P. Usher.

Economics 2b ²hf. Economic History of the United States

Half-course (second half-year). Tu., Th., (at the pleasure of the instructor) Sat., at 10. Dr. A. P. Usher.

Economics 6. Labor Problems

Mon., Wed.,and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Fri., at 9. Dr. Meriam.

Economics 7b ²hf. Programs of Social Reconstruction

Half-course (second half-year). Tu., Th., Sat., at 9. Professor Carver.

Economics 8. Principles of Sociology

Tu., Th., Sat., at 10. Professor Carver.

Primarily for Graduates

Except by special vote of the Department the courses for graduates are open to those undergraduates only who are in their last year of work and are candidates for the degree with distinction in the Division of History, Government, and Economics; but students of good standing may, in their last year of study, be admitted to Course 32, if they can show that they have special need of the subject.

ECONOMIC THEORY AND METHOD

‡Economics 11. Economic Theory

Mon., Wed., Fri., at 2.30. Professor Taussig.

‡Economics 14. History and Literature of Economics to the year 1848

Mon., Wed., and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Fri., at 11. Professor Bullock.

‡Economics 15. Modern Schools of Economic Thought

Mon., Wed., at 3.30, and a third hour at the pleasure of the instructor. Professor Young.

APPLIED ECONOMICS

‡Economics 31. Public Finance

Mon., Wed., and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Fri., at 10. Professor Bullock.

‡Economics 32 ²hf. Economics of Agriculture

Half-course (second half-year). Tu., Th., Sat., at 12. Professor Carver.

‡Economics 33 ¹hf. International Trade and Tariff Problems

Half-course (first half-year). Tu., Th., at 2.30. Professor Taussig.

‡Economics 34. Problems of Labor

Tu., Th., at 1.30, or by arrangement. Professor Ripley.

STATISTICS

‡Economics 41. Statistical Theory and Analysis

Mon., Wed., Fri., at 9. Professors Day and Young.

Course of Research in Economics for Graduates

‡Economics 20. Economic Research

Professors Taussig, Carver, Ripley, Bullock, Young, Persons, and Day.

Source: Catalogue of Radcliffe College, 1922-1923, pp. 60-62 with corrections from Report of the President of Radcliffe College, 1922-1923, pp. 89-90.

__________________

1923-24
ECONOMICS

Primarily for Undergraduates

Economics A. Principles of Economics

Tu., Th., Sat., at 10. Mr. Remer.

Course A cannot be taken by Freshmen without the consent of the instructor.

[Economics B ¹hf. Economic Thought and Institutions]

Half-course (first half-year). Tu., (and at the pleasure of the instructor) Th., at 2. Dr. A. E. Monroe.
Given in alternate years. Omitted in 1923-24.

Course B is open to undergraduates who have passed in Economics A and are concentrating in the Division of History, Government, and Economics; and to others with the consent of the instructor.

Economics C hf. Theses for Distinction

Half-course (throughout the year). Hours to be arranged. Members of the Department.

For Undergraduates and Graduates

Economics 1a ¹hf. Statistics

Half-course (first half-year). Mon., Wed., Fri., at 2. Mr. Blackett.

Economics 1b ¹hf. Accounting

Half-course (second half-year). Mon., Wed., Fri., at 2. Mr. A. W. Hanson.

Economics 2a ¹hf. European Industry and Commerce in the Nineteenth Century

Half-course (first half-year). Tu., Th., (at the pleasure of the instructor) Sat., at 10.Asst. Professor Usher.

Economics 2b ²hf. Economic History of the United States

Half-course (second half-year). Tu., Th., (at the pleasure of the instructor) Sat., at 10. Asst. Professor Usher.

Economics 3 ¹hf. Money, Banking, and Commercial Crises

Assistant Professor Williams.

Economics 4b ²hf. Economics of Corporations

Mr. A. V. Woodworth.

Economics 6. Labor Problems

Mon., Wed., and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Fri., at 12. Dr. Meriam.

Economics 7b ²hf. Programs of Social Reconstruction

Half-course (second half-year). Tu., Th., Sat., at 9. Professor Carver.

Economics 8. Principles of Sociology

Tu., Th., Sat., at 10. Professor Carver.

Primarily for Graduates

ECONOMIC THEORY AND METHOD

‡Economics 11. Economic Theory

Mon., Wed., Fri., at 3. Professor Taussig.

‡Economics 12a ¹hf.Problems in Sociology and Social Reform

Half-course (first half-year). Mon., Wed., and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Fri., at 10. Professor Carver.

‡Economics 14. History and Literature of Economics to the year 1848

Mon., Wed., and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Fri., at 11. Professor Bullock.

‡Economics 15 ¹hf.Modern Schools of Economic Thought

Half-course (first half-year) Tu., Th., at 10, and a third hour at the pleasure of the instructor. Professor Young.

APPLIED ECONOMICS

‡Economics 31. Public Finance

Mon., Wed., and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Fri., at 10. Professor Bullock.

‡Economics 32 ²hf.Economics of Agriculture

Half-course (second half-year). Tu., Th., and( at the pleasure of the instructor) Sat., at 12. Professor Carver.

[‡Economics 33 ¹hf.International Trade and Tariff Problems]

Half-course (first half-year). Tu., Th., at 2.30. Professor Taussig.
Omitted in 1923-24.

‡Economics 34. Problems of Labor

Full course (first half-year) Tu., Th., 2-4, or by arrangement. Professor Ripley.

‡Economics 37 ¹hf.Commercial Crises

Half-course (first half-year). Tu., Th., at 9, or by arrangement. Professor Persons.

‡Economics 38. The Principles of Money and Banking

Mon., Wed., and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Friday at 4. Professor Young.

STATISTICS

‡Economics 41. Statistical Theory and Analysis

Mon., Wed., Fri., at 9. Asst. Professor Crum.

Course of Research in Economics for Graduates

‡Economics 20. Economic Research

Professors Taussig, Carver, Ripley, Bullock, Young, and Persons.

Source: Catalogue of Radcliffe College, 1923-1924, pp. 62-65 with corrections from Report of the President of Radcliffe College, 1923-1924, p. 34.

__________________

1924-25
ECONOMICS

Primarily for Undergraduates

Economics A. Principles of Economics

Tu., Th., Sat., at 9. Mr. Bober.

Course A cannot be taken by Freshmen without the consent of the instructor.

Economics B ¹hf. Economic Thought and Institutions

Half-course (first half-year). Tu., (and at the pleasure of the instructor) Th., at 2. Asst. Professor A. E. Monroe.
Given in alternate years.

Course B is open to undergraduates who have passed in Economics A and are concentrating in the Division of History, Government, and Economics; and to others with the consent of the instructor.

Economics C hf. Theses for Distinction

Half-course (throughout the year). Hours to be arranged. Members of the Department.

For Undergraduates and Graduates

Economics 1a ¹hf. Statistics

Half-course (first half-year). Mon., Wed., Fri., at 2. Mr. D. W. Gilbert.

Economics 1b ¹hf. Accounting

Half-course (second half-year). Mon., Wed., Fri., at 2. Professor W. M. Cole.

Economics 2a ¹hf. European Industry and Commerce since 1750

Half-course (first half-year). Tu., Th., (at the pleasure of the instructor) Sat., at 10.Asst. Professor Usher.

Economics 2b ²hf. Economic History of the United States

Half-course (second half-year). Tu., Th., (at the pleasure of the instructor) Sat., at 10. Asst. Professor Usher.

Economics 3 ¹hf. Money, Banking, and Commercial Crises

Half-course (first half-year). Mon., Wed., Fri., at 11. Assistant Professor Williams.

Economics 4b ²hf. Economics of Corporations

Half-course (second half-year). Mon., Wed., Fri., at 11. Dr. Woodworth.

Economics 6. Labor Problems

Mon., Wed., and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Fri., at 12. Asst. Professor Meriam.

Economics 7b ²hf. Programs of Social Reconstruction

Half-course (second half-year). Tu., Th., and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Sat., at 9. Professor Carver.

Economics 8. Principles of Sociology

Tu., Th., and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Sat., at 10. Professor Carver.

