Category: M.I.T.

Categories
Economic History M.I.T. Suggested Reading Syllabus

M.I.T. Reading list for Problems in Russian Economic History. Domar, 1975

Evsey Domar’s 1970 article, “The Causes of Slavery or Serfdom” (The Journal of Economic History. Vol. XXX, March, 1970) made him a one-hit wonder in the field of economic history. But what a hit!

He shared some of his life-long passion for Russian economic history  with M.I.T. graduate students back when M.I.T. could boast having three professors teaching economic history — Charles Kindleberger covered modern European history, Evsey Domar focussed on his Russian peasants, and Peter Temin was there for U.S. economic history of the new cliometric fashion. Just about ten years ago Peter Temin wrote a memoir on “the rise and fall of economic history at MIT“.

One salient memory I took from Domar’s Russian economic history class is associated with the very first meeting when Domar, not a very tall man, lugged into the classroom a huge rolled-up map of Russia to hang on the blackboard. He hardly referred to the map so I presumed he once ordered it in a fit of enthusiasm that far exceeded its pedagogical usefulness. Or maybe Domar was a kindred spirit of The Dude (see “Lebowski, Big”) and thought his Russia map really tied the classroom together. 

________________________

PROBLEMS IN RUSSIAN ECONOMIC HISTORY
14.732

E.D. Domar
Spring Term 1974-75

The purpose of this list is to indicate to the student the sources in which the more important topics of the course are discussed from several points of view. He will be held responsible for the topics rather than for “who said what.”

Since it is difficult to understand the economic and social developments in a country without a good general background in the country’s history, it is suggested that students who have not had a course in Russian history familiarize themselves with some standard textbook, such as A History of Russia by Nicholas V. Riasanovsky (New York: Oxford University Press, 1963), to which some references will be made here.

The book which will be used from cover to cover is Jerome Blum, Lord and Peasant in Russia from the Ninth to the Nineteenth Century (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1961). It would be best to buy a copy. (Paperbacks are available).

Each student is expected to write a term paper of about 30 double-spaced pages on a subject agreed upon with the instructor.

There will be a 80 minute final examination on the last day of class in May.

PART I – KIEVAN RUSSIA
PART II – APPANAGE RUSSIA

REQUIRED

Riasanovsky, Parts I, Il, and III.

Blum, Introduction, Chapters 1-7.

RECOMMENDED

Karl Bosl, Alexander Gieysztor, Frantisek Graus, M. M. Postan, and Ferdinand Seibt, Eastern and Western Europe in the Middle Ages (Harcourt Brace, Jovanovich, Inc., 1971).

Francis Dvornik, The Slavs in European History and Civilization (Rutgers University Press).

James Gregory, Russian Land, Soviet People: A Geographical Approach to the U.S.S.R. (London, 1968).

V. O. Kliuchevsky, A History of Russia, translation by C. J. Hogarth.

Peter Liashchenko, History of the National Economy of Russia to the 1917 Revolution, translated by L. M. Herman (New York: 1949, 1970).

Frank Nowak, Medieval Slavdom and the Rise of Russia (Greenwood Press, Inc.)

W. H. Parker, An Historical Geography of Russia (London: 1968).

Henry Paszkiewicz, The Origin of Russia (New York: 1969).

M. N. Pokrovaky, History of Russia from the Earliest Times to the Rise of Commercial Capitalism(Bloomington, Indiana: 1966).

B. H. Slicher (van Bath), The Agrarian History of Western Europe, A.D. 500-1850.

Arnold J. Toynbee, A Study of History, Vol. III, pp. 391-454.

George Vernadsky, Kievan Russia (New Haven: 1948).

George Vernadsky, The Mongols and Russia (New Haven: 1953).

Warren B. Walsh, Readings in Russian History from Ancient Times to the Post-Stalin Era, Vol. I, (Syracuse University Press, 1963).

PART III — THE DEVELOPMENT OF SERFDOM BEFORE PETER I
XVI and XVII CENTURIES

REQUIRED

Riasanovsky, Part IV (as a background)

Blum, Chapters 8-14.

Evsey D. Domar, “The Causes of Slavery or Serfdom,” The Journal of Economic History. Vol. XXX, March, 1970, pp. 18-32.

Richard Hellie, Enserfment and Military Change in Muscovy (Chicago: 1970). Introduction, Parts I, II (omit the details and get the man ideas).

Joseph T. Fuhrmann, The Origins of Capitalism in Russia: Industry and Progress in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries (Chicago: 1972), Chapters 1, 2, 10-13 (omit the details).

RECOMMENDED

Paul Avrich, Russian Rebels, 1600-1800 (Schocken Booke, 1972).

Lloyd E. Berry and Robert O. Crummey, editors, Rude & Barbarous Kingdom (The University of Washington Press, 1968).

V. O. Kliuchevsky, A Course in Russian History: The 17th Century (Quadrangle Books, Inc.)

James Mavor, An Economic History of Russia (New York: 1965), two volumes.

R. E. F. Smith, The Enserfment of the Russian Peasantry (Cambridge: 1968).

George Vernadsky, The Tsardom of Moscow, 1547-1682, in two volumes, (London and New Haven: Yale University Press, 1969).

Jerome Blum, “The Rise of Serfdom in Eastern Europe,” American Historical Review, Vol. LXII, 1957, pp. 807-836.

T. S. Wellan, The Early History of the Russia Company (New York: 1969).

See also Part I and II of the Reading List.

PART IV – FROM PETER I TO THE EMANCIPATION OF THE PEASANTS
1700 — 1861

REQUIRED

Blum, Chapters 15-27.

James Mavor, An Economic History of Russia (New York: 1925, 1965), pp. 100-141 (omit the details).

A. Kahan, “Continuity in Economic Activity and Policy During the Post-Petrine Period in Russia,” The Journal of Economic History, Vol. XXV, March, 1965, pp. 61-85.

A. Kahan, “The Costs of ‘Westernization’ in Russia: The Gentry and the Economy in the Eighteenth Century,” The Slavic Review, Vol. XXV, March, 1966, pp. 40-66.

R. Portal, “The Industrialization of Russia,” The Cambridge Economic History of Europe, Vol. VI, Part II, (Cambridge: 1965), pp. 801-810.

W. Blackwell, The Beginnings of Russian Industrialization, 1800-1860 (Princeton: 1968), (Get the main ideas and omit all details).

RECOMMENDED

Clifford M. Foust, Muscovite and Mandarin: Russia’s Trade with China and its Setting, 1727-1805 (Chapel Hill, N.C.: The University of North Carolina Press, 1969).

Baron August Von Haxthausen, Studies on the Interior of Russia (University of Chicago Press, 1972).

Baron August Von Haxthausen, The Russian Empire, Volume 1 and 2.

James Mavor, An Economic History of Russia (New York: Russell and Russell, Inc., 1925, 1965), pp. 142-374, Volume I.

Anatole G. Mazour, The First Russian Revolution, 1825: The Decembrist Movement — Its Origins, Development, and Significance (Stanford: 1937).

Walter McKenzie Pintner, Russian Economic Policy Under Nicholas I (Cornell University Press, 1967).

Charles H. Pearson, Russia by a Recent Traveller (Frank Cass and Co. Limited, 1970).

S. P. Turin, From Peter the Great to Lenin: A History of the Russian Labour Movement with Special Reference to Trade Unionism (W. Heffer and Sons)

PART V — FROM THE EMANCIPATION OF THE PEASANTS TO
THE SOVIET REGIME 1861-1917

REQUIRED

A. Gerschenkron, “Agrarian Policies and Industrialization: Russia 1861-1917,” The Cambridge Economic History of Europe, Vol. VI, Part II, (Cambridge: 1965) , pp. 706-800 (Get the main ideas and skip the details).

G. T. Robinson, Rural Russia Under the Old Regime (New York: 1962).

A. Gerschenkeron, “Russia: Patterns and Problems of Economic Development, 1861-1958,” Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective (Cambridge, Mass.: 1962), pp. 119-151.

A. Gerschenkron, “The Rate of Industrial Growth in Russia Since 1885,” The Tasks of Economic History, Supplement VII, 1947, to The Journal of Economic History, pp. 144-174.

R. W. Goldsmith, “The Economic Growth of Tsarist Russia, 1860-1913,” Economic Development and Cultural Change, Vol. IX, April, 1961, pp. 441-475 (only pp. 441-443 are required).

Paul Gregory, “Economic Growth and Structural Change in Tsarist Russia: A Case of Modern Economic Growth?” Soviet Studies, Vol. XXIII, January, 1972, pp. 418-434.

T. H. Von Laue, Sergei Witte and the Industrialization of Russia (New York: 1963), (not in detail), pp. 1-35, 262-308.

RECOMMENDED

Dorothy Atkinson, “The Statistics on the Russian Land Commune, 1905-1917,” Slavic Review, Vol. 32, Number 4, December, 1973, pp. 773-787.

Alexis N. Antsyferov, Russian Agriculture during the War: Rural Economy (New Haven: 1930).

Haim Barkai, “The Macro-Economics of Tsarist Russia in the Industrialization Era: Monetary Developments, the Balance of Payments and the Gold Standard, The Journal of Economic History, Vol. XXXIII, June, 1973, pp. 339-371.

A.V. Chayanov, The Theory of Peasant Economy (Homewood, Illinois: 1966).

T. Emmons, The Russian Gentry and the Peasant Emancipation to 1861 (Cambridge: 1968).

A. Gerschenkron, Continuity in History and Other Essays (Cambridge, Mass.: 1968).

A. Gerschenkron, Europe in the Russian Mirror: Four Lectures in Economic History (Cambridge University Press, 1970).

Geoffrey A. Hosking, The Russian Constitutional Experiment: Government and Duma, 1907-1914 (New York and London: Cambridge University Press, 1973).

Isaac A. Hourwich, The Economics of the Russian Village (New York: Columbia University, 1892).

Stefan Kieniewicz, The Emancipation of the Polish Peasantry (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1969).

V. I. Lenin, The Development of Capitalism in Russia, (second Russian edition, Moscow: 1907; English translation, Moscow: 1956).

James Mavor, An Economic History of Russia (New York: Russell & Russell, 1925, 1965).

John P. Mckay, Pioneers for Profit: Foreign Entrepreneurship and Russian Industrialization, 1885-1913(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970).

Margaret Miller, The Economic Development of Russia, 1905-1914, second edition, (New York: 1967).

W. H. Parker, A Historical Geography of Russia (London: 1968).

Alfred J. Rieber, editor, Politics of Autocracy: Letters of Alexander II to Prince Bariatinskii, 1857-1865 (New York: 1966).

Amende Roosa, “Russian Industrialists and ‘State Socialism’, 1906-1917,” Soviet Studies, Vol. XXIII, January, 1972, pp. 395-417.

Teodor Shanin, The Awkward Class: Political Sociology of Peasantry in a Developing Society: Russia 1910-1925 (Oxford: 1972).

Mikhail I. Tugan-Baranovsky, The Russian Factory in the 19th Century, Richard D. Irwin, 1970.

Wayne S. Vucinich, editor, The Peasant in Nineteenth-Century Russia (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1968; London: 1970).

Reginald E. Zelnik, Labor and Society in Tsarist Russia: The Factory Workers of St. Petersburg, 1855-1870(Stanford: April, 1971).

Male, D. J., Russian Peasant Organisation Before Collectivisation. A Study of Commune and Gathering 1925-1930. (Cambridge University Press, 1971).

Source: Personal copy of Irwin Collier.

Image Source:  MIT Economics Facebook post (Evsey Domar, In Memoriam) of October 10, 2014.

