Tag: Becker

Categories
Economists NBER

NBER. Oral History Interviews with 8 researchers. Goldin, 2001-2003

The 2023 recipient of the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel, Professor Claudia Goldin of Harvard University, has contributed to the history of modern economics through her series of eight interviews with senior economists whose careers have been intrically woven into the historical fabric of the National Bureau of Economic Research.

In other news, Professor Goldin has been named to the Economics in the Rear-view Mirror’s “Economists Wearing Jewelry” Hall of Fame.

______________________

Interview with Claudia Goldin (2004)

Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, The Region (September 1, 2004). Interviewer: Douglas Clement, editor.

______________________

Oral History Interviews with Claudia Goldin

Gary Becker (August 5, 2003)

Richard Easterlin  (March 15, 2002)

Milton Friedman (August 16, 2002)

Victor Fuchs (March 18, 2002)

Robert Lipsey (August 8, 2001)

Anna Schwartz (November 19, 2001)

Victor Zarnowitz (December 11, 2001)

Jacob Mincer  (July 26, 2002)

Cf. History page of the National Bureau of Economic Research.

Categories
Chicago Economists Funny Business

Chicago. The School of Chicago 1972 by Roger Vaughan (Ph.D. 1977). IDs by Gordon, McCloskey & Grossbard

The 1500th artifact added to Economics in the Rear-view Mirror deserves to be a celebratory post for visitors. For this honor I have chosen a  pastiche drawn by a Chicago economics graduate student in 1972. Roger Vaughan (Ph.D. 1977) was the principal, if not only, illustrator for the student-produced satirical publication P.H.A.R.T., an issue of which has been transcribed for an earlier post.

I first saw a copy of Roger Vaughan’s reworking of Raphael’s “School of Athens” added to a photo from a Tweet of a few years back. At that time it did not occur to me to engage in a serious search for the backstory to the drawing. And yet, serendipity turned out to be kind to me when, on a visit to the Harvard Archives last year, I stumbled upon a folded, mint-condition copy of  Vaughan’s “The School of Chicago 1972” in the papers of Zvi Griliches. Of course I had this masterpiece of economics funny business copied and it now has pride of place in my home study.

A few identifications of the figures seen in “The School of Chicago 1972” are obvious (e.g. Milton Friedman and George Stigler, duh) and others could be identified from other Vaughan caricatures that likewise are found in Griliches’ papers (e.g. Marc Nerlove, Stan Fischer, and Robert J. Gordon). Still, most of the renderings remained unidentified. My first idea was to seek out the artist himself, but alas I could only confirm that he had passed in October 2021. The next idea was to seek a living eye-witness to the Chicago economics department of a half-century ago. Here I was luckier, the Stanley G. Harris Professor in the Social Sciences at Northwestern University, Robert J. Gordon, responded to my inquiry almost immediately and as quickly forwarded my request for further information to Distinguished Professor of Economics, History, English, and Communication at the University of Illinois at Chicago, Deirdre McCloskey, for her confirmation and further commentary. Following the initial posting of this artifact, Professor Shoshana Grossbard of San Diego State University spotted a few misspelled names (mea culpa), but, more importantly, was able to identify Margaret Reid by her beret(!).We can all be grateful to these colleagues for their identifications provided below. There remains one unidentified man in the back-row standing to George Stigler’s left plus a couple of yet-to-be identified graduate students. Peeps, Economic in the Rear-view Mirror needs your help! You can leave comments at the end of this post.

___________________________________

About the artist, Roger Vaughan

From his 1981 AEA Biographical Listing, p. 421

Vaughan, Roger J, 421 Hudson St., Apt. 406, New York, NY 10014. Birth Yr: 1946

Degrees: B.A., U. of Oxford, 1968; M.A., Simon Fraser U., 1970; Ph.D. U. of Chicago, 1977. Prin. Cur. Position: Dep.Dir., Off. Of Develop. Planning, State of New York, 1980-

Concurrent/Past Positions: Econ., Citibank, 1978-80; Econ. The Rand Corp. 1974-78. Research: Urban Policy, finance, taxation training.

Roger J. Vaughan’s Rand Reports,
1974-1980

• The Urban Impacts of Federal Policies: Vol. 1, Overview 1980
• Federal Activities in Urban Economic Development 1979
• Recent Contributions to the Urban Policy Debate 1979
• The Urban Impacts of Federal Policies: Vol. 4, Population and Residential Location 1979
• Assessment of Countercyclical Public Works and Public Service Employment Programs. 1978
• Regional Cycles and Employment Effects of Public Works Investments. 1977
• The Urban Impacts of Federal Policies: Vol. 2, Economic Development 1977
• The value of urban open space 1977
• The Economics of Urban Blight. 1976
• Getting People to Parks. 1976
• Public Works as a Countercyclical Device: A Review of the Issues 1976
• The Use of Subsidies in the Production of Cultural Services. 1976
• The Application of Economic Analysis to the Planning and Development of the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area. 1975
• The Economics of Expressway Noise Pollution Abatement. 1975
• The Economics of Recreation: A Survey. 1974

Source: Rand Reports. Published Research by Author, Roger J. Vaughan.

Sage. Research Methods.

Communicating Social Science Research to Policymakers
By: Roger J. Vaughan & Terry F. Buss
Published: 1998
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412983686

___________________________________

Raphael’s Scuola di Atene (1509-1511)

For some explanation of what we see in the original, cf. “The Story Behind Raphael’s Masterpiece ‘The School of Athens'” by Jessica Stewart at the Modern Met Website.

___________________________________

Roger Vaughan’s Pastiche

Open the image in a new window to see a larger image

Source: Harvard University Archives. Papers of Zvi Griliches, Box 129. Folder “Posters, ca. 1960s-1970s”.

Background

The statues standing in the upper alcove are of the President and Vice-President of the United States, Richard M. Nixon (holding a lyre, a sweet visual pun) and Spiro T. Agnew (with the pennant “Effete Snobs”, abridged from his description of self-characterized intellectuals as an “effete core of impudent snobs” in his  “Generation Gap” speech given in New Orleans on October 19th, 1969.)

“1126” refers to the street address of the Social Science Research Building, 1126 E. 59th St.

“MV=PT” inscribed in the center of the dome is the Equation of Exchange (cf. Irving Fisher’s The Purchasing Power of Money). Cf. at the left of the back-row of Chicago economists, Arnold Zellner is carrying papers with “MV=PY“. Milton Friedman’s vanity license plates on his red cadillac used “MV=PQ” for the Equation of Exchange. Everyone seems to have agreed on the notational virtues of “M”, “V”, and “P”. Does anyone know whether there was any substantive reason for differences regarding the choice of “T”, “Y”, and “Q” for the final term?

Economics in the Rear-view Mirror comment: Though his arm is blocking part of the equation, Zellner is clearly displaying the equation of exchange, MV = PY.