Primarily for Graduates

ECONOMIC THEORY AND METHOD

‡Economics 11. Economic Theory

Mon., Wed., Fri., at 2. Professor Taussig.

‡Economics 12a ¹hf.Problems in Sociology and Social Reform

Half-course (first half-year). Mon., Wed., and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Fri., at 10. Professor Carver.

‡Economics 14. History and Literature of Economics to the year 1848

Mon., Wed., and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Fri., at 11. Professor Bullock.

‡Economics 15 ¹hf.Modern Schools of Economic Thought

Half-course (first half-year) Tu., Th., at 10, and a third hour at the pleasure of the instructor. Professor Young.

ECONOMIC HISTORY

‡Economics 23. European and American Economic History

Wed., Fri., at 3, and a third hour at the pleasure of the instructor. Asst. Professor Usher.
With the consent of the instructor Course 23 may be taken as a half-course in either half-year.

‡Economics 24. Topics in Modern Economic History

Two consecutive evening hours a week, to be arranged. Professor Gay.

APPLIED ECONOMICS

‡Economics 31. Public Finance

Mon., Wed., and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Fri., at 10. Professor Bullock.

‡Economics 32 ²hf.Economics of Agriculture

Half-course (second half-year). Tu., Th., and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Sat., at 12. Professor Carver.

‡Economics 33 ¹hf.International Trade and Tariff Problems

Half-course (first half-year). Tu., Th., at 2. Professor Taussig.

‡Economics 34. Problems of Labor

Tu., Th., 2-4, and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Sat., at 2. Professor Ripley.

‡Economics 37 ¹hf.Commercial Crises

Half-course (first half-year). Tu., Th., at 9, or by arrangement. Professor Persons.

‡Economics 38. The Principles of Money and Banking

Mon., Wed., Fri., at 4. Professor Young.

‡Economics 39 ²hf.International Finance

Half-course (second half-year) Tu., Th., at 3. Asst. Professor Williams.

STATISTICS

‡Economics 41 ²hf.Statistical Theory and Analysis

Half-course (second half-year) Mon., Wed., Fri., at 9. Asst. Professor Crum.

Course of Research in Economics for Graduates

‡Economics 20. Economic Research

Professors Taussig, Carver, Ripley, Bullock, Young, and Persons.

Source: Catalogue of Radcliffe College, 1924-1925, pp. 66-68 with corrections from Report of the President of Radcliffe College 1924-1925, p. 27.

Image Source: From the cover of the Radcliffe Book of the Class of 1916.

Chicago Economist Market Economists Harvard Radical

Harvard/Chicago. Gottfried Haberler and Milton Friedman on Samuel Bowles, 1970

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2019-05-19
1 Comment on Harvard/Chicago. Gottfried Haberler and Milton Friedman on Samuel Bowles, 1970

The following exchange between Gottfried Haberler and Milton Friedman is really quite remarkable. It is the second observation by Economics in the Rear-view Mirror of Gottfried Haberler trashing a liberal/radical economist on the q.t. The first instance involved John Kenneth Galbraith in 1948 (though I cannot say that I would personally fault Haberler for his having ranked Paul Samuelson above John Kenneth Galbraith as an economist). It will come as a surprise to some people that Milton Friedman defended the scholarly honor of one of the leading, if not the leading, radical economists in 1970. As we see below Friedman in no uncertain terms let Haberler know that he still considered his earlier support of Samuel Bowles for an untenured appointment at the University of Chicago to have been based solely on the analytical merits displayed by Bowles.

You do not want to miss the Harvard anecdote relayed by Roy Weintraub that is posted below as a comment!

__________________

PERSONAL

May 14, 1970

Professor Milton Friedman
Department of Economics
University of Chicago
Chicago, Illinois 60637

Dear Milton:

I was told that Chicago has made an offer to Sam Bowles and that you supported it warmly. Frankly, I am somewhat surprised. He has certainly some analytic abilities but in general he is very radical, almost as wild as Arthur MacEwan, and thoroughly demagogic in his interventions in faculty meetings and talks to students. I would really like to know whether it is true that Chicago offered him a job.

Sincerely yours,

Gottfried Haberler

H:w

__________________

THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS
1126 EAST 59^THSTREET
CHICAGO—ILLINOIS 60637

May 19, 1970

Professor Gottfried Haberler
Department of Economics
Harvard University
326 Littauer Center
Cambridge, Masachusetts 02138

Dear Gottfried:

Some years back I had occasion to read some of the work which Bowles had done in connection with our consideration of him at that time. I was very favorably impressed indeed by the intellectual quality of the work and the command that it displayed of analytical economics. At that time I was very much in accord with our decision to make him an offer of a position. He turned us down to stay at Harvard.

I have very vague recollections about what has happened this year. I do not know for certain whether or not we did make an offer to him this year. We may have done so; and if so, I would not have objected since the only consideration I would have considered relevant would have been his intellectual qualities.

I will try to find out more definitely and let you know.

Sincerely yours,
[signed, “Milton”]
Milton Friedman

[Handwritten addition: P.S. I have checked. No offer was made to him this year. We made an offer some years ago at the Ass’t Prof level when he first went to Harvard. We made a later offer a couple of years ago again on a term basis. There is no offer outstanding now.]

Source: Hoover Institution Archives. Gottfried Haberler Papers. Box 12, Folder “GH—Milton Friedman”.

Image Source: University of Massachusetts Amherst . Police Department, “Board of Trustees fee increase demonstration: Economics professor Samuel Bowles speaking to protesters, April 15, 1976“, University Photograph Collection (RG 110-176). Special Collections and University Archives, University of Massachusetts Amherst Libraries.

Tags Bowles, Friedman, Haberler

Economists Gender Harvard Socialism

Harvard. Economics Ph.D. alumnus, later collector of Soviet nonconformist art. Norton T. Dodge, 1960

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2019-05-19

That John Maynard Keynes was an art collector/investor is well-known. Economics in the Rear-view mirror has earlier posted about the Columbia economic historian Vladimir Simkhovich, one of Milton Friedman’s professors, who turned out to be quite the collector himself. My old professor of comparative economic systems, John Michael Montias of Yale, later became a well-renowned authority on Vermeer as well as the art market in Amsterdam in the 17th century.

This post is another in the series “Get to know a Ph.D. economist”. Norton Dodge was one of the legion of young scholars who launched their research careers at the Harvard Russian Research Center. Somehow Dodge went from being a mild-mannered economist who wrote a doctoral dissertation on labor productivity in the Soviet tractor industry (don’t try that at home unless you are a professional) to the passionate collector of Soviet nonconformist art. Apparently Dodge was able to fly under the radar long enough to establish a network to help satisfy his urge to collect, often discretely sometimes openly, and to assemble an enormous collection. According to John McPhee’s 1994 book (see below), Norton Dodge spent $3 million dollars of his personal fortune buying Soviet underground art. Dodge inherited a bundle from his father, Homer Levi Dodge, physicist who also became dean of the graduate school at the University of Oklahoma in Norman. Homer Dodge was an early Warren Buffett investor.

In 1995 the Norton and Nancy Dodge Collection of Soviet Nonconformist Art was donated to Rutgers University.

________________

Norton Townshend Dodge

1927 June 15. Born in Oklahoma City.

Began his studies at Deep Springs College.

1948. Graduated from Cornell University.

1951. A.M. in Russian studies at Harvard

1955. First trip to USSR. Dissertation research.

1960. Harvard economics Ph.D. Thesis: Trends in Labor Productivity in the Soviet Tractor Industry; a Case Study in Industrial Development.

1962. Second visit to Soviet Union. Meets dissident artists.

1966. Women in the Soviet Economy: Their Role in Economic, Scientific, and Technical Development(Johns Hopkins University Press).

1976. Following death of artist Evgeny Rukhin under suspicious circumstances, Dodge ceased his travel to the Soviet Union, relying on his personal network

1980. Retired from University of Maryland, College Park, begins teaching at St. Mary’s College, Maryland.

1989. Retired from St. Mary’s College, Maryland.

1995. Opening of the Norton and Nancy Dodge Collection of Soviet Nonconformist Art to Rutgers University [17,000 items donated valued at $34 Million] (permanent display at Jane Voorhees Zimmerli Art Museum)

From Gulag to Glasnost: Nonconformist Art in the Soviet Union, edited with Alla Rosenfield.