Categories
Harvard M.I.T. Math Pedagogy Princeton Teaching Wisconsin

Harvard. Draft memo on “Basic Mathematics for Economics”. Rothschild, ca. 1970

 

“These bewildering cook-books [Allen, Lancaster, Samuelson, Henderson & Quandt] are as helpful to those without mathematical training as Escoffier is to weekend barbecue chefs.”

The 1969 M.I.T. economics Ph.D. Michael Rothschild served briefly as assistant professor of economics at Harvard, a professional milestone that went somehow unmentioned in his official Princeton biography included below. He co-taught the core graduate microeconomic theory course with Zvi Griliches in the spring term of 1971 which is probably why a draft copy of his memo proposing  “a course which truly covers ‘Basic Mathematics for Economists'” is found in Griliches’ papers at the Harvard Archives.

Tip: Here is a link to an interview with Michael Rothschild posted in YouTube (Dec. 4, 2012). A wonderful conversation revealing his academic humility and wit as well as an above-average capacity for self-reflection.

_________________________________

Courses Referred to in Rothschild’s Memo

Economics 199. Basic Mathematics for Economists

Half course (fall term). M., W., F., at 10. Professor G. Hanoch (Hebrew University).

Covers some of the basic mathematical and statistical tools used in economic analysis, including maximization and minimization of functions with and without constraint. Applications to economic theory such as in utility maximization, cost minimization, and shadow prices will be given. Probability and random variables will be treated especially as these topics apply to economic analysis.

Source: Harvard University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Courses of Instruction, Harvard and Radcliffe 1969-1970. Published in Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. LXVI, No. 12 (15 August 1969), p. 142.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Economics 201a. Advanced Economic Theory

Half course (fall term; repeated spring term). Tu., Th., (S.), at 12. Professor D. Jorgenson (fall term); Professor W. Leontief (spring term).

This course will be concerned with production theory, consumption theory, and the theories of firms and markets.
Prerequisite: Economics 199 or equivalent.

Source: Ibid., p. 143.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Economics 221a. Quantitative Methods, I

Half course (fall term; repeated spring term). Tu., Th., S., at 11. Assistant Professor A. Blackburn (fall term); Assistant Professor M. Rothschild (spring term).

Probability theory, statistical inference, and elementary matrix algebra.

Prerequisite: Economics 199 or equivalent

Source: Ibid., p. 146.

_________________________________

DRAFT
[Summer or Fall 1970?]

M. Rothschild

Economics 201a, as Professor Jorgenson now teaches it1, presumes much specialized mathematical knowledge. (See attachment 1) There is no single course which covers all these topics, (chiefly the implicit function theorem, constrained maximization and Euler’s theorem), in either the economics or mathematics departments at Harvard. We are in effect demanding that our students arrive knowing these things or that they learn them on their own. The former is unlikely, the latter more so. Imagine trying to learn the mathematics necessary to follow the standard derivation of the Slutsky equation by studying the standard sources such as Allen, Mathematical Analysis for Economists, Lancaster’s Mathematical Economics or the appendices to Samuelson’s Foundations or Henderson and Quandt. These bewildering cook-books are as helpful to those without mathematical training as Escoffier is to weekend barbecue chefs. Those with some knowledge of mathematics will not find the standard sources much more helpful for they are written in a spirit alien to that of modern mathematics; they give almost no motivation or intuition for their results.

There are other bits of mathematics necessary for a thorough understanding of basic economic theory. For instance, the stability theory of difference and differential equations, the theory of positive matrices and rudiments of duality and convexity theory are required for the stability analysis of simple macro models, input output economics, and linear programming respectively. These are hardly new fangled and abstruse parts of economic theory. Indeed they are topics which should be part of every economist’s competence.

There are courses at Harvard where one can learn these things; the difficulty is that there are so many. Advanced courses in mathematical economics treat of positive matrices, duality and much more. Few students take these courses and almost no first year students do. I have no doubt that somewhere in the mathematics or applied math department, there is a course where one may learn all one would want to know and more of difference and differential equations. But all economists really need to know can be taught in three weeks or less.2

There is an obvious solution to these problems, namely for the department to offer a course which truly covers “Basic Mathematics for Economists.”3 A proposed course outline is attached. The course begins with linear algebra because most of the specialized topics needed for mathematical economics are applications of the principles of linear algebra. I know of no one semester course at Harvard which teaches linear algebra in a manner useful to economists. Another advantage to including linear algebra in this course is that it would make it possible to drop the topic from Economics 221a which is presently supposed to teach linear algebra, probability theory, and statistics in a single semester.4 I doubt this can be done. If linear algebra were excluded from the syllabus of 221a, there would be less reason for offering the course in the economics department. We could reasonably expect that our students learn statistics and probability theory from the statistics department (in Statistics 122, 123 or 190).

*  *  *  *  *  *

1…and, I hasten to say, as it should be taught

2A word must be said here about Mathematics 21. This excellent full year course in linear algebra and the calculus of several variables contains all the insights, and almost none of the material, which economists should know. With a slight rearrangement of topics, principally the addition of the implicit function theorem, constrained maximization, and the spectral theory of matrices this would be a great course for economists. As it is now it is a good, but rather time consuming, way to develop mathematical maturity which should make it easy to learn the mathematical facts economists need to know.

3The present title of Economics 199 which is a remedial calculus course taken only by those students with almost no mathematical training.

4I became aware of the need for such a course while teaching 221a. After spending three very rushed weeks developing some of the basic notions of linear algebra I had to drop the subject just when it would have been easy to go on and explain the mathematics behind basic economic theory. The desire of the students that I do so is indicated by the fact that most of them were enticed to sit through a second (optional) hour of lecture on a Saturday by the promise that I would unravel the mysteries of the determinental second order conditions for maximization of a function of several variables.

*  *  *  *  *  *

Proposed course outline:
  1. Linear Algebra, vector spaces, linear independence, bases, linear mappings, matrices, linear equations, determinants.
  2. Cursory review of the calculus of several variable from the vector space point of view, the implicit function theorem, Taylor’s theorem.
  3. Quadratic forms and maximization with and without constraints; diagonalization, orthogonality and metric concepts, projections.
  4. The Theory of Positive matrices; matrix power series.
  5. Linear Difference Equations, stability.
  6. Linear Differential Equations, stability.
  7. Convex sets and Duality. (If time permits.)

_________________________________

Michael Rothschild

Mike Rothschild first came to Princeton in 1972 as a lecturer in economics and quickly rose to the rank of professor three years later. Mike is an economist with broad interests in social science. His 1963 B.A. from Reed College was in anthropology, his 1965 M.A. from Yale University was in international relations, and his 1969 Ph.D. from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology was in economics.

In the early 1970s, Mike published a string of ground- breaking papers studying decision making under uncertainty and showing the effects of imperfect and asymmetric information on economic outcomes. With Joseph Stiglitz, Mike proposed now- standard definitions of what it means for one random variable to be “riskier” than another random variable. He studied consumer behavior when the same good is offered at different prices and when the consumer does not know the distribution of prices. He studied the pricing behavior of fi when they are uncertain about demand and showed that a fi may end up setting the wrong price even when it optimally experiments to learn about the demand for its product. Arguably, Mike’s most important early work was a 1976 paper with Stiglitz on insurance markets in which insurance companies did not know the heterogeneous risk situations of their customers. Mike and Stiglitz showed that under certain circumstances a market equilibrium exists in which companies offer a menu of policies with different premiums and deductibles that separate customers into appropriate risk groups. This research is one of the landmarks in the field of information economics.

Mike left Princeton in 1976 for the University of Wisconsin and moved to the University of California–San Diego (UCSD) seven years later. His research over this period included papers on taxation, investment, jury-decision processes, and several important papers in finance. Mike’s research contributions led to recognition and awards: he became a fellow of the Econometric Society in 1974, received a Guggenheim Fellowship in 1978, became a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 1994, and in 2005 was chosen as a distinguished fellow of the American Economic Association.

In 1985, Mike decided to branch out from teaching and research, and he spent the next 17 years in university administration. Shortly after arriving at UCSD he became that university’s first dean of social sciences. Under his watch, the division grew dramatically in the number of students, faculty, departments, and programs. He presided over the launching of cognitive science, ethnic studies, and human development. During his deanship, the UCSD social sciences soared in the national rankings, reaching 10th nationally in the last National Research Council tally for 1996.

Mike was lured back to Princeton in 1995 to become the dean of the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs. During his seven-year tenure as dean, Mike started the one-year Master in Public Policy program for mid-career professionals; the Program in Science, Technology, and Environmental Policy; the Center for the Study of Democratic Politics; and the Center for Health and Wellbeing. Under his leadership, the Wilson School added graduate policy workshops to the curriculum, expanded course offerings, added multi-year appointments of practitioners to the faculty, and enhanced professional development. Mike shared his dean duties with his trusted and loyal dog, Rosie, who became an important part of the school’s community and accompanied Mike throughout campus.

Finally, Mike likes to wear a hardhat. At UCSD he oversaw the planning and construction of the Social Sciences Building, and at Princeton he built Wallace Hall and renovated Robertson Hall. The Princeton community may remember Mike most for turning Scudder Plaza from the home of a formal reflecting pool where guards kept people out of the fountain into a community wading pool that welcomes and attracts students, families, and children (many under the age of three) each summer evening.

Source: Princeton University Honors Faculty Members Receiving Emeritus Status (May 2009), pp. 18-20.

Image Source: Screenshot from the interview (Posted Dec. 4, 2012 in YouTube).

Categories
Economics Programs M.I.T. Undergraduate

M.I.T. Economics department committee (re-)organization. 1976-78

During my second year in graduate school at M.I.T. (1975-76), the economics department professors were engaged in a discussion about reforming the administration of their department. At the time I was completely unaware of this discussion that had been provoked by the following memorandum written by then Department Head, Professor E. Cary Brown, based on his experience with the growing overload of administrative chores and responsibilities in a department with the scale of that attained by M.I.T.’s economics department.

Brown’s memo to the faculty is followed by a transcription of a copy of the letter Brown wrote to Robert Solow, who as an administrative reorganization committee member, must have been asked for some further testimony. The entire committee’s (Peter A. Diamond, Stanley Fischer, Jerry Hausman, Paul Joskow, Robert M. Solow) report was completed two months after Brown’s memo. In the same departmental file from the M.I.T. archives, one finds a copy of the actual assignment of administrative responsibilities for the academic year 1977/78.

Many, if not most, of the administrative tasks had been allocated and faithfully executed before this “reorganization”. I know that Evsey Domar had long been covering the placement of new Ph.D.’s and also proudly serving as the departmental representative for library-related affairs. I sense reading these documents that the truly neglected child all along was the undergraduate program for which some arm-twisting was required to achieve equitable burden-sharing among the faculty. But perhaps there were other specific items that had been sore points too. Maybe Brown simply wanted an explicit organization chart to forestall “whataboutism” from the mouths of relatively uncooperative colleagues. But like I wrote above, this was a discussion that was invisible to me (appropriately so) at the time.

Cf. The committee assignments in the Harvard economics department during the 1972-73 academic year. 

__________________________

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS
CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS 02139

March 12, 1976

Economics Department Faculty

Dear [blank]

For some time I have become increasingly dismayed at the increase in the administrative burden in the Department, and now find the present job as Head to be a nearly impossible one. If the job is to be made tolerable, it must have substantial additional faculty support in some form to cut it down to a scope manageable either by me or a successor.