Deirdre McCloskey’s comment: “Underneath Nixon is Marc Nerlove pointing into the ear, by the way of insult, of Hans Theil the great Dutch econometrician (the four great econometricians at Chicago, which had included Zvi Griliches, who had just moved to Harvard, hated each other).”

Economics in the Rear-view Mirror comment: Robert J. Gordon served as an editor of the Journal of Political Economy (J.P.E.) from 1971-1973.

Economics in the Rear-view Mirror comment: Stigler’s position corresponds to that of Aristotle’s in Raphael’s fresco. There Aristotle holds a copy of his own Nicomachean Ethics. Stigler is seen here holding a book by [Adam] Smith, presumably Wealth of Nations.

Deirdre McCloskey’s comment: “George Tolley [is] in a garbage can because he did urban economics (Vaughan was his student).”

Shoshana Grossbard’s comment: “[Margaret Reid]…not only [wore] the dark beret, but also [has] her hair in a bun, under the beret. that was her typical look. She and I attended Becker’s workshop in applications of economics in the years 1974-76.”

And guess what a casual search just turned up…

Margaret Gilpin Reid, professor emeritus of Home Economics and Economics

Source:  University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf1-07052, Hanna Holborn Gray Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.

Economics in the Rear-view Mirror’s comment: On the high-resolution hard-copy hanging on my study wall, the beret looks sort of like an ink blot and I regreted that imperfection. But now, thanks to Shoshana Grossbard’s careful observation combined with her memory of Reid’s “typical look” and an archival sighting of said beret, I am convinced and grateful that we now have another positive identification!

Deirdre McCloskey’s comment: “D. Gale Johnson…has a pitchfork because he was an agricultural economist. ”

Deirdre McCloskey’s comment: Ted Schultz […] is pointing down to say “This is where the true Chicago School is, where I am!”.

Foreground

The identification of Robert F. Pollard was made by Roger Vaughan’s work and life partner, Anna Nechai.

 

Deirdre McCloskey’s comment: “…Dick Zecher [is] sticking his finger through an IBM card because he was in charge of the Department’s mainframe computer access.”

Another visual pun: Harry Johnson is portrayed writing on a literal Edgeworth-Bowley-box, a two-dimensional representation of allocations that could be Pareto efficient exchange equilibria. The two tradeable goods are measured in Edgeworth and Bowley units, respectively.

Deirdre McCloskey’s comment: “Mary Jean Bowman, one of two tenured women in a small department; she did educational and demographic economics.  The other woman was Margaret Reid, the inventor of household economics…”

The triangle seen in the previous detail is Arnold Harberger’s measure of deadweight loss (efficiency cost resulting from a natural or policy induced distortion of markets).  See Robert J. Gordon’s historical photo of Al Harberger stripping down to reveal himself as “Triangleman” ca. December 1970. In Raphael’s fresco Harberger’s place was that of Euclid.

Robert  J. Gordon’s comment: “I think the bearded student is Dan Wisecarver”

Robert  J. Gordon’s comment: “The woman holding the ball is Carolyn Mosby, the head of the department staff.”

 

 

 

 

 

Categories
Chicago Columbia Economist Market Economists

Chicago. Harry Johnson opposes major appointment to be offered to Gary Becker, 1964

HarryJohnsonGaryBecker

From the perspective of today it is rather difficult to imagine that the idea of bringing favorite son Gary Becker back to the University of Chicago from Columbia could have faced any, much less, serious resistance from within the economics department. But as the following letters from Zvi Griliches’ papers in the Harvard archives show, Harry Johnson’s displeasure with this prospect was a force taken most seriously by several of his colleagues, at least in the Spring of 1964. Perhaps more was at play than Johnson’s principle objection to a Becker hire:

“…his accomplishments consist mainly in doing more competently what various members of the department already do, and have been doing for a long time, and not in doing well what the department does not do and ought to be doing if it expects to attract good students and maintain its leadership among the graduate schools of the continent, I think that it would be a grave error of strategy in the development of the department to go after him.”

Johnson offered another interesting claim with regard to 1964 Chicago faculty expectations for a Ph.D. thesis:

“I have noticed among some of the graduate students the notion that the Ph.D. thesis is to be completed with the minimum of intellectual input and a few single-equation regressions. This is contrary to the intention of the Ph.D. regulations (‘the quality and length of a good journal article’)…”

Perhaps the birth of the concept of a job-market-paper?

_____________________

THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO
CHICAGO 37 • ILLINOIS
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

May 20, 1964

To: Al Harberger, Zvi Griliches

From: Al Rees

Re: Gary Becker

The question of an appointment for Gary will be discussed at a Department Meeting on June 4. I enclose a copy of a confidential memo from Harry in which he opposes the appointment. Harry will be in Italy on June 4 and cannot present his views in person. I would very much like to have your reaction before the meeting.

You should also know that appointments are being offered this week to Jimmy Savage and to Hans Theil, both at high salaries and both joint with the School of Business. There seems to be a very high probability that both will be accepted.

I am somewhat concerned about the number of tenure posts the Administration will let us have; in particular, I do not want to do anything that might “freeze out” Larry Sjaastad, for whom I have very high hopes.

Another consideration is the effect on Harry of making a senior appointment that he opposes. He seems to feel somehow outnumbered and is still actively considering a move to London.

Gregg has already put to you the case for Gary; in any case you know his stengths too well to need to be reminded of them.

[signed] Al

_____________________

 UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO

Date May 19, 1964

CONFIDENTIAL

To: A. Rees
From: H.G. Johnson
In re: [Economics] Department Meeting, June 4th

As I will not be at the departmental meeting on June 4th, I am taking the unusual course of putting on paper my views about certain matters due for discussion, on which I would have spoken.

I. A. (1) The thesis prospectus seminar on Choudhri was dissatisfied with the prospectus; it considered making him prepare a new prospectus, but decided instead to make him get agreement from the three members of his Committee on a new draft. Earl Hamilton was in favor of another prospectus seminar, but was overruled. I have had second thoughts, and believe that the matter should be reconsidered, for the following reasons:

(a) next year’s money workshop will be in different hands than this year’s; I am worried that, in the rush to get students past their prospectus seminar, we will land next year’s workshop with a batch of poorly thought out prospectuses that will have to be patched up with great labor.

(b) Choudhri has an excellent record; he should be able to do much better, and we should make him do better–if we let him get by with low-quality work, we are doing his future career a disservice.

(c) I have noticed among some of the graduate students the notion that the Ph.D. thesis is to be completed with the minimum of intellectual input and a few single-equation regressions. This is contrary to the intention of the Ph.D. regulations (“the quality and length of a good journal article’), bad for student morale, and inimical to good teaching. An example in this case would be salutary, and it would do Choudhri himsèlf little harm and probably some good.