2011 November 5. Died in Washington, D.C.

________________

For more, especially about Dodge’s art collecting

John McPhee. The Ransom of Russian Art (1994).

Andrew Solomon. “Produced in the Soviet Dark, Collected by a Secret Admirer”. New York Time, October 15, 1995.

Emily Langer, Norton T. Dodge, U-Md. Economics professor and Soviet art collector, dies at 84. Washington Post, November 10, 2011.

Margalit Fox, “Norton Dodge Dies at 84; Stored Soviet Dissident Art. New York Times, November 11, 2011.

Image Source: US Post News, Deaths November 2011.

Tags Dodge, Montias, Simkhovitch

Economics Programs Harvard

Harvard. Completion rates for economics graduate students, 1947-57

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2019-05-11

Here is an interesting summary of the spectrum of completion from drop-out through award of the Ph.D. in economics for Harvard University 1947-1957. Note the labels “desperate, doubtful, better, safe” for the forecasted prospects of students who had left the gravitational pull of residency.

____________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
GRADUATE STUDENTS IN THE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS
1947-57

Comment:

The attached survey shows the history of graduate students in the Department of Economics from 1947-57. The details by years are available in Littauer M-8, but we are not duplicating that part of the report.

You will note that of 525 students (378 Arts and Sciences, 50 Radcliffe and 97 Graduate School of Public Administrations) in these ten years, there were a total of 113 withdrawals, about 55% because of poor grades and 45% despite good grades. Of the remaining 412 students, 40 have had but one year’s residence and have not yet taken the General Examination, while 372 have taken and passed the General Examination for an advanced degree. Of these, 69, or about 16%, were awarded a terminal A.M. largely because they passed for the A.M. only. This leaves 303 who have passed the General Examination for the Ph.D., but so far only 152, or roughly 50% have received their Ph.D. There are 50 students still in residence working on their thesis. Of 101 students no longer in residence, 69 have thesis overdue and 39 have not yet written their thesis but are still within the five year limit.

Further details may be had by glancing at the attached sheet.

* * * * * * * * *

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
GRADUATE STUDENTS IN THE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS
1947-57
SUMMARY

1.	Enrollment 1947-57: (Arts and Sciences 378, Radcliffe 50, Graduate School of Public Administration 97)		525
2.	Withdrawn
a)	with poor grades, in discontent or upon request:
	after one term	20
	after two terms	36
	after four terms	_6_
		62
b)	despite good grades:
	after two terms	48
	after four terms	3
	after more than four terms	_0_
		51
	Total Withdrawals		113
3.	Now in residence before General Examination		40
	Forecast:
	Prospects for withdrawal	6
	Prospects for terminal A.M.	14
	Prospects for Ph.D.	20
4.	Passed General Examination for advanced degree		372

5.	A.M. Awarded as terminal degree		69
6.	A.M. expected as terminal degree	5
7.	A.M. awarded in course toward Ph.D. degree	188
8.	Candidates for the Ph.D. degree	343
9.	Ph.D. degree awarded		152
10.	Students still in residence working on thesis (29 of these, 3 yrs residence; 2, less than 3 yrs)		50
	Forecasts:
	Prospects for completion safe	40
	Prospects for completion doubtful	10
11.	No longer in residence, thesis overdue		62
	Forecasts:
	Prospects for completion desperate (Poor record: thesis overdue 2-5 yrs.)	26
	Prospects for completion doubtful (Fair record; thesis overdue 1-4 yrs.)	13
	Prospects for completion better (Good record; thesis overdue 1-4 yrs.)	23
12.	No longer in residence, thesis within 5 yr. limit		39
	Forecasts:
	Prospects for completion doubtful	5
	Prospects for completion safe	34	___
			525

	Summary:
	Ph.D. prospects safe	117
	Ph.D. awarded	152
	Ph.D. awarded or safely expected	269

Source: Harvard University Archives. Department of Economics. Correspondence and Papers, 1930-1961. General-Exams-Haberler.(UAV.349.11), Box 13.

Image Source: Harvard Album, 1946.

Curriculum Fields Harvard

Harvard. Mathematical Economics Recognized as Subfield of Theory. E.B. Wilson, Crum, and Schumpeter, 1933

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2019-05-09

What I find particularly striking in the following report of the Committee on Instruction in Mathematical Economics at Harvard (note the first named of the trio is E. B. Wilson) is the forecast that economics graduate students will need to acquire tools of mathematical economics and statistics already in the mid 1930s because they will need them later, 1953-63, when they will be “at the height of their activity” and by which time (implicitly) the “rapidly increasing importance of theoretical and statistical work involving higher mathematics” will have caught up with them. I have appended the course names for the statistics and mathematics courses referred to by number in the report.

Related postings:

_____________________

Meeting of the Committee (Wilson, Crum, Schumpeter) on
Instruction in the Mathematical Economics
Tuesday, May 9 [1933]

In view of the rapidly increasing importance of theoretical and statistical work involving higher mathematics, and of the possibility that a considerable number of economists may have to be adequately familiar with both mathematical theory and statistical procedure twenty to thirty years from now, that is, when many of our present students will be at the height of their activity, the Committee (Wilson, Crum, Schumpeter) agreed on the following recommendations to be submitted to the Department which they believe to be both necessary and sufficient in order to provide facilities for events to work in mathematical theory as applied to economics:

(1) Any student who may wish to do so should be allowed to offer mathematical economics as his special field within the requirements for the Ph.D. This would involve but a slight alteration of existing practice which permits students to choose some branch of economic theory as a special field. The committee’s suggestion is merely that mathematical economics should be added to the other special subjects in economic theory which a student may select.

It seems desirable, moreover, to permit that any such student may select mathematics or rather some branch of pure or applied mathematics in place of one of the two remaining fields he has to offer.

(2) Advanced work in mathematical economics should conform to modern tendencies by stressing equally the mathematical side of economic theory and mathematical statistics. No student who elects mathematical economics as his special field should be allowed to do the one without the other. Especially courses 31a and 32b should be required also from students mainly interested in pure theory.

(3) Work in the Department of Mathematics through Math 5 should be considered as the minimum requirement as to mathematical training. Credit should be given only for Math 5, but not for any of the still more elementary course preparatory to it, which most of the students taking up mathematical economics will have had anyhow in their undergraduate period.

(4) No further steps should be taken at present. It seems best to see what the response will be before attempting to organize a special graduate course. The mathematical aspect of our subject is being dealt with in some courses already, and any Ph.D. candidates who may present themselves in case the rules be altered as recommended could easily be taken care of individually.

* * * * * * * *

Copy of Letter from Harold H. Burbank to Joseph Schumpeter

October 3, 1933

Dear Joe,

I have read and approved without qualification the report of the Committee on Instruction in Mathematical Economics.

I think this report should be brought before the Department on the evening of Tuesday, October 10.

Very sincerely yours,

Prof. J. A. Schumpeter
2 Scott Street

HHB:VS

* * * * * * * *

Graduate Instruction in the Mathematical Economics
Department Vote, October 10, 1933

The Department voted to accept the recommendations stated as follows:

(1) Any student who may wish to do so should be allowed to offer mathematical economics as his special field within the requirements for the Ph.D. This would involve no alteration of existing practice, which permits students to choose some branch of economic theory as a special field. The committee’s suggestion is that mathematical economics should be admissible.

(2) Any students using mathematical economics as his special field should be allowed to offer some branch of pure or applied mathematics as an allied field.

Work in the Department of Mathematics through Math 5, or the equivalent, should be considered as the minimum requirement as to mathematical training. Credit should be given only for Math 5, but not for any more elementary course preparatory to it.

(3) Advanced work in mathematical economics should conform to modern tendencies by stressing equally the mathematical side of economic theory and mathematical statistics. Therefore courses 31a and 32b should be required of anyone in electing mathematical theory as his special field.