There are two basic ways that this can be achieved: (1) by spreading the administrative activities and responsibilities more widely among the faculty; or (2) placing these tasks on essentially an associate departmental head, whose precise title could take various forms Executive Officer, Academic Officer (e.g., Tony French in Physics), or Associate Head. I personally would favor the Associate Head route, but regard it as an open question subject to further discussion and consideration, and to Administration approval. This new structure should be treated as an experiment, to last no longer than until the next Head is chosen, and to be reconsidered at that time.

My own thinking about the administrative tasks of the Department separates them into four major areas: undergraduate programs, graduate programs, research programs, and personnel and budgeting. While these can be headed by an administrator or by faculty, it seems to me that the first two programs should have formal faculty control regardless of the form the administrative reorganization takes. The graduate program nearly has that form now and largely runs itself, with the exception of a few odds and ends that now lie outside the responsibility of the graduate registration officers. The undergraduate program is a long way from this structure and will require a good deal of imagination, initiative and effort to resuscitate the Undergraduate Economics Association and provide more guidance and support for majors. The research programs (student and faculty) focus more or less clearly under the Committee on Economic Research. Personnel and budgeting are an administrative responsibility. They have involved increasing amounts of time as budgets have tightened, space has tightened, and the search for new faculty has expanded.

The administrative structure is an important matter to the Department. Because it involves departmental administration and the role of the Department Head, it concerns the Administration through Dean Hanham. He has asked me to appoint the following committee to consider these questions of reorganization and to make recommendations: Bob Solow, Peter Diamond, Stan Fischer, Paul Joskow, and Jerry Hausman. Please give your views to members of the committee as soon as you can.

Sincerely,
[signed “Cary”]
E. Cary Brown, Head

ECB/sc

__________________________

Brown to Solow

March 16, 1976

Professor Robert Solow
E52-383

Dear Bob:

I shrink from making organization charts, but the following diagram is intended to give some idea of the orders of magnitude of faculty involvement in departmental chores.

Chairman, Committee on Undergraduate Studies

  1. Faculty counselors (we have agreed with the UEA to keep members to 10 or less, and let faculty build up expertise by staying adviser for freshman, sophomore, junior, or senior year).

—10 faculty: 2 for each class. 4 for seniors

  1. Faculty adviser for humanities concentration in economics (advises and signs up students); also considers the eligibility of economics subjects, what we consider concentration, etc.
  2. Closely related to (2) is possible membership on the so-called Humanities Committee that approves and reviews the whole Humanities, Arts, and Social Science requirement and program. (We have no one on this year but as the largest concentration will surely need to have a presence.)
  3. Approval of transfer of credits from other schools to M.I.T.
  4. Advising with Undergraduate Economic Association in matters academic, professional, social.
  5. Undergraduate placement, while an Institute responsibility, could be supervised and assisted by a faculty member who would keep up to date on summer placement, interning possibilities, salaries. The experience our students have applying to graduate schools, actual jobs offered and taken.
  6. Design of curriculum, cooperative program, etc.
  7. Various activities, such as providing information to undergraduates in their choice of major (Midway in fall, seminar in spring), Open House activities, Alumni activities, etc.
  8. Relations with other Departments at undergraduate level, such as subject offerings, subject content, etc.
  9. Supervision and staffing of undergraduate subjects with multiple sections — 14.001, 14.002, 14.03, 14.04, 14.06, 14.30, 14.31.
  10. Catalog copy.

Chairman, Committee on Graduate Studies

  1. Graduate Registration Officers, so far one each for first two years, and one for thesis writers. Has been suggested that we have an additional adviser for foreign students and minority and women?
  2. Admissions Committee has, in the past, had three members.
  3. Placement, both summer and permanent.
  4. Supervision of core subjects.
  5. Ph.D. and M.S. requirements, program, size.
  6. Financial aid — coordinating various GRO; Admissions Committee, and Budget limitations.
  7. Graduate School Policy Committee meetings.
  8. Annual revision of brochure.
  9. Graduate Economics Association, Black Graduate Economics Association.
  10. Catalog copy.
  11. Various activities — professional and social that are not contained within a particular class.

Chairman, Committee on Economic Research (I faculty)

  1. Organized list of faculty projects requiring research assistants and the supply of them (both graduate and undergraduate). Assignment of R.A.’s.
  2. Assistance in research proposals.
  3. Inventory of internships and off-campus research.
  4. Supervision of unscheduled subjects, such as UROP, Undergraduate Seminar, and thesis.
  5. Supervision of M.I.T. Working Paper Series.
  6. Allocation of computer funds, developing rules, developing alternative sources.

Personnel and Budgeting (Administrative Officer and a large chunk of my time)

  1. Personnel
    1. Nonfaculty is supervised by the Administrative Officer.
    2. Faculty Personnel

(1) Employment — new Ph.D.’s and senior faculty
(2) Review and promotion
(3) Assignments, leaves, research

    1. Postdoctoral personnel
  2. Space allocations, revisions.
  3. Budget Proposals
  4. a. Proposals
    b. Implementation

Telephone
Xerox & Ditto
Supplies
Equipment

There may be other matters that I am leaving out – routine meetings average probably a day a week, and things like that. Consultations with faculty, students, and other Departments, would probably add a couple more days.

If there are questions, I’ll oblige, of course.

Sincerely,
E. Cary Brown, Head

ECB/sc

__________________________

MEMORANDUM

May 10, 1976

TO:       Department Faculty
FROM: Committee on Reorganization (PAD, SF, JH, PJ, RMS) [Peter A. Diamond, Stanley Fischer, Jerry Hausman, Paul Joskow, Robert M. Solow]

SUBJECT:         Reorganization

ECB’s [E. Cary Brown] letter of March 12, which created this committee, starts from the premise that the administrative burden on the Department Head has become essentially impossible. This seems clearly to be the case. It has happened because the department has increased in size and complexity without any corresponding adaptation of its administrative arrangements. Every new function has fallen into the Head’s lap. (Top that, anyone.) Apart from the sheer burden of work thus created, another problem is the difficulty of communications, because that is also time-consuming.

After some palaver and negotiation, we have a reorganizational package to suggest. It rests on two conditions; since it is something of an interconnected web, it will probably unravel if the two conditions can not be met. (1) Since the only way to correct an excessively centralized structure is to decentralize it, we propose to diffuse administrative responsibility more widely through the department; there will be at least one serious administrative post for everyone, or perhaps two minor posts instead, but everyone will have to participate. (2) The administrative load attached to the undergraduate program has increased with the size of the enrollment and the improvement of the curriculum; no one wants to manage an inadequately staffed program. We propose, therefore, that the normal teaching load for everyone in the department be agreed to be half graduate and half undergraduate teaching. This definition should be extended to everyone on the departmental budget: joint appointees, visiting professors, etc. As soon as there are a couple of exceptions to this understanding, there will be more. Then the management of the undergraduate program will break down, and it will revert or default to the Department Head, and that is what we are trying to stave off.

The particular organization we have in mind is as follows.

  1. The central functions (budgeting, space, leaves, relations with the MIT hierarchy, etc.) will be in the hands of the Department Head and an Associate Head namely PAD [Peter A. Diamond]). In addition, one of them (probably ECB [E. Cary Brown]) will be an ex officio member of the Committee on Undergraduate Studies to be proposed below, and the other will be an ex officio member of the Committee on Graduate Studies. The precise division of labor is obviously a matter of taste; for the moment, ECB [E. Cary Brown] will probably do most of the relations with the MIT structure and PAD [Peter A. Diamond] will concentrate on intra-departmental matters.
  2. There will be a Director of Undergraduate Studies (PT [Peter Temin]), who will be chairman of a Committee on Undergraduate Studies (with 2 or 3 additional members, possibly RD [Rudiger Dornbusch], PJ [Paul Joskow] and one other). This committee will be responsible for revisions of the undergraduate curriculum adding and subtracting subjects, staffing them, degree requirements, etc. In recent discussions with the Undergraduate Economics Association, the proposal has merged that there should be a larger number of Undergraduate Advisors (i.e., registration officers) than there is now, with each taking care of at most 10 students. That suggests we would need about 8 such advisors. The members of the Committee might serve as advisors, plus others. Merely serving as registration officer for 10 undergraduates is by itself not an onerous job.
  3. There seems to be no need for change in the organization of graduate studies in the department. We suggest that there be a Director of Graduate Studies (RSE [Richard S. Eckaus]) and a Committee on Graduate Studies which would, as now, consist of the other two Graduate Registration Officers. Things are going very well now with REH [Robert E. Hall] handling the first-year students. MJP [Michael J. Piore] the second-year students and RSE [Richard S. Eckaus] the thesis-writers. REH [Robert E. Hall] is prepared to take on the task or devising a scheme to keep track of post-generals students, and see that they find themselves a reasonable thesis topic in a reasonable amount of time. The scheme may need another person to look after it.
  4. We suggest the creation of Committee on Staffing whose functions would include looking after the hiring of assistant professors, the dovetailing of visiting professors with faculty leaves, and the rationing of visiting scholars. The picture we have is that the members of committee would do the interviewing and preliminary screening of new Ph.D.’s at the annual meetings, and decide which of them to invite to come and give seminars. At that stage and thereafter, the whole department faculty would be in on the act, and final decisions would be made, as they are now, in a department meeting. The main time-consumer for this committee would be the correspondence in connection with hiring. Since that would fall on the Chairman, that post would be a major one. For the other members of the committee, the burden would be relatively light. We suggest REH [Robert E. Hall] as chairman, plus perhaps 3 others.
  5. There seems to be no reason to change the way the Admissions Committee now functions.
  6. We see no need for major change in the Placement process. Our only suggestion are (a) perhaps to provide EDD [Evsey D. Domar] with another person to share the load, and (b) to have a pre-season department meeting, analogous to the post-generals meeting, at which each graduate student entering the market could be discussed by the full facuIty, and information and ideas collected.
  7. There are other details. RLB [Robert L. Bishop] is functioning as advisor to MIT undergraduates thinking about economics as part of their Humanities requirement, and we are happy to preserve that human capital. MAA [Morris A. Adelman] who has been our representative to CGSP is to begin a term on the CEP, which should count as a major administrative burden. We need his successor on CGSP.

One last point: we hope that each committee chairman will promptly send a written notice of each substantive decision to the Head and Associate Head for distribution to the department faculty, so that communications are well looked after. That plus rational expectations should do the trick.

Source: MIT Archives. MIT Department of Economics Records. Box 2, Folder “Department Organization”.

__________________________

DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITIES:
ECONOMICS DEPARTMENT 1977-78
  1. UNDERGRADUATE COMMITTEE
Chairman: Peter Temin
Members: Cary Brown Senior Faculty Counsellor, Ex Officio
Jerry Rothenberg Senior Faculty Counsellor
Peter Temin Senior Faculty Counsellor
Rudiger Dornbusch Junior Faculty Counsellor
Jeffrey Harris Junior Faculty Counsellor
Jagdish Bhagwati Sophomore Faculty Counsellor (Fall)
Henry Farber Sophomore Faculty Counsellor (Spring)

Summer Jobs: Jeffrey Harris
Humanities Adviser: Robert Bishop
Transfer of Credits: Cary Brown

  1. GRADUATE COMMITTEE
Chairman: Richard Eckaus Thesis, Graduate Registration Officer
Members: Paul Joskow/Mike Piore Second Year Graduate Registration Officer
Marty Weitzman First Year Graduate Registration Officer
Jerome Rothenberg CGSP Representative
Stan Fischer, Ex Officio

Admissions Committee:

Chairman: Robert Bishop
Members: Frank Fisher and Lance Taylor

Placement: Evsey Domar
Harvard-MIT Theory Seminar: Eric Maskin
Theory Workshop: Kevin Roberts

  1. OTHER DEPARTMENTAL ACTIVITIES

Staffing Committee: Chairman: Rudiger Dornbusch

(For New Ass’t Profs.) Members:

Paul Joskow
Jerry Hausman
Stan Fischer, Ex Officio
(Added for Temporary Visitors: Robert Solow)

Independent Activity Period: Jeffrey Harris/Marilyn Simon
Unstructured Subjects Committee: Peter Temin, Undergraduate; Richard Eckaus, Graduate
Computer Allocation: Richard Eckaus

ADDENDUM: INSTITUTE COMMITTEES

CEP: Morris Adelman
Associate Chairman of the Faculty: Michael Piore
Visual Arts: Jerry Rothenberg
Library System, Chairman: Evsey Domar

Image Source:  For this portrait of members of the M.I.T. economics department in 1975 see the Economics in the Rear-view Mirror post that provides identifications.