I. A. (1) I would like to recommend strongly that we go after R. A. Mundell for the Ford Fellowship for 1965-66. Mundell is one of the most original and elegant moentary theorists going: he has contributed to the theory of economic policy under fixed and floating exchange rates, and started off the analysis of optimum currency areas, and he has made a number of contributions to the price theory of money and of inflation. He is also a first-class international trade and general value theorist, and a man who is always ready for an intelligent argument. Apart from our mathematical economists, we have no-one here with Mundell’s interest in pure monetary and value theory; and we have no-one with his practical experience at the IMF. I should add that I have suggested Mundell partly because I have talked with him, and he would like to spend 1965-66 in this area.

I. B. (2) Just as strongly, I feel that the department should not pursue the proposal to offer a tenure appointment to Gary Becker. I have a high respect for Becker’s theoretical abilities; but as his accomplishments consist mainly in doing more competently what various members of the department already do, and have been doing for a long time, and not in doing well what the department does not do and ought to be doing if it expects to attract good students and maintain its leadership among the graduate schools of the continent, I think that it would be a grave error of strategy in the development of the department to go after him. 

In addition, I would point out that Becker is probably the most distinguished graduate this department had had in recent years, and that going after him would be a repetition of the cannibalization-of-the-young policy that in my judgment has seriously weakened this department in the past decade or so. Unless we get our good graduates established in good departments in other Universities, we are going to have to live with the present image of the Chicago School in the profession at large, and we are not going to have representatives in other good universities steering good students towards us. If we persistently try to bring our own best back, we will defeat ourselves in the long run in two ways: we will not get the students; and we will not get the top-quality men we should get either, because we are bound to miss out on some of our own, and the fact that a new non-Chicagoan will necessarily be one of a minority outgroup will make the place unattractive to such men.

I am also fairly sure that Becker would not come, because he is intelligent enough to know that he should not come and begause he is well entrenched at Columbia, where a number of senior men are due to be replaced and will be replaced by men of his own

_____________________

THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO
CHICAGO 37 • ILLINOIS
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

June 15, 1964

Professor Zvi Griliches

The Maurice Falk Institute for
Economic Research in Israel
17, Keren Hayesod Street
Jerusalem, Israel

Dear Zvi:

I have your letter of June 7.

At the Department Meeting a week ago last Friday, we took no action on Richard Moorsteen other than agreeing to invite him to come to Chicago for a visit next fall. We agreed to invite Bob Mundell to join our faculty for the year 1965-66 on the Ford Foundation Professorship.

The Department took no action on my proposal to offer a major appointment to Gary Becker. It is likely that the question will come up again next fall and you will be here then to state your own point of view.

It is quite clear now that Theil is not going to give us his decision until after his return to the Netherlands. At the moment I am fairly optimistic that when he makes his decision, it will be favorable. Theil has been offered a quite good package, I think, and I judge from conversations with him that he feels he also has a good package.

Furthermore, Judy got the impression that Laura Theil would be favorable to coming here.

You ask in the postscript to your letter whether I got a raise. I presume that what was in your mind was the question: Will I get a raise if the chairmanship is offered to me and I accept it?

I can’t answer your  question for sure since the chairmanship has not been offered to me. Indeed, I have taken steps at this end to try to insure that it won’t be offered to me. If it is offered to me, it is very unlikely I will accept it. Indeed, I can’t imagine that the terms on which it would be offered would be sufficiently attractive to induce me to accept.

Sincerely,

[signed] Gregg

H.G. Lewis

HGL/agm

Source: Harvard University Archives, Papers of Zvi Griliches, Box 129, Folder „Correspondence, 1960-1969“.

Image Sources: Harry Johnson (Archives of two giants of economics donated to the U Chicago Library. U Chicago News, October 25, 2018); Gary Becker (University of Chicago Booth School Nobel Laureate Page for Gary Becker).

Categories
Columbia Suggested Reading Syllabus

Columbia. Reading list for Economic Analysis (less advanced level). Hart and Wonnacott, 1959

 

Judging by the following syllabus, the entry level graduate course for economic theory at Columbia sixty years ago seems to have been pitched no higher than the level of an undergraduate intermediate economic theory of today.

The syllabus transcribed for this post comes from William Vickrey’s papers in the Columbia University Archives. We can see there was a deviation from the originally announced announcement with the addition of Paul Wonnacott (a recent Princeton PhD) to co-teach with the department chairman Albert G. Hart. It is not clear what is meant below that Vickrey teaches “a reverse section” to start in January 1960, though I suspect it meant that the sequence could either be taken with Hart [first semester (101) then second semester (102)] or the sequence could be taked lagged one semester with Vickrey [second semester (101) then first semester of the following year (102)].

I will be going back into my files to see if I can find Hart’s 102 syllabus for 1960.

_________________________

From Course Announcements 1959-60

Economics 101-102. Economic Analysis

Sec 1: Professor [Albert G.] Hart. (3) ThTh 11.
Sec 2: Professor [William] Vickrey. (3) TuTh 4:10.

May be taken only for E credit [“examination credit” where course requirements include a final examination or paper with a recorded letter grade (A,B,C,D or Pass).]. Students who have not completed Economics 101 are admitted to 102 only with the instructor’s permission.

Detailed analysis of the reactions of producing units (firms) and consuming units (households); determination through the market of resource allocation, outputs, prices, and incomes; capital and interest; theories of general equilibrium (Walrasian and Kenesian); introduction to “dynamics.”

Economics 105-106. Economic Analysis

Professor [Gary] Becker. (3) Tu Thu 11.

Prerequisite: the instructor’s permission. The course may be taken only for E credit.

Topics noted under Economics 101-102, treated at a more advanced level.

Source: The Graduate Faculties 1959-1960 in the Columbia University Bulletin, Series 59, Number 19 (May 9, 1959), p. 40.

_________________________

Reading list for Hart and Wonnacott

ECONOMICS 101
AUTUMN 1959

Meetings:

Regular: M.W., 11 AM: 710 Business
Third hour (Rooms to be arranged):

(1) Th. 10 AM
(2) Th. 1 PM

Instructors:

A.G. Hart, 503 Fayerweather
P. [Paul] Wonnacott, 513 Fayerweather

For “reverse section” starting January 1960: W. Vickrey

Textbooks:

  1. Each member of the course should own one of the following texts, and arrange loans back and forth with other students:

A. W. Stonier & D.C. Hague, Textbook of Economic Theory (2d ed., London, Longmans Green, 1957)
Chapters 1-8 are first-semester material.

G.J. Stigler, Theory of Price (Revised ed., New York, Macmillan, 1952)
Chapters 1-10 and 12 are first-semester material.

K.E. Boulding, Economic Analysis (3rd ed., New York, Harper, 1955)
Chapters 26-29 and 36 are first-semester material.

  1. An optional item is the mimeographed BASIC MATHEMATICS OF ECONOMIC QUANTITIES (Economics Department office, $1.00).
  2. In addition, each student’s working library should come to include some of the following:

J.M. Henderson and R.E. Quandt, Microeconomic Theory (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1958): mathematical.