(4) No further steps need be taken at present. It seems best to see what the response will be before attempting to organize a special graduate course. Any individual cases calling for special attention can be dealt with, under the proposed regulation, as our courses now stand.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Department of Economics, Correspondence and papers 1930-1961. (UAV349.11), Box 13.

_____________________

Statistics Courses offered in the Department of Economics
at Harvard, 1934-35

Economics 31a ¹hf (formerly Economics 41a). Theory of Economic Statistics, I

Half-course (first half-year). Mon., Wed., Fri., at 9. Professor Crum and Asst. Professor Frickey.
Economics 1a, or its equivalent, is a prerequisite for this course.

Economics 31b ²hf (formerly Economics 41b). Theory of Economic Statistics, II

Half-course (second half-year). Mon., Wed., Fri., at 9. Professor Crum and Asst. Professor Frickey.
Economics 1a, or its equivalent, is a prerequisite for this course.

Economics 32b ²hf (formerly Economics 42). Foundations of Statistical Theory

Half-course (second half-year). Tu., Th., 3 to 4.30. Professor E. B. Wilson.
Economics 31a and one year of Calculus are prerequisites for this course.

Source: Announcement of the Courses of Instruction offered by the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, 1933-34(second edition), Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. XXX, No. 39 (September 20, 1933), p. 128.

_____________________

Undergraduate Mathematics Courses
at Harvard, 1934-35

Mostly Freshmen

[Mathematics] A. Professors J. L Coolidge et al. — Analytic Geometry; Introduction to the Calculus.

Mostly Sophomores

[Mathematics] 2. Professors Graustein et al. — Differential and Integral Calculus; Analytic Geometry.

Mostly Juniors

[Mathematics] 5a¹hf. Professor Morse. — Differential and Integral Calculus (advanced course), Part I

[Mathematics] 5a²hf. Professor Morse. — Differential and Integral Calculus (advanced course), Part II

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1934-35, p. 86.

Images: Left to right: William Leonard Crum, Joseph A. Schumpeter, Edwin Bidwell Wilson. From the 1934 (Crum) and 1939 (Schumpeter and Wilson) Harvard Class Albums.

Tags Burbank, Crum, Schumpeter, WilsonEB

Harvard Seminar Speakers Sociology Suggested Reading Syllabus

Harvard. Social Influences on Economic Actions, outline and readings. Musgrave and Spechler, 1973

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2019-05-08
2 Comments on Harvard. Social Influences on Economic Actions, outline and readings. Musgrave and Spechler, 1973

The outline below for an ambitious Harvard course organized jointly by Richard Musgrave and Martin C. Spechler in 1973 comes from John Kenneth Galbraith’s papers. Galbraith was invited to give a lecture on institutional economics and a couple of pages of keywords in the folder would appear to confirm that Galbraith indeed lectured on the topic.

Biographical information for Richard Musgrave was provided a few blog postings ago. Martin Spechler too was a Harvard alumnus (indeed all three of his academic degrees come from that institution) and so I’ll first insert the chronology of his academic jobs so one can meet another economic Ph.D. alumnus. Spechler’s main research field was comparative economic systems complemented by a strong interest in the history of economics (see the link to his 2007 c.v. below).

______________________

Martin C. Spechler (b. January 25, 1943, New York City)

A.B. in Social Studies (1964), A.M. in Economics (1967), Ph.D. in Economics (1971). Harvard

1965-1971. Harvard. Teaching fellow in economics and social studies.
1971-1973. Harvard. Lecturer on economics and on social studies.
1971-1974. Harvard. Head tutor in economics.
1973-1975. Harvard. Assistant professor of economics.
1974-1980. Hebrew University, Jerusalem. Department of Economics, lecturer.
1980-1982. Tel Aviv University. Department of Economics and School of General History. Senior lecturer (acting).
1982-1983. University of Washington, Seattle. School of International Studies. Visiting associate professor.
1983-1984. University Iowa, Iowa City. Visiting associate professor.
1984-1986. Indiana University, Bloomington. Visiting associate professor of economics and research associate, West European Studies.
1986-1990. Indiana University, Indianapolis. Associate professor of economics
1990-. Indiana University, Purdue University, Indianapolis. Professor of economics.

Source: Martin C. Spechler c.v. (December 2007).

______________________

ECONOMICS 2080
Tentative Lecture Schedule
[1973]

1.	September 27	Spechler on Marxism
2.	October 4	Unger on Weber
3.	October 9 (Tues.)	Galbraith on institutionalism
4.	October 18	Duesenberry on consumer behavior
5.	October 25	(?) on entrepreneurs
6.	November 1	M. Roberts on government bureaucracy
7.	November 8	J. Bower on corporate organization
8.	November 15	Doeringer on workers and unions
9.	November 20 (Tuesday)	Bowles (?) on Marxian theory of the state
10.	November 29	D. Bell (?) on elite theory
11.	December 6	J. Q. Wilson on pluralism
12.	December 13	Hirschman on trade policy
13.	December 20	Musgrave on objectivity in economics and social science

Harvard University
Economics 2080

Social Influences on Economic Action
Fall Term, Thursday 4-6

Martin C. Spechler
Holyoke 833, Office; 10-12 (daily)

Richard Musgrave
Littauer 326

Designed to be taken in one semester to be followed by a seminar, this course examines the social context of economic activity. It covers theoretic and applied writings in several significant traditions: Marxist, Weberian, institutionalist, and liberal. The list includes a more thorough reading of Marx and Weber than is usually available elsewhere and articles reporting contemporary research of a scale suitable for dissertations. Since certain topics of interest, such as stratification, are treated elsewhere in the Economics or allied departments, the range of topics is intentionally incomplete. But each topic includes competing paradigms and case studies making use of them. Each topic takes off from the limits of conventional economics to show that different assumptions and procedures show promise of answering important questions about economic life.

It is envisioned that the course will be taught during the first year in a conference format, with guest lecturers but with one or two Department members responsible for the entire course and always present in class. The course will culminate in the writing of a long (30-40 pages) case study, employing some or all of the theoretical perspectives which have been presented. There will also be a shorter paper early on to fix the theoretical perspectives in mind.

The course is intended for graduate students with some preparation in economics. To facilitate discussion, one might have to limit enrollment, though a diverse group would be highly desirable.

Works marked (*) are assumed as background; those marked (**) are supplementary.

A. The Content and Limits of Modern Economics: A Point of Departure

*Lord Robbins, An Essay on the Nature and Significance of Economic Science (2^nded. 1935).

Emile Gruenberg, “The Meaning of Scope and External Boundaries of Economics.”

Kenneth E. Boulding, “The Verifiability of Economic Images.” Both in Sherman Roy Krupp, The Structure of Economic Science. (Prentice Hall, 1966), pp. 129-165.

Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen, Analytical Economics (Harvard University Press, 1966), Part I (especially pp. 92-129).

B. Three Social Perspectives on Economic Action

What are the hallmarks of “modern” — now misleadingly termed “Western” — society? What changes in productive relations, in ethos, and in political arrangements favored its development? This section examines in depth three major interdisciplinary systems which undertake to define, explain, and analyze the working of modern society, particularly the limits placed on the market by social forces.

Week 1 (September 27) Marxism

Karl Marx, “Preface to a Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy”

________, “Estranged Labor”

________, “Private Property and Communism”

________, “The Power of Money in Bourgeois Society”

________, “The German Ideology”, Part I

________, “Wage Labor and Capital”

________, “Capital”, Vol. 1 (selections) all in The Marx-Engels Reader (ed. By Robert C. Tucker), Norton Publ., pp. 306 [30-36 intended?], 56-83, 110-164, 167-317, 577-588.

Friedrich Engels, “Letters on Historical Materialism” in Tucker, ed., pp. 640-651 and 661-664. OR

Ernest Mandel, Marxist Economic Theory, Vol. I, chapters 5, 11; Vol. II, 12-14.

Week 2 (October 4) Weber

Max Weber, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, entire.

________, The Religion of China, IV, V, and VIII.

________, *General Economic History, Part IV

“Power, Capitalism and Rural Society in Germany,” and “National Character and the Junkers,” all in Hans Gerth and C. Wright Mills, From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology, pp. 159-195, 363-395.