Categories
Chicago Funny Business Harvard M.I.T.

Chicago. Lyrics from “With a Little Bit of Luck”, ca. 1962

 

The following number comes as the last sheet of a stapled collection of skit numbers, beginning with an economics version of “Dear Officer Krupke” from West Side Story, already posted. That number was written about 1962 and My Fair Lady ran on Broadway from 1956 through 1962, so this too could have been written sometime around 1962 as well.

_____________________________

FINALE
(To the tune of “With a Little Bit of Luck”
from My Fair Lady)

Oh we are all perpetually students
Because the army we would like to shirk
Oh we are all perpetually students
But with a little bit of luck, with a little bit of luck
We will never have to go to work

With a little bit, with a little bit
With a little bit of bloomin’ luck

The men upstairs harass us with their prelims
To write the answers always makes us fret
The men upstairs harass us with their prelims
But with a little bit of luck, with a little bit of luck
We will pass them all without a sweat

(Repeat Chorus)

Ingersoll and Earhart pay us money
And the reason we don’t understand
Oh Ingersoll and Earhart pay us money
But with a little bit of luck, with a little bit of luck
They’ll increase it by another grand

(Repeat Chorus)

Oh we have spent long years in these damn workshops
Hearing all the young professors shout
Oh we have spent long years in these damn workshops
But with a little bit of luck, with a little bit of luck
They’ll have pity and they’ll let us out

(Repeat Chorus)

The MIT men get the best job offers
The Harvard men get all the business dough
The MIT men get the best job offers
But we just never get the luck, we just never get the luck
All that’s left for us is Chicago

We just never get, we just never get
We just never get the bloomin’ luck

Oh everybody thinks that we are madmen
And we have no say in policy
Oh everybody thinks that we are madmen
But with a little bit of luck, with a little bit of luck
We will publish in the J-P-E.

No final Chorus

Source: Harvard University Archive. Papers of Zvi Griliches. Box 129, Folder “Faculty Skits, ca. 1960s.”

Image Source: Stanley Holloway (center) as Alfred P. Doolittle from the Broadway presentation of My Fair Lady. At left is Gordon Dillworth and at right, Rod McLennan. From Wikimedia Commons.

Categories
Exam Questions M.I.T.

M.I.T. Midterm and final exam questions for first half of international economics. Kindleberger, 1961-1967

 

The two term graduate sequence for international economics 14.581 and 14.582 provided the following course description in the M.I.T. catalogues, unchanged over the better part of the 1950’s and 1960’s:

The foreign exchange market, foreign trade and commercial policy, with emphasis on the relation of the items in the current account to national income, international finance and the achievement and maintenance of equibrium in the balance of payments as a whole; current problems of international economics.

For this post I have transcribed six sets of the 1960’s exams for the first course of the sequence taught by Charles Kindleberger. 

Kindleberger’s exams for both 14.581 and 14.582 for 1954-55 have been posted earlier, as have his exams for 1950-51.

_____________________________

Fall Term 1961-62

14.581 International Economics. Professor C. P. Kindleberger.  3 hours/week, 37 Students.

 

14.581
November 9, 1961
HOUR QUIZ

Answer two questions (equal weight).

  1. Discus some of the choices which balance-of-payments statisticians must make, and illustrate how the outcomes are governed by the purposes to be served on the one hand, and the nature of the raw material on the other.
  2. Indicate the contribution which the establishment of a forward market can make to hedging facilities for foreign traders
  3. Evaluate the Heckscher-Ohlin theorem as an explanation of comparative advantage.

 

14.581 – International Economics
FINAL EXAMINATION
C. P. Kindleberger
January 23, 1962

NO BOOKS ALLOWED.
Answer question 1 and any three of the following five.

  1. (one hour) Discuss the relevance to the theory of international trade taken in the widest sense of any three of the classical assumptions of:

a) full employment
b) mobility of resources within but not between countries
c) perfect competition
d) the labor theory of value
e) Say’s Law of markets

How is the theory modified, and the prescription of free trade altered, if the assumptions you deal with have to be revised?

Answer three questions (forty minutes each).

  1. Which side do you favor in the debate between the elasticities and absorption in the exchange -devaluation problem? Explain.
  2. To what extent, if at all, does international trade theory illuminate the tariff history of some country with which you are familiar? Give details.
  3. How do tariffs affect the distribution of income within and between countries? Illustrate, with reference to the relevant theorems.
  4. Under what circumstances, if ever, are two of the following three weapons of commercial policy justified: a) tariffs; b) quota restrictions; c) foreign exchange control? Compare the measures you treat with alternative means of achieving the same goals, and include in your justification, if you find one, reasons for why the means indicated are superior to the alternatives.
  5. How is the theory of international trade, and of commercial policy, altered by moving from two to a greater number of countries?

_____________________________

Fall Term 1962-63

14.581 International Economics. Professor C. P. Kindleberger. 3 Hours/week, 46 Students.

Quiz
14.581
November 6, 1962

Answer both questions. (25 minutes each)

  1. How does the United States Department of Commerce define a “deficit” in the balance of payments? Comment on the adequacy of this definition.
  2. Evaluate the success of the Heckscher-Ohlin theory in explaining the basis of international trade.

 

 

Tuesday, January 22, 1963
Time 1:30 – 4:30 P.M.

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
Scheduled Examination in
INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS 14.581

NOTE: Students are not permitted to use any books, notebooks, or papers in this examination. If brought into the room, they must not be left on the desks

Answer any five questions (36 minutes each).

  1. What difference does the establishment of a forward-exchange market make to the conduct of international trade and exchange?
  2. The underlying theory of international trade is sometimes called a theory of “comparative costs” and sometimes one of “comparative advantage.” Is there any real distinction between these views? Explain in detail.
  3. Explain how trade and restrictions of trade alter the distribution of income within and between countries.
  4. If you were called upon to judge the Alexander-Machlup debate over the adjustment mechanism under changing exchange rates, which side would you favor and why?
  5. What is the “foreign repercussion” in the adjustment mechanism? How does it operate? Evaluate its significance.
  6. What difference does it make, when a country restricts its international trade by a given amount, whether it uses tariffs or quotas?
  7. Do customs unions enlarge welfare?

_____________________________

Fall Term 1963-64

14.581 International Economics. Professor C. P. Kindleberger. 3 Class Hours/Week, 19 Students.

[Note:  one additional section  of 14.581 was taught by L. Lefeber with 22 students]

14.581
One-hour Test
November 14, 1963

Answer both questions, which have equal weight.

  1. What is meant by a deficit in the balance of payments?
  2. Expound the law of comparative advantage in modern economic terms.

 

Tuesday, January 28, 1964
Time: 1.30 – 4.30 P.M.

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
Scheduled Examination in
INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS – 14.581

NOTE: Students are not permitted to use any books, notebooks or papers in this examination. If brought into the room they must not be left on the desks.

Answer six (6) questions (one-half hour each).

  1. In balance-of-payments accounting, practice differs or is disputed in connection with the following items, among others. What are the various ways in which a country may treat five of them, and what is the justification for each possible treatment?

i) immigrants’ remittances
ii) payments to own nationals for carriage of imports
iii) foreign aid
iii) reinvested profits of foreign-owned enterprises
iv) new gold production sold abroad
v) short-term U.S. claims of commercial banks on foreigners
vi) prepayments of U. S. government loans to foreign governments,

  1. Provide a geometric demonstration of the effect on the terms of trade of technological change in the export good which economizes the scarce factor. State all necessary assumptions explicitly, making them as neutral as possible.
  2. Does the shift of the analysis of the theory of international trade from two to many countries change the theory? In what respects and to what extent?
  3. Explain how currency devaluation under full employment affects the balance of payments, and the terms of trade
  4. Meade states that the adjustment mechanism in international trade is virtually the same under the gold standard and under flexible exchange rates. How does he justify this assertion? Do you agree or disagree? Explain.
  5. The marginal propensity to spend on home goods out of national income in Country A is 2/3rds, and to spend on imports, 1/6. Country B has similar propensities of 1/2 and 1/4. Country A undertakes new expenditure of 100 divided normally between home and abroad. What amount does B have to change its expenditures to preserve internal balance? What happens to A’s balance of payments?
  6. The Reciprocal Trade Agreement Acts of 1934 and thereafter, and the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 called for reciprocal reductions of trade barriers. Under what circumstances and to what extent is it useful for a single country to reduce its tariffs by itself without matching tariff reductions abroad?
  7. Set out at length and in detail the conditions under which customs unions increase world welfare.

_____________________________

Fall Term 1964-65

14.581 International Economics. Professor C. P. Kindleberger. 3 Class Hours/Week, 29 Students.

HOUR TEST
14.581
November 12, 1964

  1. Define accurately “lags and leads” in the balance of payments, and discuss their significance.
  2. What assumption does the Heckscher-Ohlin theorem make about factor inputs of commodities, and what is the significance of this assumption.

 

Tuesday, January 26, 1965
Time: 9:00 – 12:00 A.M.

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
Scheduled Examination in
INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS – 14.581

Answer one question from each of Groups I to IV, and the single question in Group V.

Group I

  1. Expound the theory of comparative advantage as simply and clearly as you can.
  2. Does it make a significant difference to the theory of international trade to move from an analysis of two to more than two countries? Explain.
  3. What are the gains from trade? How are they distributed? How does the gain of a single country change in response to a change in supply abroad? demand at home?

Group II

  1. Is the purchasing-power-parity doctrine best described as a) a truism; b) a fallacy; c) a useful operational hypothesis? Explain.
  2. Discuss the similarities and differences between the gold standard and the flexible exchange system.

Group III

  1. Is free trade the best policy?
  2. Analyze the slogan “There is nothing that a tariff can do that a subsidy cannot do better”.
  3. Argue for or against international commodity agreements.

Group IV

  1. Does a flexible exchange rate make it possible to pursue an independent monetary and fiscal policy internally? Explain.
  2. What happens to the terms of trade when exchange rates alter?

Group V

  1. What is the effect on its balance of payments of an increase in foreign demand for a country’s exports.

_____________________________

Fall Term 1965-66

14.581 International Economics. Professor C. P. Kindleberger. 3 Class Hours/Week, 46 Students.

 

[Note:  No hour midterm exam questions found for the fall term 1965-66.]

Monday, January 24, 1966
Time: 1:30-4:30 p.m.

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
Scheduled Examination in
INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS – 14.581

NOTE: Students are not permitted to use any books, notebooks or papers in this examination. If brought into the room they must not be left on the desks

Answer Question 1 and 3 others–all of equal weight. 45 minutes each.

  1. Discuss the significance for the pure theory of international trade of two of the following assumptions:

1) two countries, two commodities, two factors
2) identical linear homogeneous production functions of the first degree
3) the labor theory of value
4) perfect competition in goods and factor markets
5) no transport costs.