J.R. Hicks, Value and Capital (Oxford: Clarendon Press; 2nd ed. 1946)

A. Marshall, Principles of Economics (8th ed., London: Macmillan, 1920)

G.J. Stigler & K.E. Boulding, Readings in Price Theory (Chicago: Irwin, 1952)

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

AGH/PW/8/27/59
[Economics] 101
Autumn 1959

INTRODUCTION

Sept. 28, 30. LOGIC OF SUPPLY-AND-DEMAND MODELS

Stonier & Hague, ch. 1-2 (pp. 9-33).

Stigler, ch. 1-2 (pp. 1-19).

E.J. Working, “What Do Statistical ‘Demand Curves’ Show?” in Readings in Price Theory, pp. 97-115.

ad lib. Henderson & Quandt, ch. 1 (pp. 1-5).

Oct. 2. Math short course: Quantitative concepts and their dimensions.

THE FIRM AND THE MARSHALLIAN INDUSTRY

Oct. 5, 7. SHORT-RUN AND LONG-RUN COST CURVES AND THE FIRM’S SUPPLY SCHEDULE

l           Stonier & Hague, ch. 5 (pp. 87-122).

Stigler, ch. 7-8 (pp. 111-146); note that discussion is intermingled with that of the next topic.

Boulding, ch. 27 (note references to preceding chapters which have not been discussed in this course).

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

J. Viner, “Cost Curves and Supply Curves” in Readings in Price Theory, pp. 198-232.

H. Staehle, “Measurement of Statistical Cost Functions” in Readings in Price Theory, pp. 264-79.

Oct. 9. Math short course: Charts, tables and functions.

Oct. 12, 14. THEORY OF PRODUCTION.

l           Stonier & Hague, ch. 10 (pp. 210-31).

Stigler, ch. 6 (pp. 96-110: completes production-cost-and-supply discussion).

Boulding, ch. 28 (pp. 585-604).

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Marshall, Book IV, ch. 13 (pp. 314-22).

H.S. Ellis & W. Fellner, “External Economies and Diseconomies” in Readings in Price Theory, pp. 242-63.

ad lib. Henderson & Quandt, ch. 3 (pp. 42-84).

Oct. 16. Math short course: Simple analytical networks.

Oct. 19, 21. COMPETITIVE EQUILIBRIUM.

l           Stonier & Hague, ch. 6-7 (pp. 123-61).

Stigler, ch. 9-10 (pp. 148-86).

Oct. 23. Math short course: Maxima and derivatives.

Oct. 26, 28. COMPETITIVE EQUILIBRIUM, continued.

Marshall, Book V, ch. 1-5 (pp. 323-80).

ad lib. Henderson & Quandt, ch. 4 (pp. 85-125).

Oct. 30. Math short course: Maxima and derivatives, continued.

Nov. 2,4. MONOPOLY.

l           Stonier & Hague, ch. 8 (pp. 162-81).

Stigler, ch. 12 (pp. 204-21).

Boulding, ch. 29 (pp. 605-27).

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Marshall, bk. V, ch. 14 (pp. 477-95).

Chamberlin, ch. 1-2 (pp. 3-29).

Robinson, ch. 3 (pp. 47-59: note references to preceding chapter on “the geometry”).

Robinson, ch. 15-16 (pp. 179-208).

ad lib. J.R. Hicks, “Theory of Monopoly” in Readings in Price Theory, pp. 361-83.

Nov. 6. Math short course: compound analytical networks.

Nov. 9, 11. HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL LINKAGES OF MARKETS.

Marshall, Book V, ch. 6 (pp. 381-93).

Nov. 16. “MARGINALISM” AND THE FIRM.

R.L. Halland & C.J. Hitch, “Price Theory & Business Behavior” in T. Wilson (ed.) Oxford Studies in the Price Mechanism, pp. 107-38.

F. Machlup, “Marginal Analysis and Empirical Research”, American Economic Review, Sept. 1946 (pp. 521-54).

Nov. 18. Midterm hour exam.

THE HOUSEHOLD, AND MARKETS INVOLVING CONSUMERS.

Nov. 23, 25, 30. PREFERENCE AND UTILITY.

Stonier & Hague, ch. 2-4 (pp. 34-86).

Stigler, ch. 5 (pp. 68-93).

Boulding, ch. 32 (pp. 680-701), 36 (pp. 787-809).

Hicks, Value & Capital, ch. 1-2 (pp. 11-37).

Marshall, Book 3, ch. 1-5 (pp. 83-123).

ad lib. Henderson & Quandt, ch. 2 (pp. 6-41).

ad lib. S.W. Rousseas and A.G. Hart, “Experimental Verification of a Composite Indifference Map”, Journal of Political Economy, Aug. 1951 (pp. 288-318).

Dec. 2, 7, 9. INDIVIDUAL AND MARKET DEMAND FUNCTIONS.

Stigler, ch. 4 (pp. 42-66).

Hicks, Value & Capital, ch. 3 (pp. 42-52).

J.S. Duesenberry, Income, Saving and the Theory of Consumer Behavior, ch. 5 (pp. 69-92); ad lib. ch. 2 (pp. 6-16), 6 (pp. 93-110).

Dec. 16, 18. CONSUMER SURPLUS & INDEX NUMBERS.

Marshall, Book III, ch. 6 (pp. 124-37).

Hicks, Value & Capital, pp. 38-41.

Hicks, Revision of Demand Theory, pp. 95-106.

A.P. Lerner, “Note on the Theory of Price Index Numbers” in Essays in Economic Analysis (pp. 152-63).

Source: Columbia University Rare Book & Manuscript Library. William Vickrey Papers, Box 35. Folder 630, “Columbia/Economics 101 Course 1954-1959, n.d.”

Image Source: Alma Mater, Columbia University. Columbia College Today, Winter 2017-18.

 

Categories
Chicago Columbia Economists

Columbia. George Stigler reviews the department of economics, 1978

 

Somewhere between bibliometric departmental rankings and formal visiting committees lie the relatively casual responses to requests for outside opinions solicited by university administrators. In this post George Stigler provides his brief assessment of where the Columbia economics department was at the end of 1978 and what could be done to improve its relative standing.

Stigler’s message was essentially to add “More Cowbell“, i.e. outside hires of senior heavy-weights as opposed to the selection and cultivation of internal candidates for promotion.

As a former active “area expert” on the GDR economy, I am delighted to have found this explicit obiter dicta that expresses Stigler’s contempt for regional studies. 

“I also approve of [the Columbia economics department’s] conscious policy of withdrawing from the quite excessive number of special geographical area commitments into which Columbia entered.” 

Also worth noting is that Edmund Phelp’s “departure” from Columbia  lasted only 1978-79. Because of a salary dispute, Phelps left Columbia for New York University. Perhaps Stigler’s letter helped warm the Columbia administration to accepting Phelp’s terms (which they did and Edmund Phelps indeed returned the next year).