Week 3 (October 11) Institutionalism

Thorstein Veblen, The Theory of the Leisure Class, in Max Lerner, The Portable Veblen (Viking pb) chapters IV, VI.

________, “On the Merits of Borrowing,” from Imperial Germany and the Industrial Revolution, pp. 349-363 in M. Lerner, The Portable Veblen, op. cit.

________, The Theory of Business Enterprise, chapters III, IV, VII.

John Kenneth Galbraith, Economics and the Public Purpose (Houghton-Mifflin, 1973), chapters V, IX-XIV, and XIX.

Possible paper topics (illustrative only) for section B. Due October 18:

Paper: What do Marxist, Weberian, and Historical-institutional theories have to say about kinds of modern economies which have developed in the world?

**England, 1642-1851

David Landes, The Unbound Prometheus, introduction and chapter 1.

Barrington, Moore, Jr., Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy, chapters I and VI.

E.J. Hobsbawm, Industry and Empire, chapters 1-7.

**Japan and China Compared

M. J. Levy, “Contrasting Factors in the Modernization of China and Japan,” in Simon Kuznets, Economic Growth: Brazil, India, Japan (Duke, 1955), pp. 496-536.

Henry Rosovsky, “Japan’s Transition to Modern Economic Growth, 1868-1885,” in Henry Rosovsky (ed.) Industrialization in Two Systems: Essays in Honor of Alexander Gerschenkron (Wiley, 1966). Bobbs-Merrill Reprint No. Econom-264.

Thomas C. Smith, “Japan’s Aristocratic Revolution,” Yale Review V (50), 1960-61, pp. 370-83, reprinted in R. Bendix and S.M. Lipset, Class, Status and Power (2^nded.), pp. 135-40. The samurai class as modernizers.

Barrington Moore, Jr., Social Origins, op. cit., IV, V, VIII, IX. Particular attention to feudal land patterns as an obstacle to economic and political modernization.

or R.H. Tawney, Land and Labour in China (Octagon, 1964)

or Johannes Hirschmeier, The Origins of Entrepreneurship in Meiji Japan (Harvard, 1964).

**Indonesia, 1945-

Clifford Geertz, Peddlers and Princes (Chicago, 1963). An excellent example of economic anthropology in the Weberian tradition.
[Other suggestions and bibliography available from the instructors.]

C. How do Consumers, Workers, and Entrepreneurs form their Preferences for Market Activities?

This section examines the empirical evidence to date on the relative role of material incentives and job characteristics on productivity, on the effects of advertising on consumer attitudes, and on the relationship between historical experience and decisions about the future.

Week 4 (October 18) Consumer Behavior

*Robert Ferber, “Research on Household Behavior,” American Economic Review, Vol. 52 (1962), pp. 19-63. Reprinted in A.S.C. Ehrenburg and F.G. Pyatt, Consumer Behavior (Penguin, 1971).

*Karl Marx, “Alienated Labor,” and “Needs, Production, and the Division of Labor,” from Early Writings, ed. J. B. Bottomore, pp. 120-134.

*James S. Duesenberry, Income, Saving, and the Theory of Consumer Behavior, chapters I-IV.

J.K. Galbraith, The Affluent Society, (Revised edition), chapter 11.

Lester Telser, “Advertising and Cigarettes,” Journal of Political Economy (October, 1962), pp. 471-99).

Tony McGuiness and Keith Cowling, “Advertising and the Aggregate Demand for Cigarettes: An Empirical Analysis of a U.K. Market,” paper no. 31, Centre for Industrial Economic and Business Research, University of Warwick, England. On reserve in Littauer.

Lester D. Taylor and Daniel Weiserbs, “Advertising and the Aggregate Production Function,” American Economic Review, (September 1972), pp. 642-55.

George Katona, Burkhard Strumpel and Ernest Zahn, Aspirations and Affluence (McGraw-Hill, 1971), chapters 6-12. The effects and causes of consumer attitudes in the United States and Western Europe.

Week 5 (October 25) Entrepreneurs

Joseph Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, (Harper Torchbook, 1962), chapter XI-XIV.

Thomas C. Cochran, “Cultural Factors in Economic Growth,” and David Landes, “French Business and the Business Man: a Social and Cultural Analysis,” in Hugh G.J. Aitken, Explorations in Enterprise (Harvard University Press, 1965), pp, 122-38, 184-209.

Alexander Gerschenkron, “Social Attitudes, Entrepreneurship, and Economic Development,” in Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective (Harvard, 1962), pp. 52-71. [note: workers’ attitudes will be discussed in week 8.]

D. How Do Large Organizations Behave?

The opportunities created by market power and the size of the hierarchy in modern economic bureaucracies probably allowed behavior far from the competitive norm. What are the elements of structure, control, and attitudes which influence corporate behavior? The readings include the Weberian, and the “bureaucratic politics” points of view; and the case comparisons include the U.S. Navy, French enterprise, the Society of Jesus, the Soviet industrial planning system, and the most important American public enterprise.

Week 6 (November 1) Government Bureaucracy

Max Weber, “Bureaucracy,” in Hans Gerth and C. Wright Mills, From Max Weber, pp. 196-244.

Charles Lindblom, “The Politics of Muddling Through,” Bobbs-Merrill Reprint, Public Administration Review XIX (Spring, 1959), pp.79-88: why strict means-end rationality is impossible in government bureaucracies.

A. Wildavsky, The Politics of the Budgetary Process, (Little, Brown, 1964) chapter 2.

Stanley Surrey, “Congress and the Tax Lobbyist: How Tax Provisions Get Enacted,” Harvard Law Review (1957), pp. 1145-70.

Sandford F. Borins, “The Political Economy of ‘The Fed,’” Public Policy (Spring, 1972), pp. 175-98.

Sanford Weiner, “Resource Allocation in Basic Research and Organizational Design,” Public Policy (Spring, 1972), pp. 227-55.

Benjamin Ward, The Socialist Economy: A Study of Organizational Alternatives, chapters 5 and 6.

The latter considers whether socialization, such as occurs in the Jesuits and the Navy, would overcome some of the control anomalies which have frustrated Soviet planning.

**Joseph Berliner, Factory and Manager in the U.S.S.R. (Harvard, 1957); a classic on informal organizations versus system goals.

Week 7 (November 8) Corporate Organization

A Harvard Business School case will be distributed for discussion.

*R.H. Coase, “The Nature of the Firm,” Economica, (1937) reprinted in G. J. Stigler and Kenneth Boulding,Readings in Price Theory (AEA, 1952), pp. 331-351.

Armen A. Alchian and Harold Demsetz, “Production, Information Costs, and Economic Organization,” American Economic Review (December, 1972), pp. 777-95.

Philip Selznick, Leadership in Administration (Row Peterson, 1957), chapter 4.

David Granick, Managerial Comparisons of Four Developed Countries (MIT, 1972), chapters 1-5, 9-13.

**Alfred Chandler, Jr. Strategy and Structure, chapters 1-3, 5-7, conclusion.

**Philip Selznick, TVA and the Grass Roots (Harper pb, 1966).

**Michelle Crozier, The Bureaucratic Phenomenon (Phoenix pb, 1964).

**Alfred Chandler. Pierre Dupont and the Modern Corporation.

Joseph L. Bower, “The Amoral Organization,” in R. Marris and E. G. Mesthene, Technology, the Corporation, and the State (forthcoming) or Harvard Business School 4-372-285.

Week 8 (November 15) Workers and Unions

Victor Vroom,”Industrial Social Psychology,” in Gardner B. Lindzey and Elliott Aronson, eds., The Handbook of Social Psychology, Vol. V. (2^nded.), 1969, pp. 196-248.

Work in America, report of a Special Task Force to the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare (MIT Press, 1973), chapters 1, 2, 4, 5.
Mancur Olsen, Logic of Collective Goods (paperback, rev. ed., 1971), chapter III, pp. 66-97.