  1. What are the effects of a tariff on the distribution of income between countries and within them?
  2. Comment at length on the Meade view that financial policies can be used to achieve internal balance, and exchange-rate variation to achieve external balance.
  3. Write an essay on the “gains from trade,” including, inter alia, a discussion on what countries gain, how much, and under what circumstances.
  4. Argue for or against discrimination in international trade, including, as one case, the customs union.

_____________________________

Fall Term 1966-67

14.581 International Economics. Professor C. P. Kindleberger with P. Bardhan, 3 Class Hours/Week, 39 Students.

Hour Test
14.581
December 1, 1966
10:30 a.m.

Answer one question under each of A and B (two in all, half hour each). Use a separate book for each question. Mark with your name and letter and number of the question.

  1. Describe in detail how a central bank can use forward exchange operations a) to protect its foreign exchange reserves in the event of capital outflow; and b) to gain reserves. What are the benefits of such forward operations? their limits?
  2. For 1964, 1965, and 1966 first nine months at an annual rate, the United States balance of payments showed the following data:
1964 1965 1966*
(in billions of dollars)
Gold sales -0.1 -1.7 -0.6
Liquidity balance -2.8 -1.3 -1.2
Official Reserve Transactions Balance -1.5 -1.3 +0.8

*First nine months of 1966 at an annual rate, seasonally adjusted except for gold sales.

Did the balance of payments improve or worsen each year? If one cannot say, what more would one need to be able to do so? Explain fully.

B

  1. Suppose you have a model with two countries, three goods, three factors, and internationally identical fixed-coefficients production functions for each good. What are the sufficient conditions for factor-price equalization in this model?
  2. In the usual two-by-two trade model if all of wage income is spent on one good and all of rental income from capital is spent on the other good, find out the conditions for uniqueness of static equilibrium in such a model.
  3. Take a small country in a large world with given terms of trade. Suppose in this country capital grows at a higher rate than labour and there is Hicks-neutral technical progress at a uniform rate in all the industries. What will happen to the wage rate and the rental rate on capital?

 

14.581T
24 January 1967
FINAL EXAMINATION

Answer question 1 or question 2 (one hour) and three others (forty minutes each)

  1. Compared to a pre-trade situation how will free trade affect income distribution in the trading countries in terms of the Heckscher-Ohlin model, comment on the assumptions of this model.
  2. What do you think are the most important limitations of the existing theory of international trade? Give suggestions, in as much detail as possible, about how you would go about removing one or two of them.
  3. Defend or refute the view of those who claim that free trade hinders rather than stimulates economic growth.
  4. What difference does it make to the impact of a tariff in general equilibrium what happens to the proceeds of the tariff?
  5. Comment at length on the usefulness of the purchasing-power parity theory.
  6. Suppose you have a country large enough to affect world prices. In that context comment on Samuelson’s proposition that “some trade is better than no trade.”
  7. In a standard two-sector two-factor neoclassical trade model with constant proportions of income being spent on each good, show how patterns of specialization will change with factor accumulation.
  8. Protectionists argue out — occasionally successfully — a case for government intervention, but a case for government intervention is not necessarily a case for tariffs. Illustrate with reference to the case of external economies in production.

Source:  M.I.T. Institute Archives. Charles Kindleberger Papers, 1934-1999. Box 22, Folder “Examinations 14.581, 1949-1966”.

Image Source: Charles P. Kindleberger from the MIT Museum.

Categories
Carnegie Institute of Technology Chicago Economist Market Economists Harvard M.I.T.

Chicago. Three casual letters from Cambridge, Mass. regarding young talent, 1957-59

 

In the three letters to Theodore W. Schultz transcribed for this post we witness the old-boy network at work in Chicago’s search for young talent.  Mason and Harris from Harvard share the enormous respect that Harvard Junior Fellow Frank Fisher had won from the senior professors there.  Evsey Domar hedges somewhat in his assessment of Robert L. Slighton but more or less places him in a spectrum running between Marc Nerlove and Martin Bailey closer to the latter. Other now familiar (and less familiar) names are tossed in for good measure.

____________________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
GRADUATE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

Office of the Dean

Littauer Center
Cambridge 38, Massachusetts

December 27, 1957

Professor Theodore Schultz
Department of Economics
University of Chicago
Chicago, Illinois

Dear Ted:

In addition to [John] Meyer, [James] Henderson and [Otto] Eckstein, I would also name Franklin Fisher and Daniel Ellsberg as among our really promising young men. Fisher and Ellsberg are, at present, both junior fellows. Fisher is something of a wunderkind, having graduated summa cum laude from Harvard at the age of 18. He published a mathematical article on Welfare Economics when he was a senior, and those who can understand it say it’s good. He is only 20 now, and, of course, it is difficult to say how he is going to turn out. He may be another Paul Samuelson, and on the other hand he may not. Ellsberg is another one of our summas and a very good man, indeed. I don’t think he measures up to John Meyer, but is probably in the Henderson and Eckstein category. Since I promised you six names, I will add that of [???] Miller who came to us this year from California. I have really seen nothing of him, and consequently, can no give you a first-hand judgement. My colleagues, however, think he is very good.

With best wishes, I am

Sincerely yours,
[signed] Ed
Edward S. Mason
Dean

ESM:rrl

____________________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

Office of the Chairman

M-8 Littauer Center
Cambridge 38, Massachusetts

January 5, 1959

Professor Theodore Schultz
Department of Economics
University of Chicago
Chicago 37, Illinois

Dear Ted:

It was good to see you even though it was for a very short period. As you know, we include on our list of available men only those who have requested to be put on the list or who have given us their permission to have their name included in the list. It represents men who are either already Ph.D.’s or will receive their Ph.D. within the year, and who are actually available for the coming year.

[Daniel] Ellsberg will be getting his Ph.D. this year, but he is going to Rand at a salary of about $10,000. [Franklin] Fisher will not have his Ph.D. until June 1960. He is just out of college three years and has been offered an assistant professorship at Carnegie Tech. We have now promised him a similar appointment, and in fact he said he would prefer to be at Harvard.

Among other young men of talent who are now here but are not on our permanent roster are the following: Leon Moses who teaches half time in the department and does research with the [Wassily] Leontief project half time. There is a good chance that Moses will go to Pittsburgh, particularly in order to work on the metropolitan project with [Edgar M.] Hoover. Moses is an excellent man in every way and certainly of permanent quality: the same holds for Alfred Conrad who is in somewhat the same position as Moses. Incidentally, both of them have a leave for next year: There is also André Daniere who will be an assistant professor next year and who works primarily with Leontief. Daniere is another good man, though probably not quite as good as the others.

Then there are Otto Eckstein, James Henderson, Jaroslav Vanek and Louis Lefeber. They are all excellent men and in the running for a permanent appointment. Actually, during the next few years we will have but one or two openings and obviously we cannot keep all these men. There is little to choose among them and we will have a tough time making a decision. Please keep this in the highest confidence.

With kind regard, I am,

Sincerely yours,
[signed] Sey
Seymour E. Harris
Chairman

SHE/jw

____________________________

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
Department of Economics and Social Science

Cambridge 39, Massachusetts

January 14, 1959

Professor Theodore W. Schultz
Department of Economics
University of Chicago
Chicago 37, Illinois

Dear Ted:

Your letter of January 6, regarding [Robert L.] Slighton is not quite easy to answer. I do not know [Daniel] Elsberg [sic] or [Franklin] Fisher well enough to make comparisons, but I will try to compare Slighton with [Martin J.] Bailey and [Marc] Nerlove. From the point of view of statistical and mathematical ability, Nerlove stands in a class all by himself, and I do not think that Slighton’s comparative advantage is in those fields. As far as Bailey is concerned, he may have flashes of ideas at times superior to Slighton’s. On the other hand, I would credit Slighton with greater solidity, more common sense and better judgment. As far as long-run contributions are concerned, I don’t know on whom of the two I would bet at the moment, but Slighton would be a serious contender in any such betting.

Lloyd [Metzler]’s session went quite well. He was greeted by the audience most warmly and was pleased about the whole works very much. I am very happy that that meeting was arranged and that I could participate in it.

Please let me know if you need any additional information.

Sincerely yours,
[signed] Evsey D
Evsey D. Domar

EDD:jr

Source:  University of Chicago Archives. Department of Economics, Records. Box 42, Folder 9.

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard M.I.T. Suggested Reading Syllabus

Harvard. Basic graduate microeconomic theory. Chamberlin and Samuelson, 1956-1957

 

For some reason, Paul Samuelson was asked to help out with the teaching of Edward H. Chamberlin’s graduate theory course during the 1956-57 academic year. In Paul Samuelson’s papers at Duke I was able to find a letter from the Harvard economics chair, Seymour Harris, confirming his appointment as “Visiting Professor” for co-teaching Economics 201. The actual “allocation of subject matter” between Chamberlin and Samuelson is not clear from Samuelson’s papers, nor from the course outlines. Since the second semester reading list only has Chamberlin’s name on it, it seems likely that Samuelson’s participation was limited to the first semester of the course. Because Robert Bishop’s manuscript on Economic Theory (taught to generations of M.I.T. graduate students) was included in the first section of the fall semester reading list and we find questions for a one hour mid-term exam in Samuelson’s folder for the course, I am led to conjecture that Samuelson taught most or all of the first half of the fall semester of the course. As we can see from the internal M.I.T. department teaching records included below, Paul Samuelson continued teaching his courses at “Tech” that year.

Perhaps a future trip to Duke University’s David M. Rubenstein Rare Book Manuscript Library  to consult the Edward H. Chamberlin papers that were donated in 2019 will help to establish why Samuelson was needed at Harvard that year.

_________________________

Letter from Chairman Seymour Harris to Paul Samuelson
May 25, 1956

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

Office of the Chairman

M-8 Littauer Center
Cambridge 38, Massachusetts

May 25, 1956

Professor Paul A. Samuelson
Department of Economics and Social Science
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Cambridge 39, Massachusetts

Dear Paul:

Economics 201 meets Tuesday, Thursday, and at the pleasure of the instructor Saturday at 10. It would be hard to change that hour because of the arrangement of other courses, and also because we must have the same hour for the second semester.

I hope that you would get together with Ed and discuss the allocation of subject matter. You can have [Richard] Gill as an assistant, and he would, I am sure, be willing to meet the class once a week when you think it necessary. You will find him a most adequate assistant.

I may add that the Dean has agreed to recommend your appointment as a Visiting Professor, which is an unusual appointment, for most appointments of this kind, inclusive of Tech, are Visiting Lecturers. This suggests the high regard in which we hold you.

Sincerely yours,

[signed] Sey
Seymour E. Harris
Chairman

SEH/c
cc: Professor Chamberlin

P.S. I hope you will remember to bring my article on Saturday and any comments.

 

Source: Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Papers of Paul Samuelson, Box 33, Folder “Ec201 Harvard Course, 1955-1956 [sic]”.

_________________________

From the M.I.T. economics department records for 1955-56

Paul Samuelson was teaching full time 1956-57. He taught Economics and Industrial Management (14.117) and Mathematical Approach to Economics (14.151) in the fall semester and Economic Analysis (14.122) and Economics Seminar (14.192) in the Spring semester.

Source:  M.I.T. Archives. M.I.T. Department of Economics Records, 1947—. Box 3, Folder “Teaching Responsibility”.

_________________________

Enrollment figures from Harvard President’s Report

[Economics] 201. Economic Theory. Professor Chamberlin and Professor Samuelson (Massachusetts Institute of Technology). Full course.