_________________________

Stigler’s View of Columbia from Chicago

December 8, 1978

Professors Louis Henkin and Steven Marcus
Columbia University
211 Low Memorial Library
New York, New York 10027

Dear Professors Henkin and Marcus:

Let me attempt to reply to your inquiries about the Department of Economics.

  1. The department was probably rated too low in 1969, and I think it is about as strong today relative to other universities, yielding a ranking around 9th or 10th. The department has suffered 2 major losses in the past decade or so (Becker and Phelps) but made a number of excellent appointments of younger people and one almost major appointment (Mundell, who dominated international trade theory in the 1960’s but has apparently stopped working). The department lacks flashy, controversial figures and this may account for its unduly low ratings. But the fact is that it is a good department.
  2. I would not quarrel with its size or general balance. I also approve of its conscious policy of withdrawing from the quite excessive number of special geographical area commitments into which Columbia entered.
  3. The department is especially strong in international trade. I consider it seriously weak in the basic fields of microeconomics and industrial organization, even though Lancaster is very good,—I would consider this its top need. There is some weakness in macroeconomics: Cagan is no longer a major figure, and Phelps’ departure emphasizes the weakness in the area. Mincer is superb in labor economics.
  4. There is strength in the intermediate levels, with good appointments such as Taylor and Calvo and Rodriguez. I do not know many of the assistant professors, and have only a mild suspicion that they are mostly not first class.

On reflection, in the last decade the department has not made a single appointment (except possibly Dhrymes and still more uncertainly Mundell) who would be considered a catch by the other major economics departments. While Harvard was getting Jorgenson and Griliches and Arrow, and Chicago was getting Becker and Lucas and Rosen, Columbia was making good junior appointments. I believe that it is a rule that a major department will make most of its senior appointments from outside, not by promotion. If I am right, the department will not rise in relative standing until it is ready and able to draw in major scholars at the height of their productive careers. It now contains major scholars such as Vickrey and Mincer—will it be able to replace them?

Sincerely,

George J. Stigler

GJS:ip

 

Source:  University of Chicago Archives. George Stigler Papers, Box 3. Folder “U of C, ECON./MISCELLANEOUS”.

Image Source: George J. Stigler, University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf1-13366, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.

Categories
Cambridge Chicago Economists LGBTQ Northwestern

Chicago. Economics Ph.D. alumnus, “gay godfather” and mentor. Roger Weiss, 1955

Milton Friedman wrote a recommendation for two University of Chicago economics graduate students to receive fellowships from the Earhart Foundation in 1953. Friedman’s letter was transcribed for the previous post that focussed on Gary Becker, who was the unambiguous first choice in Friedman’s eyes. In addition to adding to our stock of economics Ph.D. alumna/us stories, Economics in the Rear-View Mirror introduces the LGBTQ label here with Friedman’s second candidate for an Earhart Foundation fellowship, Roger William Weiss (Chicago, Ph.D., 1955). 

_____________________

Roger William Weiss. (1930-1991) Dissertation “Exchange Control in Britain, 1939-1952”, Ph.D. awarded Winter Quarter 1955.

_____________________

AEA Profile from 1969

WEISS, Roger William, academic; b. Bronxville, N.Y., 1930 stud., Northwestern U., 1946-48; M.A., U. Chicago, 1951, Ph.D. 1955; stud., Cambridge U., Eng., 1951-52. COC.DIS. “The British Exchange Controls, 1939-52,” 1954. PUB. “Economic Nationalism in Britain in the Nineteenth Century” (H.G. Johnson, Ed.), Econ. Nationalism in Old and New States, 1967; The Economic System, 1969; “The Case for Federal Meat Inspection Examined,” Jour. Of Law and Econs., Oct. 1964. RES. American Colonial Monetary System. Asst. prof., Vanderbilt U., 1953-57; pres., N. Weiss & Co., Inc., 1957-63; asso. Prof., U. Chicago since 1966. ADDRESS 1415 E. 54th St., Chicago, IL 60615.

Source: The American Economic Review, Vol. 59, No. 6, 1969 Handbook of the American Economic Association (Jan., 1970), p. 467.

_____________________

U. of Chicago obit for Roger W. Weiss

Roger Weiss, AM’51, PhD’55, professor in the social sciences since 1963, died March 7. His specialty was the role of economics in the arts and the international trade of art works. His books included The Economic System and The Weissburgs: A Social History, a history of his own family. He was also a member of the governing board of the Chicago Symphony Orchestra. Survivors include his mother, Irene, and a brother, John.

Source: University of Chicago Magazine, Vol. 83, No. 5, June 1991, p. 44.

_____________________

Roger Weiss and his partner, Howard Brown, in the University of Chicago gay community

Roger Weiss AM 1951, PhD 1955. Professor in the College and division of social sciences. Partner Howard Mayer Brown (1930-1993), Ferdinand Schevill distinguished service professor of music.

Professors Howard Brown and Roger Weiss were “out” by many standards. The University agreed to a “spousal hire” for the couple in the 1960s, and the two hosted parties for gay students and faculty in their home until Roger’s death in 1991, and Howard’s death in 1993. Bob Devendorf (AB 1985, AM 2004) remembered Howard and Roger as “gay godfathers” and mentors, while John DelPeschio (AB 1972) treasured the intergenerational community they fostered: “I felt as if I were entering a more adult world.”

However, Brown and Weiss’ refusal to participate in political actions and “come out” in the broader public sphere sometimes frustrated younger gay men like Wayne Scott (AB 1986, AM 1989), as he describes in this article. Jim McDaniel (AB 1968) remembers Howard saying “I don’t really care what anybody knows, I just care what I have to admit.”

Source: Closeted/OUT in the Quadrangles. A History of LGBTQ Life at the University of Chicago

 

Image Source: Senior year picture of Roger W. Weiss from the 1946 Hyde Park High School Yearbook, The Aitchpe.

 

Categories
Chicago Economists

Chicago. Friedman recommends Becker and Weiss for Earhart Fellowships, 1953

 

The following letter of recommendation by Milton Friedman provides us a glimpse of the young Gary Becker. It is also interesting to observe the language used to describe potential superstardom as opposed to more conventional stardom in economics. The next post will provide career information for the “other candidate”, Roger Weiss.

______________________

THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO
Chicago 37, Illinois
Department of Economics

January 27, 1953

Mr. James A. Kennedy
Earhart Foundation
First National Bank Building
Ann Arbor, Michigan

IN RE: BECKER, Gary S.

Dear Mr. Kennedy:

I am writing at the suggestion of Professors William Paton [University of Michigan] and John Van Sickle [Wabash College] to propose two young men for Earhart fellowships in economics: Gary Becker and Roger Weiss.