Suggested:

**John Goldthorpe et al., The Affluent Worker in the Class Structure, Cambridge University Press, 1969, pb).

**Andre Gorz, A Strategy for Labor (Beacon pb., 1968), chapter 4.
Leonard Goodwin, Do the Poor Want to Work? (Brookings, 1972).

E. Does Economic Power Give Rise to Political Power?

Marxist, elite and pluralist theorists all answer differently as to under what circumstances market power and material privilege are translated into political power and what sorts of groups (classes, corporations, trade associations, ideological coalitions, parties) contend for ascendancy. The readings examine such mechanisms as control of mass media, the common training and outlook of American and European elites, pressure group influence on Congressional elections, and the weakening of countervailing interests.

*Otto Eckstein, Public Finance (2^nded.), chapters 1-2.

Week 9 (November 20, Tuesday) Marxian Theory of the State

Ralph Miliband, The State in Capitalist Society (Basic Books), entire.

Week 10 (November 29) Elite Theory

C. Wright Mills, The Power Elite, chapters 1-13.

G. William Domhoff, Who Rules America? (Spectrum pb. 1967), 1-5, 7.

Week 11 (December 6) Pluralism

Arnold M. Rose, The Power Structure, (Oxford pb, 1967), pp. 1-10, 15-24, 26-39, 70-78, 89-127, 131-133.

**J.K. Galbraith, The New Industrial State, chapters I-IX, XXV, and XXXV: A strong statement of the technological impetus towards convergence.

**Walter Adams, “The Military-Industrial Complex and the New Industrial State,” American Economic Review (May, 1968), pp. 652-665.

Stanley Lieberson, “An Empirical Study of Military-Industrial Linkages,” American Journal of Sociology, (1971), pp. 562-82.

George J. Stigler, “The Theory of Economic Regulation,” Bell Journal of Economic and Manag. Sci., (Spring, 1971), pp. 3-17.

Joseph C. Palamountain, Jr., The Politics of Distribution (Harvard University Press, 1955), II, IV, VII, VIII.

J.Q. Wilson, “Politics of Business Regulation” (revised ed.), mimeographed.

Week 12 (December 13) Trade Policy

Raymond A. Bauer, Ithiel de Sola Pool, and Lewis Anthony Dexter, American Business and Public Policy, The Politics of Foreign Trade (Aldine, 2^nded., 1972), Parts II, IV-VI.

F. Validation of Theories about Economic Action

Week 13 (December 20) Objectivity in Economics and Social Science

*Milton Friedman, “The Methodology of Positive Economics.”

Max Weber, “The Meaning of ‘Ethical Neutrality’ in Sociology and Economics,” and “’Objectivity’ in Social Science and Social Policy,” in Max Weber, The Methodology of the Social Sciences (Free Press, 1949), pp. 1-112.

Imre Lakatos and Alan Musgrave, Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge Cambridge University Press pb. (Essays by T.S. Kuhn, S.E. Toulmin, K.R. Popper, and I. Lakatos), pp. 1-24, 39-59, 91-196.

Term papers due by January 17.

Source: John Kenneth Galbraith Personal Papers. Series 5 Harvard University File, 1949-1990, Box 521, Folder “[courses]: Economics 280: Musgrave Lecture. 9 October 1973”.

Image Source: Martin C. Spechler from the Department of Economics webpage, Indiana University Purdue University, Indianapolis archived at the Wayback Machine (February 18, 2003).

Tags Bell, Bowles, Duesenberry, Galbraith, Hirschman, Musgrave, Spechler

Economists Germany Harvard Johns Hopkins Michigan Princeton Swarthmore

Harvard. Economics Ph.D. alumnus, Richard Abel-Musgrave, 1937

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2019-05-07
4 Comments on Harvard. Economics Ph.D. alumnus, Richard Abel-Musgrave, 1937

The German-born economist Richard Abel-Musgrave was one of many German/Austrian educated economists who came to the United States in the 1930s, much to the enrichment of economics. He was one of the many truly outstanding economists to have left Harvard in the 1930s with an economics Ph.D. Richard Musgrave wrote a principal textbook for the field of public finance. More biographical information can be found in Hans-Werner Sinn’s lecture “Please Bring Me the New York Times: On the European Roots of Richard Abel Musgrave” (2007).

A Musgrave-artifact posted earlier at Economics in the Rear-view Mirror:

External examination questions for honors A.B. at Swarthmore College, 1946.

_____________________

Harvard Ph.D.

RICHARD ABEL-Musgrave, DIPLOM-VOLKSWIRT (Univ. of Heidelberg, Germany) 1933, A.M. (Harvard Univ.) 1935.

Subject, Economics. Special Field, Public Finance. Thesis, “The Theory of Public Finance and the Concept of ‘Burden of Taxation.’” Instructor in Economics and Tutor in the Division of History, Government, and Economics.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1937-38, p. 155.

_____________________

Short Bio from Harvard Law School Yearbook

Richard Musgrave
H. N. Burbank Professor of Political Economy

Born: Königstein, Germany, 1910; Education: Diplom Volkswirt (Economics) U. of Heidelberg 1930, M.A. (Economics) Harvard 1936, Ph.D. (Economics) Harvard 1937; Subsequent Experience; 1941-8 Economist on the Federal Reserve Board, 1948-58 Professor of Economics at the University of Michigan, 1958-62 Professor of Economics at Johns Hopkins, 1962-5 Professor of Economics at Princeton; Married: 1964 to the former Peggy Brewer, one child; Joined the Faculty; 1965; Subjects: Federal Tax Policy, Economics for Lawyers, Taxation and Economic Development; Publications: Fiscal Systems (1969), The Theory of Public Finance (1958), Public Finance in Theory and Practice (1974); Extra-legal Activites: Consultant to the U.S. Treasury, the Council of Economic Advisers, and Foreign Missions; President, Tax Reform Commission for Columbia (1969), director, Fiscal Reform Project, Bolivia; Editor Quarterly Journal of Economics. (1968-75), President, International Seminar in Public Economics.

Source: Harvard Law School Yearbook 1979, p. 63.

_____________________

Obituary from UC Santa Cruz

Musgrave, renowned pioneer of public finance, dies at 96

January 16, 2007
By Jennifer McNulty, Staff Writer

SANTA CRUZ, CA–Richard A. Musgrave, widely regarded as the founder of modern public finance and an adviser on fiscal policy and taxation to governments from Washington to Bogota to Tokyo, died Monday, Jan. 15.

Musgrave, 96, was an adjunct professor of economics at the University of California, Santa Cruz, and professor emeritus of economics at Harvard University. His wife, Peggy Boswell [sic, “Brewer” was her maiden name] Musgrave, said Musgrave died of natural causes.

A staunch believer that government can play a positive and constructive role in society, Musgrave also believed deeply that economists can contribute to making government work well, thereby contributing to a better society. His work on public finance has been described as his “attempt to marry the theory and practice of good government.”

“Richard Musgrave transformed economics in the 1950s and 1960s from a descriptive and institutional subject to one that used the tools of microeconomics and Keynesian macroeconomics to understand the effects of taxes,” says Martin Feldstein, George F. Baker Professor of Economics at Harvard and president of the National Bureau of Economic Research.

“Richard Musgrave was a giant – a towering figure who transformed the field of public economics,” adds David M. Cutler, Otto Eckstein Professor of Applied Economics and dean for the social sciences in Harvard’s Faculty of Arts and Sciences.

An academic economist for the last 60 years, Musgrave mixed his university work with a wide range of public service and consultation. Starting in the 1940s, he advised governments in Colombia, Chile, Myanmar, Japan, Puerto Rico, South Korea, and Taiwan on taxation and fiscal policy, and led tax reform commissions in Colombia and Bolivia.

Similarly, domestic agencies and congressional committees repeatedly sought Musgrave’s advice on public finance policy questions. He worked with or as a consultant to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, the U.S. Treasury, the President’s Council of Economic Advisers, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the World Bank.

Musgrave described the setting of tax policy as a delicate orchestration of factors including employment, inflation, economic growth, and the fair distribution of the tax burden – with the latter generally assigned outsize importance, in Musgrave’s view.