(F) Total 38: 26 Graduates, 2 Seniors, 1 Junior, 4 Radcliffe, 5 Others.
(S) Total 39: 27 Graduates, 2 Seniors, 1 Junior, 3 Radcliffe, 6 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1956-1957, p. 70.

_________________________

Economics 201
Economic Theory
Fall 1956
READING LIST

I. Supply, Demand, Revenue and Cost

Marshall, Principles (4th edition or later), Book III, Ch. 3, 4, 6

Mill, Principles, Book III, Ch. 1-6

Chamberlin, Theory of Monopolistic Competition, Ch. 2

Schultz, H., Theory and Measurement of Demand, pp. 5-12

Bishop, Economic Theory Ms., Book II, Ch. 1, 2, 3

Viner, Cost Curves and Supply Curves (1930), AFA or Clemence Readings

Robinson, Economics of Imperfect Competition, Ch. 2

Suggested:

Ricardo, Political Economy (Gonner Edition or Sraffa Edition), Chapter I

Mills’ Autobiography or the Introduction to the Ashley edition of the Principles

Jevons, Theory of Political Economy, Chapters 3, 4

Keynes, “Alfred Marshall,” Economic Journal, September 1924 (Also in Keynes, Essays in Biography)

II. Production and Consumption Analysis

A. Production and Cost

Chamberlin, Theory of Monopolistic Competition, Ch. 8, Appendix B

Knight, Risk, Uncertainty and Profit, pp. 94-109.

Stigler, Production and Distribution Theories, Introduction

Stigler, Theory of Price, Chs. 7, 8

Suggested:

Douglas, P. Theory of Wages

Hicks, Value and Capital, Chs. 6, 7

Carlson, Sune, Theory of Production

Cassels, J. H, “On the Law of Variable Proportions,” in Explorations in Economics, essays in honor of Taussig

Schneider, E., Pricing and Equilibrium

B. Utility and Consumption Theory

Hicks, Value and Capital, Chs. 1, 2, 3

Stigler, Theory of Price, Chs. 5, 6

III. Welfare Economics

Boulding, K., “Welfare Economics,” Survey of Contemporary Economics, Vol. II

Hicks, J.R., “Foundations of Welfare Economics,” Economic Journal, 1939

Pigou, A.C., Economics of Welfare, Preface, Part I., Chs. 3, 7, 8; Part II, Introductory, Ch. 9

Lerner, A. P., Economics of Control, Chs. 3, 5, 6, 7, 9

Source: Harvard University Archives, Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003”, Box 6, Folder “Economics, 1956-1957 (2 of 2)”.

_________________________

Economics 201
Hour Exam
November 3, 1956

  1. Define “external” and “internal” economies. What do we mean when we say these economies are (a) “pecuniary,” (b) technological”? (10 min.)
  2. What are the conditions of stable equilibrium of supply and demand as analyzed by (a) Walras and (b) Marshall? Explain the “apparent contradiction” between the Walrasian and Marshallian stability conditions. (20 min.)
  3. In the “Ricardian increasing cost” case, as described by Viner, what would be the effect on price, output, and rent to the fixed factor, of a tax of “x” cents per unit of output? Illustrate graphically. (20 min.)

Source: Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Papers of Paul Samuelson, Box 33, Folder “Ec201 Harvard Course, 1955-1956 [sic]”.

_________________________

1956-57
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Economics 201
Midyear examination. January, 1957.

Answer the first two (2) questions and any three (3) of the others. Be sure to allocate your time approximately as indicated.

  1. (Forty-five minutes). Assume two individuals (who act as pure competitors) and two commodities. Given the “production-possibility” or “transformation” curve for each individual and also his indifference map, indicate graphically: a) the equilibrium price; b) the equilibrium quantities of each good produced by each individual; and c) the quantity of each good exchanged.
  2. (Forty-five minutes). Discuss the scope and limitations of “Welfare Economics.” Illustrate your discussion with reference to one or two specific theoretical problems (e.g., the box-diagram).
  3. (One-half hour). A production function relates product (Q) to two factors, labor (L) and capital (C). Distinguish the “three stages” for each factor, and give an interrelations among them in a) the case of constant returns to scale (homogeneous production function) and b) the general case.
  4. (One-half hour). Distinguish “internal” and “external” economies and analyze the possibility of equilibrium under pure competition in each case.
  5. (One-half hour). A monopolistic firm can buy labor and land at fixed prices but sells its output in an impurely-competitive market. Now let it be subject to a tax of $X per unit of its output. On the oversimplified assumption that the tax leaves its factor prices, the consumer demand for its product, and its production function unchanged, compare the new equilibrium of output, price, and factor hirings with the old.
  6. (One-half hour). Define the “income” effect and “substitution” effect of a price change. Indicate, in terms of these effects, the likelihood of a) a backward-bending supply curve, and b) a positively-sloping demand curve.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University Final Examinations, 1853-2001. Box 25. Papers Printed for Final Examinations [in] History, History of Religions, …, Economics, …, Naval Science, Air Science. January, 1957.

_________________________

A twitter prayer.

_________________________

Economics 201
Spring Term, 1956-57
Economic Theory—Professor Chamberlin

I. Monopoly and Monopolistic Competition

Chamberlin, Monopolistic Competition, Chapters 1, 4,5, 9.

_________, “Monopolistic Competition Revisited,” Economica, November 1951.

Robinson, J., Imperfect Competition, Foreword, Introduction, Chapter 1.

Monopolistic Competition, Chapter 3, Appendix A.

Triffin, Monopolistic Competition and General Equilibrium T-heory, pp. 78-108.

Hall and Hitch, “Price Theory and Business Behavior,” Oxford Economic Papers, No. 2 (1939). (Also in Oxford Studies in the Price Mechanism, T. Wilson, Editor).

Chamberlin, “‘Full Cost’ and Monopolistic Competition,” Economic Journal, May 1952.

_________, “The Product as an Economic Variable,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, February 1953.

Monopolistic Competition, Appendix C, Chapters 6, 7.

Chamberlin, “Product Heterogeneity and Public Policy,” American Economic Review, May 1950.

Suggested:

Robinson, J., Imperfect Competition, Chapters 3-7.

Fellner, Competition Among the Few, Chapters 1-7.

Holton, Richard H., “Marketing Structure and Economic Development,” Q.J.E., August 1953.

Alsberg, C. L., “The Economic Aspects of Adulteration and Imitation,” Q.J.E., 46:1 (1931)

Brems, “The Interdependence of Quality Variations, Selling Effort, and Price,” Q.J.E., May 1948.

II. Income Distribution—General; Wages.

Readings in the Theory of Income Distribution, 3.

Marshall, Principles, Book VI, Chapters 1-2.

Hicks, Theory of Wages, Chapters 1-4.

Readings, 12.

Monopolistic Competition, Review Chapter 8 and pp. 215-18, 249-52, (5th or later edition).

Hicks, Chapters 5, 6.

Marshall, Book VI, Chapters 3-5.

Taussig, Principles, 4th edition, Chapter 52 (or 3rd revised edition, Chapter 47).

E.H.C., “The Monopoly Power of Labor,” in The Impact of the Union.

Readings, 19.

Hicks, pp. 170-185.

Suggested:

1. Douglas, Theory of Wages, Chapter 2.

2. J.B. Clark, Distribution of Wealth, Chapters 7, 8, 12, 13.

III. Interest

Böhm-Bawerk, Positive Theory, Book I, Chapter 2; Book II; Book V.

Marshall, Principles, Book IV, Chapter 7; Book VI, Chapter 6.

Wicksell, Lectures, Vol. I, pp. 144-171, 185-195, 207-218.

Clark, J.B., Distribution of Wealth, Chapters 9, 20.

Suggested:

Fisher, I., Theory of Interest, Chapters 5, 6.

Readings, Chapters 20, 21.

IV. Rent

Ricardo, Chapter 2.

Marshall, Book V, Chapters 8-11.

Robinson, Imperfect Competition, Chapter 8.

V. Profits

Marshall, Book VI, Chapter 5, Section 7; Chapters 7,8.

Taussig, Principles  (4th edition), Vol. II, Chapter 49, Section 1 (3rd revised edition, Chapter 50, Section 1)

Veblen, Theory of Business Enterprise, Chapter 3.

Henderson, Supply and Demand Chapter 7.

Bernstein, P., “Profit Theory—Where Do We Go From Here?” Q.J.E., August 1953

Monopolistic Competition, Chapter 5, Section 6; Chapter 7, Section 6; Appendices D, E.

Schumpeter, Theory of Economic Development, Chapters 1-4.

Suggested:

1. Readings, 27, 29.

Source: Harvard University Archives, Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003”, Box 6, Folder “Economics, 1956-1957 (2 of 2)”.

_________________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics
Economics 201
Final Examination
May, 1957

A. Choose two of the following questions, allowing one-half hour for each.

  1. Write a brief article on the subject of “oligopoly” designed for an encyclopedia of the social sciences, and therefore to be consulted and used mainly by non-specialists in the subject. (Consider well your objective before you begin.)
  2. Discuss excess capacity in the economy, its meaning and its compatibility with “equilibrium.” What are the chief forces tending (a) to bring about, and (b) to eliminate, excess capacity?
  3. (a) Discuss the issues involved in distinguishing between production costs and selling costs, and defend your own conclusions. (b) Are selling outlays, like production outlays, subject to the law of diminishing returns? Discuss, and illustrate your conclusion graphically.

B. Choose four of the following questions, allowing one-half hour for each.

  1. “It is inappropriate to say that the marginal productivity of a certain type of labor determines its wage; wages, like the prices of all economic goods, are determined by both supply and demand.” Discuss with particular reference to the role of supply factors in an adequate theory of wages.
  2. Develop the role which you would give to either (a) monopoly, or (b) rent, in your own theory of wages.
  3. “Waiting is certainly not an element of the economic process in a static state, because the circular flow, once established, leaves no gaps between outlay or productive effort and the satisfaction of wants. Both are, following Professor Clark’s conclusive expression, automatically synchronized.” Discuss the several aspects of this quotation.
  4. Outline your own theory of land rent, with some critical discussion of writers with whom you are familiar. (Restrict your discussion to the problem of land income, without extending the analysis to other factors.)
  5. Write on risk as an element in the theory of profits, choosing such subdivisions or aspects of the problem as seem to you most significant. In what respects, if at all, would you regard a risk theory of profits as inadequate?

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University Final Examinations, 1853-2001. Papers Printed for Final Examinations [in] History, History of Religions, …, Economics, …, Naval Science, Air Science. June, 1957. In bound volume Final Exams—Social Sciences—June 1957 (HUL 7000.28, 113 of 284).

Image Sources:

John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation, Edward H. Chamberlin, Fellow 1958.

M.I.T., Paul Samuelson Memorial Information Page/Photos from Memorial Service.  Accessed via the Internet Archive Wayback Machine.

 

Categories
M.I.T. Syllabus Undergraduate

M.I.T. Course outline and readings for undergraduate applied microeconomics. McFadden, 1978

I don’t remember how this particular course outline came into my possession during my graduate student days. I presume my sticky fingers together with an early manifestation of a propensity to hoard papers resulted in these four-pages finding their way into my files of teaching material. Now decades later, this applied microeconomics outline from Daniel McFadden’s first semester on the M.I.T. faculty is digitised. Only wish I had the eight problem sets too…

_________________________

14.03
APPLIED MICROECONOMICS

Daniel McFadden
Fall 1978

MWF 11-12
16-134

General Information:

14.03 is organized around a set of applied microeconomic problems. It is not a course in economic theory, but theoretical topics will be treated as they arise in the applications. Students are expected to know basic microeconomics as taught in 14.01 or another course at the level of R. Leftwich’s The Price System and Resource Allocation. Students are also expected to be able to use calculus with ease. The textbook for 14.03 is Microeconomic Theory: Basic Principles and Extensions, 2nd ed., by Walter Nicholson (Dryden Press, 1978). Various other readings will be assigned.