Gary Becker is a young man who received his A.B. from Princeton. He was recommended to us by his Princeton teachers for a departmental fellowship in terms that we found hard to take really seriously—the best person that we have had in the last ten years; the best student that I have ever had, and the like. After observing him closely for the past year and a half, I am inclined to use similar superlatives: there is no other student that I have known in my six years at Chicago who seems to me as good as Becker or as likely to become an important and outstanding economist. Though only twenty two years old now, Becker has already published one paper in the American Economic Review[*] and has collaborated with one of his teachers at Princeton in a paper published in Economica.[**] Both are first rate papers. Becker needs to do one more full year of graduate work to fulfill his requirements for his Ph.D. Our department has granted him a fellowship in the past and will again; in addition I believe he is applying for a Social Science Research Fellowship. I have asked him to summarize briefly his plans for next year, and enclose his brief statement. [not in this Hoover file]

Becker has a brilliant, analytical mind; great originality; knowledge of the history of economic thought and respect for its importance; a real feeling for the interrelationships between economic and political issues; and a profound understanding of both the operation of a price system and its importance as a protection of individual liberty. This is one of those cases in which there is just no question at all about Becker’s being preeminently qualified for one of your fellowships. I wish I could look forward to being able to find a candidate this good every year, but that is asking for too much.

Roger Weiss, the other candidate I would like to propose, is also an extremely able young man—he is not in Becker’s class, but that is a measure of Becker’s extraordinary qualities, not a reflection of Weiss. He is of the quality of the very top group of our graduate students.—the best half-dozen or so each year out of our 125 to 175 graduate students. He did some of his undergraduate work here; spent last year at Cambridge, England on a fellowship, and returned here this year for further graduate work. Another year should see him with his Ph.D. He has just turned twenty three.

Weiss has been working on a topic that he got interested in in England, namely, the operation of British Exchange controls in the post-war period. He came to the conclusion that their effectiveness was greatly overrated and their adverse effects on the efficiency of British industry greatly underrated. He is trying to see how far a more detailed study will support these judgments and permit them to be spelled out.

Weiss has an excellent mind and a thorough knowledge of price theory and monetary theory. His major interest is in problems connected with money and international trade. He is hardworking, conscientious, and productive. Perhaps his strongest quality is his ability to organize material well and to present it both in writing and speech lucidly and with some distinction. I expect Weiss to become a productive scholar and to have a most desirable influence through his writings on public policy. I have asked him, too, to prepare a brief statement of his plans, which I enclose. [not in this Hoover file]

I may say that I have checked these recommendations with my colleagues H. Gregg Lewis and Frank H. Knight, who concur in them.

Sincerely yours,
[signed]
Milton Friedman

MF-FF

[Handwritten:] P.S. This letter was written just prior to receiving yours of the 23rd. Both men do of course plan to go into University teaching.

[* “…taken from a larger essay originally submitted as a senior thesis in the department of economics and social institutions of Princeton University.” A Note on Multi-Country Trade. The American Economic Review, Vol. 42, No. 4 (Sep., 1952), pp. 558-568.]

[** The Classical Monetary Theory: The Outcome of the Discussion (with William J. Baumol). Economica, New Series, Vol. 19, No. 76 (Nov., 1952), pp. 355-376.]

Source:  Hoover Institution Archives. Milton Friedman Papers, Box 194, Folder “Earhart Foundation…”.

Image Source:  Becker-Friedman Institute for Economics at the University of Chicago. Webpage “About Our Legacy”.

Categories
Chicago Economists Exam Questions

Chicago. Preliminary Examinations in Economic Theory. Friedman, chair. 1952

 

Today’s post includes not only the questions for the economic theory preliminary examinations (Part I and Part II) from the summer quarter of 1952 at the University of Chicago, but also some interesting background material. From Milton Friedman’s papers at the Hoover Institution archives I have transcribed copies of the entire schedule of preliminary examinations for summer 1952 along with the correspondence between Friedman, Frank Knight and the departmental secretary. We can compare Friedman’s suggested questions with the questions that were actually used for the exam along with Friedman’s rankings of the anonymous examinations. Two sentences in Frank Knight’s letter to Friedman (after the grades had been compared among the graders and the veil of ignorance regarding the identities of the examinees was lifted) is definitely worth considering in light of current discussions about systemic elements of racism in the discipline of economics.

“I feel that these Negroes are in the same position as the Chinese students only more so in that they compete in a completely different market, and they are never really compared with our “full fledged” Ph.D. graduates. (Besides, between you and me, I have attended 4 or 5 Ph.D. exams this summer and thought very few of them ought to pass but they all did).”

I have gone on to track down the top eight examinees as ranked by Milton Friedman. Fun facts: Gary Becker won the bronze medal and Abba Lerner’s son, Lionel Lerner, placed fourth.

The summer 1951 theory preliminary exams were posted earlier.

_________________________

Schedule for the Preliminary Examinations
Summer 1952

July 15, 1952

To: Committee members of Preliminary examinations
From: J. Barker, Departmental Secretary
Re: Schedule and committees for Preliminary Examinations, Summer Quarter, 1952.

Date Examination Committee Registration
Tues., July 29 Economic Theory I M. Friedman, Chr.,
F. H. Knight
G. Tolley		 26
Thurs., July 31 Economic Theory II (as above) 4
Tues., July 29 Government Finance P. Thomson, Chr.
H. Lewis		 1
Thurs., July 31 Industrial Relations F. Harbison, Chr.
A. Rees
M. Reid		 1
Tues., Aug. 5 Money, Banking & Monetary Policy L. Mints, Chr.
E. Hamilton
J. Marschak		 21
Tues., Aug. 5 Statistics T. Koopmans, Chr.
W. Wallis		 4
Thurs., Aug. 7 Agricultural Economics D. Johnson, Chr.
T. Schultz
P. Thomson		 8
Thurs., Aug. 7 International Econoics L. Metzler, Chr.
C. Hildreth
H. Lewis		 9

_________________________

Friedman to Knight and Tolley
Carbon copy

Orford, N.H.
July [19 or 20], 1952

F. H. Knight
G. Tolley

Dear Knight and Tolley:

I have just received word from Miss Barker that I am chairman of the Theory prelim committee for this summer, that you are the other members, and that the exams are to be in her hands by July 22.

I wish you could join me here for a session to get out the exams—and I am sure you do too if what we have been hearing about the weather in Chicago bears any resemblance to the truth.

Since you cannot, I enclose some suggested questions for both Part I and Part II. I wonder if the two of you could get together and combine these or such of them as you think worthy of retention with your own questions. Time does not permit of rechecking with me and I assure you I shall be more than satisfied with whatever decisions the two of you make.

As to the papers, have them sent to me at any stage that suits your own plans best, since mine are very flexible. I shall try to read them promptly and return them promptly. If I send you in my grades, perhaps the two of you can combine them with your own. I realize this puts more of the work on you, but I know not what else to do. I do hope we can get the grades in reasonably promptly, and certainly before the end of the quarter, which also means before I return.

Many thanks, and apologies. Best regards too.