“Clearly, tax policy is not simply a matter of raising revenue in an equitable fashion,” he and his wife, then an economist at the University of California, Berkeley, wrote in the Boston Globe in 1978. “The entire performance of the economy must be allowed for as well, though this should be done with least damage to the fairness of the tax system.”

Two of Musgrave’s books became classics in their field: The Theory of Public Finance: A Study in Public Economy (1958) and Public Finance in Theory and Practice, coauthored with Peggy Musgrave (1973).

“Intelligent conduct of government is at the heart of democracy,” Musgrave wrote in the introduction to The Theory of Public Finance. “It requires an understanding of the economic relations involved; and the economist, by aiding in this understanding, may hope to contribute to a better society. This is why the field of public finance has seemed of particular interest to me; and this is why my interest in the field has been motivated by a search for the good society, no less than by scientific curiosity.”

The Theory of Public Finance transformed the study of public finance to a discipline in which questions are analyzed in general equilibrium terms, where changes in tax policy take into account the resulting changes in the economy. Musgrave’s many intellectual contributions included studies on tax incidence, tax progressivity, public goods, fiscal federalism, the effects of taxation on risk taking, and the role of fiscal policy in stabilizing the economy.

Musgrave’s influence endured throughout his lengthy career. In 1998, he was invited by the University of Munich to join his “archrival” in the study of political economy, James M. Buchanan, in a five-day debate. The results were published in 1999 as Public Finance and Public Choice: Two Contrasting Visions of the State. [At the CESifo Mediathek one can find videos from this five day conference. Search “Two visions” or “Buchanan” or “Musgrave”]

“Two towering pillars of 20th-century public economics examine the deep foundations of their own thought and their common subject,” economist Robert M. Solow of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology wrote of the work. “Who could resist the chance to eavesdrop on their reflections? Certainly not anyone who cares about the role of government in modern society.”

Born Dec. 14, 1910, in Koenigstein, Germany, Richard Abel Musgrave studied at the University of Munich, Exeter College, and the University of Heidelberg, where he received his Diplom Volkswirt (the equivalent of a bachelor’s degree) in 1933. He continued his studies at the University of Rochester and at Harvard, where he received an A.M. degree in 1936 and a Ph.D. in 1937.

Musgrave was an instructor in economics at Harvard until 1941, when he became an economist at the Federal Reserve Board of Governors, a position he held until 1947. He taught economics at Swarthmore College from 1947 to 1948, following which he was an economics professor at the University of Michigan from 1948 to 1958; at Johns Hopkins University from 1958 to 1961; and at Princeton University from 1962 to 1965.

In 1965 Musgrave joined Harvard as professor of economics in the Faculty of Arts and Sciences and at Harvard Law School. He was named H. H. Burbank Professor of Economics in 1969, when he also became chair of Harvard’s standing committee on Afro-American studies. In 1981 he was named professor emeritus at Harvard and became an adjunct professor at the University of California, Santa Cruz, remaining affiliated with that campus through 2004.

Among his numerous awards and honors, Musgrave was a Fulbright professor in Germany in 1956 and held a Guggenheim Fellowship in 1959. He was named honorary president of the International Institute of Public Finance in 1978, the same year he was elected a Distinguished Fellow of the American Economics Association. He received the Frank E. Seidman Distinguished Award in Political Economy in 1981. In 1983, 50 years to the day after he received his Diplom Volkswirt, Musgrave was awarded an honorary doctorate by the University of Heidelberg, his alma mater. He was elected to the National Academy of Sciences in 1986, and in 1994, he received the Daniel M. Holland Medal from the National Tax Association.

Musgrave is survived by his wife, Peggy Boswell [sic, “Brewer” was her maiden name] Musgrave, and three stepchildren: Pamela Clyne of New Jersey, Roger Richmond [sic, “Richman” is correct] of California, and Thomas Richmond [sic, “Richman” is correct] of Colorado. He is also survived by numerous nephews and nieces, including Harry Krause, the Max L. Rowe Professor Emeritus at the University of Illinois College of Law. Details regarding a memorial service have not been finalized.

Source: UC Santa Cruz. University News. January 16, 2007.

_____________________

Harvard Crimson Obituary

Renowned Economist Musgrave Dead at 96
Former professor ‘transformed’ public sector economics

By Tina Wang, Crimson Staff Writer
January 19, 2007

During the lifetimes of most Harvard undergraduates, Richard A. Musgrave—a founder of modern public sector economics—was in retirement.

Musgrave, who died Monday at age 96, also came from an era preceding current economics faculty. But his ideas about the state’s role in the economy left a lasting impact felt by Harvard faculty and alums today.

Having taught public finance at Harvard for about two decades, Musgrave had been an emeritus professor since 1981.

“The training I received well after he had retired was different because he was around,” said Dean for the Social Sciences David M. Cutler ’87.

Concerned with the government’s equitable and efficient distribution and redistribution of resources through taxation and spending, “he transformed the whole way people thought about public economics,” said one of Musgrave’s former students, James M. Poterba ’80, who now chairs the economics department at MIT.

Born in 1910 in Germany, Musgrave, who received a Ph.D in political economy from Harvard, taught here from 1937 until 1941, when he left for a post at the Federal Reserve.

After various teaching stints, including at Princeton, Musgrave returned to Harvard in 1965 with tenured appointments in the Faculty of Arts and Sciences and at Harvard Law School.

He also took prominent economic advising roles in Washington, as well as with foreign governments, from Colombia to South Korea.

Musgrave died in Santa Cruz, Calif., where he and his wife had moved to teach at the University of California, Santa Cruz.

‘THE MUSGRAVE TRICHOTOMY’

In his senior year of college—and the last year Musgrave taught at Harvard—Poterba audited Musgrave’s graduate course, co-taught with Baker Professor of Economics Martin S. Feldstein ’61.

“He didn’t just study the tax system or government policies in an abstract classroom, or in a theoretical way. He studied these questions because he believed they were incredibly important in making the lives of individual citizens better,” Poterba said.

The ground-breaking “Musgrave trichotomy” identified three separate roles of government—redistributing income, allocating resources, and stabilizing the macroeconomy, Cutler and Poterba said.

“Everything that’s taught in public economics now is completely different than what was taught from before,” said Cutler, who co-teaches Economics 1410, “Public Sector Economics.” “You look at textbooks before him and you wouldn’t even recognize them.”

Cutler said that when he teaches his students to think about questions of efficiency and redistribution in public sector economics separately, “all of that comes from Musgrave.”

“Generations of students who used his textbook [The Theory of Public Finance] think about the world very differently,” Cutler said.

Musgrave strove for much of his life to find ways for the state to play a positive role in the economy, which entailed understanding the trade-offs between allowing the government to provide some goods versus allowing the private sector to provide them.

As a student who came to Harvard in the mid-1930s during the Great Depression, when Keynesian views about the benefits of government intervention in the economy were starting to enter economic discourse, “Musgrave was always very deeply of the view that the government could make things better,” Poterba said.

ECONOMIC OUTLIER

Musgrave’s economic principles, particularly with their focus on social equity, did not always square perfectly with mainstream thinking in his field.

“He was probably a little bit frustrated that the profession has moved as far as it has toward the efficiency direction,” said Cutler. “Although I think it would’ve moved even farther had he not been around.”

An emphasis on equity may have eroded in conventional economics discourse, partially because “it’s really hard to say how equitable should things be,” Cutler said. “You’re saying, ‘gee, what’s the right distribution of income.’”

Contrary to trends in his field, Musgrave “probably moved a bit in the direction of thinking there was an activist role of government,” Poterba said.

The German school of thought— “thinking about the whole community almost as though it was one actor”—was another influence that Musgrave brought to bear on U.S. economic thinking, Poterba said.

“That was a perspective that was somewhat different from what most U.S. economists were using,” Poterba said.

Concerned with questions of how to set up an equitable tax system, Musgrave was a vocal critic of President Reagan’s conservative economic program.

In 1982, Musgrave, with 33 other economists, sent a letter to the White House criticizing Reagan’s economic policy as “extremely regressive in its impact on our society, redistributing wealth and power from the middle-class and poor to the rich,” The Crimson reported.