Problem sets will be handed out on Wednesday and will be due the following Wednesday in class. They will be graded and returned on Friday. Generally, Monday and Wednesday will be devoted to lectures, and Friday to discussion and review, including discussion of the answers to the problems. Every student is expected to complete every problem set within the allocated time. There will be three quizzes in class. Problem sets will account for 40% of the course grade, the quizzes for 30%, and the final for 30%.

I will be available in E52-274B on Wednesday afternoons, and by appointment at other times; my phone is 253-3378. Generally, you should take questions about problem sets and grading to the teaching assistant (his name will be announced later) and questions about the lectures to me.

The problems to be covered are:

    1. the demand for energy,
    2. the demand for air conditioners,
    3. the supply of electricity,
    4. the market for natural gas,
    5. the market for automobiles,
    6. pricing of tugboat services and the anti-trust law,
    7. costs and risks of nuclear and non-nuclear energy development,
    8. public investment in transportation.

The schedule of quizzes is:

Quiz 1—October 11, covering problems 1 & 2.

Quiz 2—November 1, covering problems 3 & 4 plus preceding material.

Quiz 3—November 29, covering problems 5, 6, 7 plus preceding material.

 

READINGS AND SCHEDULE

  1. The demand for energy.

Lectures: Sept. 13, 15, 18, 20.

Discussion: Sept. 22, 29.

Problem Set 1: out Sept. 20; due Sept. 27.

Read: Nicholson 3, 4, 5 (skim 6).

L. Taylor, “The demand for electricity: A survey,” BELL JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS 6 (Spring 1975), 74-110.

D. McFadden et al., “Determinants of the long-run demand for electricity,” PROCEEDINGS OF THE AMERICAN STATISTICAL ASSOCIATION,

A TIME TO CHOOSE, Energy Policy Project of the Ford Foundation (Ballinger, 1974), Chap. 5 and Appendices A, B.

  1. The demand for air conditioners.

Lectures: Sept. 25, 27.

Discussion: Oct. 6.

Problem Set 2: out Sept. 27; due Oct. 4

Read:

J. Hausman, “Consumer choice of durables and energy demand,” MIT, mimeo., 1978.

A. Goett, “Appliance fuel choice: An application of discrete multivariate analysis,” manuscript, 1978.

  1. The supply of electricity.

Lectures: Oct. 2, 4, 13, 16.

Discussion: Oct. 20.

Problem Set 3: out Oct. 11; due Oct. 18.

Read: Nicholson 7, 8, 9.

D. Pearl and J. Enos, “Engineering production functions and technological progress,” JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL ECONOICS 24 (1), (Sept. 1975), 55-72.

L. Wipf and D. Bowden, “Reliability of supply equations derived from production functions,” AMERICAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS 51 (February 1969), 170-78.

M. Nerlove, “Returns to scale in electricity supply,” in MEASUREMENT IN ECONOMICS, C. Christ (ed.), (Stanford Univ. Press, 1963), pp. 167-98.

T. Cowling, “Technical change and scale economies in an engineering production function: The case of steam electric power,” JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL ECONOMICS 23 (1974-75), 135-52.

  1. The market for natural gas.

Lectures: Oct. 18, 23, 25.

Discussion: Oct. 27.

Problem Set 4: out Oct. 18; due Oct. 25.

Read: Nicholson, Part IV, Chap. 10, 11, 12, 13 (skim 14, 15, 16).

P. MacAvoy and R. Pindyck, “Alternative regulatory policies for dealing with the natural gas shortage,” BELL JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS 4 (Autumn 1973), 454-98.

R. Hall and R. Pindyck, “The conflicting goals of national energy policy,” PUBLIC INTEREST 47 (Spring 1977), 3-15.

  1. The market for automobiles.

Lectures: Oct. 30, Nov. 3.

Discussion: Nov. 10.

Problem Set 5: out Nov. 1; due Nov. 8.

Read: Nicholson 17.

G. Akerlof, “The market for ‘lemons’: Qualitative uncertainty and the market mechanism,” QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS 84 (1970), 488-500.

Z. Griliches, PRICE INDICES AND QUALITY CHANGE (Harvard, 1971), Introduction and Chap. 3.

R. P. Smith, CONSUMER DEMAND FOR CARS IN THE USA (Cambridge, 1975), pp. 1-88.

  1. Pricing of tugboat services and the anti-trust law.

Lectures: Nov. 6, 8.

Discussion: Nov. 17.

Problem Set 6: out Nov. 8; due Nov. 15.

Read: Nicholson 18, 19, 20.

P. Areeda and D. Turner, “Predatory pricing and related practices…,” HARVARD LAW REVIEW 88 (1975), 697-733.

F. Scherer et al., “Predatory pricing and the Sherman Act, “ HARVARD LAW REVIEW 89 (1976), 868-902.

D. McFadden and R. Palmer, “The economic foundation for liability and damages from predatory pricing,” manuscript, 1978.

S. Goldman, “Industrial concentration and economic welfare: Some theoretical observations,” Working Paper IP-251 in Economic Theory and Econometrics, Berkeley, October 1977.

  1. Benefits and risks of nuclear and non-nuclear energy development.

Lectures: Nov. 15, 20, 22.

Discussion: Nov. 27.

Problem Set 7: out Nov. 15; due Nov. 22.

Read: Nicholson 6, 18, 19, 20.

S. Rosen and Thaylor, reference to be supplied.

A. Tversky, SCIENCE 185 (Sept. 27, 1974), 1124-31.

Joel Yellen, “The nuclear regulatory commission’s reactor safety study,” BELL JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS 7 (1) (Spring 1976), 317-39.

  1. Public investment in transportation.

Lectures: Dec. 1, 4, 6, 11.

Discussion: Dec. 8.

Problem Set 8: out Nov. 29; due Dec. 6.

Read: Nicholson 21, 22, 23.

D. McFadden, “Revealed preferences of a government bureaucracy: Theory,” BELL JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS 6 (Autumn 1975), 401-16.

D. McFadden, “Criteria for public investment,” JOURNAL OF POLITICAL ECONOMY 80 (1972), 1295-1305.

T. Keeler et al., THE FULL COSTS OF URBAN TRANSPORT,

M. Webber, “The BART experience—What have we learned,” PUBLIC INTEREST 45 (Fall 1976), 79-108.

Final review: December 13.

Source: Personal copy of Irwin Collier.

Image Source: Gonçalo L. Fonseca’s  “Daniel McFadden profile page” at The History of Economic Thought Website.

 

 

 

Categories
Exam Questions M.I.T.

M.I.T. Exams from International Economics, Kindleberger, 1954-1955

 

International trade and finance were covered at M.I.T. in a two semester sequence from the late 1940s through the mid-1970s mostly by Charles Kindleberger who handed off “his” courses to Jagdish Bhagwati and Rudiger Dornbusch. In his papers at the M.I.T. archives we find two folders with many, if not most, of the exams for these courses. Today I add transcriptions of the exam questions from the 1953-54 and 1954-55 years. 

________________

Posted earlier:
M.I.T. International Economics Examinations. Kindleberger, 1950-51

https://www.irwincollier.com/m-i-t-international-economics-examinations-1950-51/

________________

Course Announcement

14.581, 14.582. International Economics. [Kindleberger] The foreign exchange market, foreign trade and commercial policy, with emphasis on the relation of the items in the current account to national income; international finance and the achievement and maintenance of equilibrium in the balance of payments as a whole: current problems of international economics.

Source: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Catalogue Issue for 1954-1955 (June 1954), p. 147.

________________

14.581 One hour quiz
November 15, 1955

  1. (10 minutes)
    In balance-of-payments accounting, practice differs or is disputed in connection with the following items, among others. What are the various ways in which a country may treat three of them, and what is the justification for each of these.

    1. Immigrants’ remittances
    2. Payments to one’s own nationals for carriage of imports
    3. Official international grants, such as Marshall Plan aid
    4. Profits of a foreign enterprise, located within the reporting country’s borders
  2. (10 minutes)
    Define, sketch the content of discuss the usefulness of the purchasing power parity doctrine.
  3. (30 minutes)
    In what major respects does the classical theory of international trade differ from modern theory, with particular reference to the origin of trade and the mechanism of adjustment?

Source:  MIT Archives. Charles Kindleberger Papers, Box 22, Folder “Examination 14.481, 1949-1966.”

________________

Typed Kindleberger notes
for 14.581 Quiz of November 23, 1954
[Quiz question sheet not available]

  1. True or False

Some ambiguity attached to three questions:

#3. Where purchasing power parity said to relate merely to foreign trade goods. Originators thought of it as much more than this and therefore false. Foreign trade goods always equated through law of one price.

#4 may depend on which multiplier used [this item added as handwritten note]

#5. Is trade possible with identical endowments and tastes: yes because of decreasing costs (answer yes with different states of arts, i.e. different production functions).

  1. What factors determine what goods and services a country will export and import?

Answer should encompass

law of comparative costs or advantage
production possibilities curves and tastes
possibly the many-commodity case
factor endowments underlying the production possibility curve, decreasing costs as a special case
possible qualification for transport costs

No need to discuss question of price, offer curves at any length in the two commodity case. Does become important in the many-commodity case.

  1. Demonstration either mathematical, prose, arithmetic, geometrical

Points should be mentioned: offer curves or average revenue curves
elasticities of supply
initial size of deficit
not partial but complete elasticity (i.e. income effects)

________________

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
Scheduled Examination in
INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS 14.581

Wednesday, January 26, 1954
Time 9:00-12:00 A.M.

NOTE: Students are not permitted to use any books, notebooks or papers in this examination. If brought into the room, they must not be left on the desks.

Answer 6 questions. All have equal weight.

  1. Argue for or against including four of the following in the current account of the balance of payments:
    1. Immigrants’ remittances
    2. Payments to own nationals for carrying imports
    3. Domestic gold production
    4. Government shipments of supplies to own troops abroad
    5. Government shipments of supplies to foreign troops abroad under military assistance programs
    6. Increase of inventories abroad held by domestic firms
  2. Discuss the relation of a forward market to the ease and cost of hedging and speculation in foreign exchange under various conditions.
  3. Indicate in what ways the effects of discriminatory state trading can be duplicated by multiple exchange rates and by a system of tariffs and subsidies on exports and imports.
  4. What is the role of demand in the pure theory of international trade?
  5. Describe differences and similarities in the process of adjustment in international trade, starting say with a domestic crop failure in an export commodity, under the fixed-exchange standard on the one hand and the fluctuating exchange standard on the other.
  6. What difference does it make whether a country uses tariffs or quotas in carrying out its commercial policy?
  7. Attack or defend anti-dumping tariffs.
  8. Analyze the forces non engaged in trying to change or modify the tariffs of the United States.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

[Kindleberger’s typed comments in the margins of examination.
These appear to have been written (at least in part) after having graded the examinations.]