Yours,

_________________________

Friedman’s proposed theory exam questions
Summer 1952

M. Friedman

Suggested Questions for Theory Prelim, Summer, 1952

Part I

  1. Define the following terms precisely and indicate briefly the use made of each in economics:
    1. Demand
    2. Supply
    3. Equilibrium
    4. Indifference Curve
    5. Marginal
    6. Rate of Substitution
    7. Marginal value product
    8. Marginal efficiency of capital
    9. Production function
    10. Time preference
    11. Profit
    12. Rent
    13. Run
    14. Net advantages
    15. Variable Costs
  2. (a) “I wouldn’t take it if you paid me”. Draw the consumption indifference curves implied by this statement. (You may find it helpful to suppose first that there is some finite minimum price per unit at which the speaker would take “it”; then approach the limit implied by the quotation.)
    (b) “I’ve reached the point of diminishing returns, so I better quit”. Analyze, indicating under what conditions and for what definition of diminishing returns this is a valid inference from the conditions for a maximum.
  3. (a) Complaints are often heard about the “high” incomes of bootleggers in dry states, or gamblers where gambling is illegal, or smugglers, etc. Are high incomes in such cases evidence of the success or the failure of the laws? Explain your answer.
    (b) A man buys a ticket in a lottery and wins. View this as a business transaction. How much, if any, of his prize is properly regarded as “profit”? Does your answer use the concept of “profit” implicit in the common statement “entrepreneurs seek to maximize profit”? Justify your answer and indicate the difference, if any, between the two concepts.
  4. (a) Outline the theory of joint supply
    (b) What factors determine the elasticity of the derived supply curve of one of a pair of jointly supplied items? Show the direction of influences and prove your statements graphically or otherwise.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

M. Friedman

Suggested questions for theory prelim, Summer, 1952

Part II

  1. During every hyper-inflation there are always recurrent complaints of a “shortage of money.” How do you explain this phenomenon?
  2. The following quotation is from an article on the illicit gold traffic:
    “Traffic on the Asian gold-smuggling trails has doubled since Korea…Meanwhile savings which could be productively invested by banks lie idle; paper money is snubbed for gold, depreciates with every rise in the gold price, and becomes a weaker and weaker factor in national economies.” (H.R. Reinhardt, The Reporter, July 22, 1952, p.21).
    Analyze this quotation. Precisely what effect would the willingness of people to hold bank deposits instead of gold have on productivity or productive investment, and through what channels? What of sense and what of nonsense is there in the statements after the semi-colon?
  3. There has been much talk of the so-called “wage-price spiral.” What is generally meant by this term? Give a theoretical analysis of the so-called spiral, indicating under what circumstances you think it could or could not arise.

_________________________

Actual Economic Theory Preliminary Examination Questions
Summer, 1952

Summer, 1952

ECONOMIC THEORY I

Time: 4 hours

Answer all questions.

  1. Define the following terms precisely and indicate briefly the use made of each in economics:
    1. Demand
    2. Supply
    3. Indifference Curve
    4. Rate of Substitution
    5. Marginal value product
    6. Marginal efficiency of capital
    7. Production function
    8. Time preference
  2. (a) Outline the theory of joint supply
    (b) What factors determine the elasticity of the derived supply curve of one of a pair of jointly supplied items? Show the direction of influences and prove your statements graphically or otherwise.
  3. Assume that Crusoe is interested in economizing the use of his resources and that during the period in question there is no change in his knowledge of production techniques. How does capital and interest theory aid in explaining the following observations?

(a) After several years, Crusoe begins to obtain berries by planting and cultivation rather than simply by picking them as he had done previously.
(b) After an additional number of years, he reverts to picking wild berries.

  1. What theories do you offer to explain the following phenomena?

(a) During a prolonged rise in the general level of prices, the price of soft drinks remained at five cents with no change whatsoever in the physical characteristics of the product.
(b) During a prolonged rise in the general level of prices the price of candy bars remained at five cents, at the same time, however, as the size of the bars decreased.

  1. Using diagrams, briefly discuss the long-run cost curve for a competitive industry. Indicate, with diagrams, the response to be expected from (a) an expansion of demand, (b) a decrease of demand, within periods too short for a significant change in the fixed investment.
  2. Briefly state the main changes in the body of accepted price theory at the turn from “classical” to “Austrian” (the subjective-value school), i.e., at the “revolution” of the 1870’s. Similarly describe the transition from Austrian to “New-classical” (Marshallian) doctrine.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Summer, 1952

ECONOMIC THEORY II

Time: 2 ½ hours

Answer all questions.

  1. During every hyper-inflation there are recurrent complaints of a “shortage of money.” How do you explain this phenomenon? Compare the situation during acute depression.
  2. A part of the nation’s productive capacity is destroyed, say by a war. Ignoring any possible expectational and distributive effects, how will this affect: (a) the division of the national income between consumption and investment? and (b) the income-velocity of money. How, if at all, does your answer depend on whether wealth is a variable which influences behavior?
  3. There has been much talk of the so-called “wage-price spiral.” What is generally meant by this term? Give a theoretical analysis of the so-called spiral, indicating under what circumstances you think it would or would not arise.

_________________________

Theory Prelim, Summer, 1952, Part I. Grades by M. Friedman

General notes:

  1. I have classified the papers into five groups.

P—clear pass for the Ph.D. (7 papers)
P(?) Questionable pass for Ph.D. (5 papers)
A.M. Pass for a.M./questionable fail for Ph.D. (5 papers)
F(?) Questionable fail for A.M., clear fail for Ph.D. (4 papers)
F Clear fail for both (4 papers)

Should emphasize that as always this is somewhat arbitrary. In particular, difference between two fail classes is particularly small in this batch.

  1. In addition to the above class mark, Igive the ranking by my numerical grades. 1 is the best paper, 2, the next best, etc., to aid in seeing whether any differences among members of the committee reflect differences in absolute or relative grading.
# of candidate. Class grade Rank Remarks
1 AM 16
2 F 24
3 P 6
4 P(?) 8
5 P 5
6 F(?) 21
7 AM 14
8 P(?) 11
9 AM 15
10 P 4
11 P(?) 12
12 F 25
13 P 2 This and 15 distinctly the two best papers
14 F(?) 18
15 P 1 See under 13
16 AM 13
17 AM 17
18 F 23
19 F 22
20 P 7
21 P 3
23 F(?) 19
25 P(?) 10
26 F(?) 20
27 P(?) 9

 

PART II OF THEORY PRELIM

Not one of the three papers submitted on this part seems to me satisfactory. #1 is the best of the three, though not by much, and might deserve a questionable pass. Both of the others seem to me clear failures.

_________________________

 

THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO
Chicago 37, Illinois
Department of Economics

September 8, 1952

Mr. Milton Friedman
Orford
New Hampshire

Dear Milton:

Tolley and I have just gone over our three reports and find them fairly well in agreement. The most serious exception is #7—John J. Klein, whose paper you marked passable for the A.M. only, while both Tolley and I gave him a clear pass. Your rank was 14, as you probably have the record to show. What do you suggest? It will be no great hardship to us to re-read the paper, and we shall do so with the next day or so. Do you want to see it again? Or what can we report?