“One never knows if this will have any effect on the President, but we felt it was important to speak out,” Musgrave told The Crimson at the time.

‘DEEPLY COMMITTED’

Cutler said he first met Musgrave in the early 1990s when Musgrave was on the East Coast and had contacted him, saying he had heard Cutler had joined the Harvard faculty and wanted to meet him.

They met about every other year through much of the 1990s to chat about economics research and the goings-on of the department, according to Cutler, who joined the Harvard economics faculty in 1991.

“Every time after meeting him, I would think, ‘I hope I’m in as good a shape at 40 as he is at 80,’ ” Cutler said.

“Even though Musgrave was in his 80s and 90s at the time, he kept very well up-to-date…not very many people will do that,” he said.

He was still “very interested in the world of economics and how it could be used in policy areas,” he said.

Poterba has fond memories of Musgrave’s energy as well.

In Musgrave’s class, “even at that stage, one of his last years at Harvard, he was incredibly energetic and enthusiastic about the whole study of government and taxation, deeply committed to training students, and maintained long connections and ties to students,” Poterba said.

A stone in Mt. Auburn Cemetery in Cambridge will bear Musgrave’s name, his wife, Peggy Brewer Musgrave, told The Boston Globe.

Source: Tina Wang. Renowned Economist Musgrave Dead at 96. Harvard Crimson(January 19, 2007).

Image Source: Harvard Law School Yearbook 1970, p. 31.

Tags Musgrave

Exam Questions Harvard

Harvard. Mid-year exam. Principles of Money and Banking. Hansen and Williams, 1948-49.

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2019-05-04

Syllabi, reading assignments, bibliography and examinations for the Hansen-Williams money and banking course at Harvard have been transcribed and posted earlier for 1947-48; 1949-50. This post helps to fill the gap of course examinations.

____________________________

Enrollment

[Economics] 241 (formerly Economics 141a and 141b). Principles of Money and Banking. Professors Hansen and Williams.

(F) Total 73: 44 Graduates, 18 Public Administration, 1 MIT, 2 Juniors, 6 Radcliffe, 2 Others.
(S) Total 66: 43 Graduates, 15 Public Administration, 1 MIT, 4 Radcliffe, 3 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1948-49, p. 78.

____________________________

1948-49
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 241a
Final Exam. January, 1949

PART I (Required)

Outline and discuss the current problems (relating to monetary and banking policy) disclosed, for example, in the last three Annual Reports of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. Among other things show why the current problems are different from those of the decades of

(a) the twenties
(b) the thirties.

PART II (Answer ANY THREE questions)

Compare Wicksell and Keynes with respect to their theories of money and prices, showing, among other things, in what respects Keynes draws on the Wicksellian analysis and in what respects Keynes’s contribution is more complete.
Write an essay on the monetary theories of any twoof the following:

(a) Robertson
(b) Hawtrey
(c) Hayek
(d) Fisher
(e) Marshall
(f) Henry Simons
(g) Lerner

Explain by the aid of the modern theory of income determination the conditions under which monetary policy may be

(a) fully effective
(b) a necessary supplement to fiscal policy as means of raising real income and employment.

Explain (by making use of the modern tools of analysis) the role of wages in the theory of price-level determination.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Final Examinations, 1853-2001. Box 16, Papers Printed for Final Examinations: History, History of Religions, …,Government, Economics, Anthropology,…, Naval Science. February, 1949.

Image Source: Alvin H. Hansen and John H. Williams in Harvard Class Album 1942.

Tags Hansen, WilliamsJH

HARVARD UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS ECONOMICS 2010d: FINAL EXAMINATION and GENERAL EXAMINATION IN MACROECONOMIC THEORY SPRING, 1991

PART I

Question 1

Question 2

Question 3

PART II

Part III

Question 7

Question 8

Question 9

HARVARD UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS GENERAL EXAMINATION IN MICROECONOMIC THEORY SPRING, 1991

Instructions:

PART A (questions 1, 2,3)

PART B (questions 4 and 5)

PART C (questions 6 and 7)

1920-21 ECONOMICS

Primarily for Undergraduates

For Undergraduates and Graduates

Primarily for Graduates

ECONOMIC THEORY AND METHOD

APPLIED ECONOMICS

STATISTICS

Course of Research in Economics for Graduates

1921-22 ECONOMICS

Primarily for Undergraduates

For Undergraduates and Graduates

Primarily for Graduates

ECONOMIC THEORY AND METHOD

APPLIED ECONOMICS

STATISTICS

Course of Research in Economics for Graduates

1922-23 ECONOMICS

Primarily for Undergraduates

For Undergraduates and Graduates

Primarily for Graduates

ECONOMIC THEORY AND METHOD

APPLIED ECONOMICS

STATISTICS

Course of Research in Economics for Graduates

1923-24 ECONOMICS

Primarily for Undergraduates

For Undergraduates and Graduates

Primarily for Graduates

ECONOMIC THEORY AND METHOD

APPLIED ECONOMICS

STATISTICS

Course of Research in Economics for Graduates

1924-25 ECONOMICS

Primarily for Undergraduates

For Undergraduates and Graduates

Primarily for Graduates

ECONOMIC THEORY AND METHOD

ECONOMIC HISTORY

APPLIED ECONOMICS

STATISTICS

Course of Research in Economics for Graduates

Norton Townshend Dodge

For more, especially about Dodge’s art collecting

HARVARD UNIVERSITY GRADUATE STUDENTS IN THE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS 1947-57

Comment:

HARVARD UNIVERSITY GRADUATE STUDENTS IN THE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS 1947-57 SUMMARY

Summary:

Meeting of the Committee (Wilson, Crum, Schumpeter) on Instruction in the Mathematical Economics Tuesday, May 9 [1933]

Copy of Letter from Harold H. Burbank to Joseph Schumpeter

Graduate Instruction in the Mathematical Economics Department Vote, October 10, 1933

Statistics Courses offered in the Department of Economics at Harvard, 1934-35

Undergraduate Mathematics Courses at Harvard, 1934-35

Mostly Freshmen

Mostly Sophomores

Mostly Juniors

Martin C. Spechler (b. January 25, 1943, New York City)

ECONOMICS 2080 Tentative Lecture Schedule [1973]

Harvard University Economics 2080

Social Influences on Economic Action Fall Term, Thursday 4-6

A. The Content and Limits of Modern Economics: A Point of Departure

B. Three Social Perspectives on Economic Action

Week 2 (October 4) Weber

Week 3 (October 11) Institutionalism

Possible paper topics (illustrative only) for section B. Due October 18:

C. How do Consumers, Workers, and Entrepreneurs form their Preferences for Market Activities?

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS
ECONOMICS 2010d: FINAL EXAMINATION and
GENERAL EXAMINATION IN MACROECONOMIC THEORY
SPRING, 1991

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS
GENERAL EXAMINATION IN MICROECONOMIC THEORY
SPRING, 1991

1920-21
ECONOMICS

1921-22
ECONOMICS

1922-23
ECONOMICS

1923-24
ECONOMICS

1924-25
ECONOMICS

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
GRADUATE STUDENTS IN THE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS
1947-57

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
GRADUATE STUDENTS IN THE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS
1947-57
SUMMARY

Meeting of the Committee (Wilson, Crum, Schumpeter) on
Instruction in the Mathematical Economics
Tuesday, May 9 [1933]

Graduate Instruction in the Mathematical Economics
Department Vote, October 10, 1933

Statistics Courses offered in the Department of Economics
at Harvard, 1934-35

Undergraduate Mathematics Courses
at Harvard, 1934-35

ECONOMICS 2080
Tentative Lecture Schedule
[1973]

Harvard University
Economics 2080

Social Influences on Economic Action
Fall Term, Thursday 4-6

Richard Musgrave
H. N. Burbank Professor of Political Economy

January 16, 2007
By Jennifer McNulty, Staff Writer

Renowned Economist Musgrave Dead at 96
Former professor ‘transformed’ public sector economics

By Tina Wang, Crimson Staff Writer
January 19, 2007

1948-49
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 241a
Final Exam. January, 1949