  1. natl income vs fx budget
    treatment of M
    monetary vs non-monet
    residents
    exports and donation
    capital not current
  2. some neglected severance of arbitrage
  3. Question 3 should be reworded effects of state trading can be duplicated by multiple exchange rates and a system of taxes and subsidies
  4. offer curves
    indif curves
    Graham
    not elasticities (pure)
  5. Question five drew 3 blanks of people who looked only at short run mechanism and not at long run.
    [following list spans questions 5 and 6 in the margin]
    income effects
    price effects
    symmetry and dif.
    redistribution
    protective
    but revenue
  6. Question six should include in answer reference to multiplier, potential monopoly
  7. many mercantilists discovered

Source:  MIT Archives. Charles Kindleberger Papers, Box 22, Folder “Examination 14.481, 1949-1966.”

________________

Mid-Term Quiz
14.582

March 22, 1955

(Twenty-five minutes each)

  1. What happens to the terms of trade in the course of a capital transfer?
  2. Evaluate the contribution which direct investment can make to economic development.

or

  1. Discuss the problem of economic stability in an “export economy.”

Source:  MIT Archives. Charles Kindleberger Papers, Box 22, Folder “Examination 14.482, 1951-1976.”

________________

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
Scheduled Examination in
INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC—14.582

Saturday, May 28, 1955
Time: 9.00-12.00 A.M.

NOTE: Students are not permitted to use any books, notebooks or papers in this examination. If brought into the room, they must not be left on the desks.

Answer 1 and 2; and three of the remaining five questions, but not 5, 6, and 7

  1. Write a review of the monograph on capital movements which you read, setting out in particular what the author was trying to demonstrate, how effectively he (or she) succeeded, and whether the passage of time and the development of economic theory have made it possible to modify his (or her) conclusions.
  2. Discuss the principal problems concerning foreign trade in a country engaged in economic development with which you are familiar.

……………………….

  1. To what extent and under what circumstances can short-term capital movements give rise to or substitute for gold movements under a fixed-exchange standard?
  2. Compare and contrast the International Monetary Fund and the European Payments Union. What are the strengths and limitations of each institution?
  3. Discuss the effects of differential rates of productivity increase on international economic equilibrium.
  4. Compare exchange depreciation and deflation as remedies for balance-of-payments disequilibrium.
  5. To what extent, in your judgment, is the present disequilibrium state of balances of payments due to the failure to create institutions which provide for international, long-term capital movements.

Source:  MIT Archives. Charles Kindleberger Papers, Box 22, Folder “Examination 14.482, 1951-1976.”

Image Source: Charles P. Kindleberger from the MIT Museum.

 

 

Categories
Chicago Funny Business Harvard M.I.T. Princeton

M.I.T. Faculty Skit, Playing Monopoly at Lunch, 1986

 

It has been a while since I have added an artifact to the MIT economics skits wing of the Funny Business Archives here at Economics in the Rear-view Mirror. Apparently the following script was a, if not the sole, late-20th century MIT faculty skit not written by Robert Solow. I can believe that. In any event, today’s post is further grist to the mill for social historians of economics.

Again a grateful tip of the hat to Roger Backhouse is in order.

__________________

1986 FACULTY SKIT

(Skit opens with Dornbusch, Fischer, Diamond, Eckaus and McFadden seated around MONOPOLY board. Farber is standing alongside, watching the game. Fisher and Hausman are in the wings to make walk-on appearances).

ANNOUNCER: One of the most important unwritten rules in the Economics Department is that no one but Bob Solow writes the skit. This year, Bob reportedly outdid himself and wrote a sitcom in which Bob Lucas is struck by a blinding light while driving to work and transformed into a neo-Keynesian. The skit, titled “I’m OK, You’re OK,” follows Lucas’ attempts to explain why he is estimating Phillips curves to Lars Hansen and Tom Sargent.

Unfortunately, Bob is unable to be with us tonight, since he is delivering the presidential address to the Eastern Economic Association in Philadelphia. When we opened the envelope marked “SKIT” which Bob left for us, we were surprised to discover only a copy of his presidential address. We suspect he had a somewhat bigger surprise when he opened his envelope in Philadelphia. [Address published as “What is a Nice Girl Like You Doing in a Place Like This? Macroeconomics after Fifty Years” Eastern Economic Journal, July-September 1986]

We were of course scared skitless when we realized our predicament, and we were tempted to re-run some of the great Solow skits of the past. There was the 1974 Watergate Skit, in which Paul Colson Joskow testifies to Senator Sam Peltzman that he would run over his grandmother to get a t-statistic above two. There was the 1978 Star Wars skit, in which Milton Vader and his minions capture the wookie Jerrybaca and hold him captive in the Chicago Money Workshop. And in the incredible 1973 MASH skit, Hawkeye Hall and Trapper Jerry Hausman find Radar Diamond and Hot Lips Friedlaender cavorting in the Chairman’s office. (If that doesn’t give Solow Rational expectations, what does?)

We guessed that you had all seen these re-runs on late-nite channel 56, however, and therefore decided to try something new and provide a partial answer to the age-old question: What Really Goes On in the Freeman Room at Lunchtime on Wednesdays? We now invite you to join us for a brief look at one of these infamous gatherings…

 

MCFADDEN: (Rolling dice). “Who owns Oriental Avenue?”

DORNBUSCH: Me. That’s six dollars.

FISCHER: My turn? (Rolls dice). Damn. Inflation tax again; Here’s ten percent of my cash balances. I passed go, didn’t I?

DIAMOND: Uh huh. Here’s $186 dollars.

FISCHER: I should get $200.

DIAMOND: Not since Gramm-Rudman. Everything’s reduced seven percent across the board.

DORNBUSCH: My turn. (Rolling dice). Four. (Reaches over and moves marker).

ECKAUS: No way, Rudi—you just moved six places. No overshooting in this game. (Hands Dornbusch Chance card)

DORNBUSCH: Ah. Go directly to Brazil. Do not return until the day classes start.

HAUSMAN: (Walking in from side of stage) How come you guys are playing MONOPOLY? I thought you usually played RISK…

DIAMOND: Oliver [Hart] took that game home. You know, his contract calls for RISK-sharing…

HAUSMAN: Can you believe the graduate students scheduled the skit party for the Friday before income taxes are due? The only people who’ll come are graduate students and people like theorists who file 1040 EZ’s. (walks off)

(FISHER walks in)

DIAMOND: (Rolling dice). My turn. Oriental again. Six more dollars for Dornbusch.

FISCHER: That’s a pretty profitable property, Rudi.

FISHER: How many times do I have to say it! You can’t possibly tell that from accounting numbers! (Pause). Why don’t we ever play fun games, like Consultant?

ECKAUS: I hear Jorgensen and Griliches play that all the time up at Harvard. Maybe you should give them a call.

FISHER: They’re never around.

DIAMOND: Of course not, Frank—that’s how you play consultant.

(FISHER exits.)

FARBER: Speaking of Harvard, how are we doing on graduate recruitment this year? I heard there was some Princeton scandal.

DIAMOND: The AEA put them on probation for recruiting violations. People could look the other way when they offered prospective students money and cars, but this year Joe Stiglitz promised to write a joint paper with all entering students.

FARBER: They’re really giving out cars?

DIAMOND: Sure. Yugo’s.

FARBER: All I got was a motorcycle…

MCFADDEN: Harvard and Princeton have been dumping all over us. Every prospective student has heard that Jerry Hausman cashed in his Frequent Flyer miles for a 727. And some even know that Marty Weitzman has a Harvard offer.

FISCHER: Well, that offer was certainly no surprise. The Harvard deans read THE SHARE ECONOMY and decided they should hire more workers.

DIAMOND: Still, we’re getting the best students. This morning I signed a Yale undergrad by offering him Solow’s office. I figured Bob can share E52-390 with Krugman, Eckaus, and Farber next year. But what happens when we run out of river-view offices?

FARBER: How’s Harvard doing on recruiting?

ECKAUS: Not too well. They’re on a big kick to look relevant. Mas-Collel’s going nuts—Dean Spence has a new rule that any agent in a theoretical model has to have a proper name. Andreu’s having real problems with his continuum papers…

MCFADDEN: I hear the Kennedy School’s helping their visibility. Have you heard about the new Meese Distinguished Service Medal?

DIAMOND: No. Who’s getting them?

MCFADDEN: Sammy Stewart for Distinguished Relief Pitching,
Martin Feldstein for Distinguished Empirical Work,
Larry Summers for Distinguished Dress,
NASA for distinction in Travel Safety,
Bob Lucas and Bob Barro for Distinguished Plausible Assumptions,
Ferdinand Marcos for Distinguished Contributions to Charity,
and John Kenneth Galbraith for Distinguished Use of Mathematics.

DORNBUSCH: Harvard’s visibility campaign’s paying off. Just last week one of their junior guys hit the cover of PEOPLE magazine with a paper about marriage rates among movie stars.

FISCHER: You read PEOPLE?

FARBER: The National Enquirer had a story about a Harvard student who claimed to have a picture of Jeff Sachs in Littauer. Just like the old days with Howard Hughes…

DORNBUSCH: Perhaps we should return to the game.

(MODIGLIANI walks on).

DIAMOND: My turn again? (Rolls dice and moves piece). Community Chest. (Looking at card) You are elected department head. Lose three turns.

(Someone walks up and hands DIAMOND a telephone message. He stands up.)

DIAMOND: I nearly forgot. I’m scheduled to join Mike Weisbach who is taking a prospective student windsurfing this afternoon. Figured it was the least I could do to convince him we were as laid back as Stanford. Franco—do you want to take my place?

MODIGLIANI: (Sitting down in Diamond’s place) So, what are the new developments on the Monopoly front? [Famous Modigliani paper “New Developments on the Oligopoly Front,” JPE, June 1958] (Pause) Now, which of these pieces is Peter’s?

MCFADDEN: The coconut. [Reference here to Diamond’s coconut model of a search economy.]

MODIGLIANI: My turn now?

FISCHER: No Franco—but go ahead. [presumably a reference to Modigliani’s propensity to talk, and talk, and talk.]

MODIGLIANI: (Rolls dice and moves marker). Chance. (McFadden hands him a card). What is this? You have won second prize in a Beauty Contest, Collect $10? This is NOT POSSIBLE. This year I win only FIRST PRIZES [reference to 1985 Nobel Prize for Economics].

DORNBUSCH: (To audience) Wait till he gets the bequest card… [cf. the JEP Spring 1988 paper by Modigliani that surveys the bequest motive]

FISCHER: Franco, I have a deal for you. I’ll trade you Mediterranean and the Water Works for North Carolina and an agreement that you never charge me rent on either property. If you renege, I’ll order Chinese food.

MODIGLIANI: No deal. But what’s this about Chinese food?

FISCHER: It’s a new thing I learned from Garth [Soloner]—it makes the deal sub-gum perfect.

MCFADDEN: My turn. (Rolls and draws a Chance card). My favorite card: Advance Token to the Railroad with the Highest Logit Probability Value. Let me see which one that is… (pulls out a calculator)

FISCHER: While we’re waiting for Dan to converge, how did we do in junior hiring? Did we get that Princeton theorist?

ECKAUS: No dice. All the Princeton guys told him not to come.

DORNBUSCH: Why?

ECKAUS: They said “Go to Yale, go directly to Yale.”

MODIGLIANI: What about senior appointments?

FARBER: Ask Peter [Temin]. He’s on the Search Committee.

MCFADDEN: (Looking up from calculator). I’m having convergence problems. Maybe we should postpone the game for a few minutes while I run down to the PRIME.

[the image of the last page at my disposal is very blurred, fortunately it is only the wrap-up by the announcer]

ANNOUNCER: As you all know, NOTHING takes a few minutes on the PRIME. So until next year, when the [?] [?] Solow who accompanied Stan, 3PO and R2D2 to [?] the [?] [?] from Chicago returns to produce another skit. Good night.

 

Source: Duke University, David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Papers of Robert M. Solow, Box 83.