Another questionable case is Adolph Scott (Colored). Here I am the odd man, as I marked him passable, while you ranked him 23 out of 25, and Tolley ranked him 24. I yield as far as passing him for the Ph.D. is concerned but wondered what you would think about passing him for the A.M. He seems to have squeezed through in International Trade at the A.M. level. This would allow him to get the Master’s degree. I feel that these Negroes are in the same position as the Chinese students only more so in that they compete in a completely different market, and they are never really compared with our “full fledged” Ph.D. graduates. (Besides, between you and me, I have attended 4 or 5 Ph.D. exams this summer and thought very few of them ought to pass but they all did).

On Part II there is also some discrepancy. I had Mints read these papers, and he and I agree that #2, Mrs. Mullady, was passable. But you and Tolley both wrote failure and as she failed “flat” on Part I and has also failed a second time in another field, it looks as though that disposes of her case. This leaves S. Smidt who has your vote, a questionable pass, Tolley’s a clear pass, and Mints and I though a very very [sic] dubious pass. But Smidt passes Part I with colors flying. I am perfectly willing and in fact disposed to yield on him and pass him as I don’t feel competent to grade these Part II papers anyway.

Cordially,

(Dictated but not read)
Frank H. Knight

Source: Hoover Institution Archives. Milton Friedman Papers. Box 76. Folder 2 “University of Chicago ‘Economic Theory’”.

_________________________

Identities of eight examinees given passing grades
by Milton Friedman by rank

First place

Seymour Smidt. University of Chicago Ph.D. (1954). Dissertation: “Efficient Management for Government Wheat Stocks”.

Second place

Conrad Jan (Coen) Oort. University of Chicago A.M. (1954). Doctor of Economics, University of Leiden (1958).

Professor economics, U. Utrecht, The Netherlands, 1960-1971; professor economics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, 1956-1957; treasurer-general, Treasury, The Hague, The Netherlands, 1971-1977; managing director, Algemene Bank Nederland Bank (now Algemene Bank Nederland-AMRO), Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1977-1989; non-executive director various companies, The Netherlands, since 1989; professor economics, Maastricht, The Netherlands, since 1986. Chairman KLM, Amstelveen, Netherlands, 1992, Robeco Group, Rotterdam, Netherlands, 1989. Vice chairman Aegon Insurance, The Hague, 1990.
Source: Prabook webpage for Conrad Jan Oort.

Third place

Gary S. Becker. University of Chicago Ph.D. (1953). Dissertation: “The Economics of Racial Discrimination”.
The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel 1992.

Fourth place

Lionel John Lerner. [son of Abba P. Lerner and Alice Sendak]. University of Chicago A.B. (1950) and A.M. (1952). Johns Hopkins University Ph.D. (1955). Dissertation: “Theories of Imperialist Exploitation.”
Source: Johns Hopkins University, Sheridan Libraries, Special Collections. Commencement Program 1955, p. 19.

Fifth place

Edward J. Kilberg. Hofstra University B.A. (1949). Duke University A.M. (1952). University of Chicago A.M. (1957).
Apparently Kilberg was never awarded a Ph.D. in economics by the University of Chicago for his dissertation “Commercial bank holdings of cash and liquid items”. Most likely reason is that he died in the crash of a Northeast airliner at Nantucket Airport on August 15, 1958. Kilberg left a research job at the Mutual Life Insurance Company in 1957 to go to the NBER where he worked as assistant to Arthur F. Burns for the book Prosperity Without Inflation (1958).

Sixth place

Hugh Roy Elliott. In the list of economics Ph.D. dissertations kept by the department of economics at the University of Chicago we find “Hugh R. Elliott. Dissertation: Savings Deposits as Money (Summer 1964)” which seems rather late in the game. But then we see: AER Sept. 1957, p. 838 “Hugy [sic] R. Elliott, B.A. Harvard 1950; M.A. Chicago 1952.” Thesis in preparation at Chicago “Savings deposits as money”.

Seventh place

Irwin Ira Baskind. I have found the following item “Baskind, Irwin. Postwar Monetary Policy in Belgium (Ph.D., Chicago)” from U.S. State Department, Bureau of Intelligence and Research. External Research. A List of Studies Currently in Progress, Western Europe, ER list no. 5.14 (April 1960), p. 9. Note: Baskind’s name does not appear in the list of economics Ph.D.’s kept by the Chicago department of economics.

Eighth Place

Paul Gabriel Keat. Baruch School of the City University of New York B.B.A. (1949). Washington University A.M. (1950). University of Chicago A.M. (1952, 1956). University of Chicago Ph.D. (1959). Dissertation: “Changes in Occupational Wage Structure 1900-1956”.

Keat, Paul G. PhD 88, passed away on April 2, 2014.Born in Prague, Czechoslovakia May 2, 1925. A WWII vet who served in Ardennes, Normandy and Rhineland. Decorated with the European African Middle Eastern Services Medal, Good Conduct Medal and WWII Victory Medal. Discharged 1946. Graduated 1959 from the University of Chicago with an M.A. and PhD in economics. Student of his cherished professor, Dr. Milton Friedman. Earned B.B.A. in accounting from Baruch School of the City University of New York and M.A. from Washington University. Paul’s work with IBM was extensive in both the United States and in the European headquarters based in Paris. He taught both finance and economics at the graduate level in numerous universities including Syracuse University, Washington University, the City University of New York, Iona College and the Lubin Graduate School of Business at Pace University. In 2013 he co-authored and published the seventh edition of his textbook “Managerial Economics”.
Source: Arizona Republic, Phoenix. April 13, p. F9.

Images: The economic theory prelim examiners, Friedman, Knight, and Tolley. From the University of Chicago Photographic Archive.

Categories
Chicago Courses

Chicago. Milton Friedman nixes “Microeconomics” and “Macroeconomics”, 1965

 

From an August 9, 1965 memorandum to the faculty of the Chicago economics department we can see that there was actually a faculty meeting in which adoption of  new course titles, “Micro-Economic Theory” and “Macro-Economic Theory”, had been decided. However, Milton Friedman (presumably not at that meeting) protested this concession to the mainstream and ever since Chicago has faithfully remained home of “Price Theory” and “Income Theory” as seen below in the course titles from 2000-2001 and 2010-2011 (along with course descriptions). Incidentally the two sequences have grown a third quarter since the mid-sixties.

I don’t have a copy of the June 12, 1965 protest letter from Friedman to Lewis, but am reasonably confident that someone will eventually find a copy (most likely a carbon copy of the letter in Milton Friedman’s correspondence with Lewis).

_________________

H. Gregg Lewis to Milton Friedman

THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO
Chicago 37, Illinois
Department of Economics

June 18, 1965

Professor Milton Friedman
Orford,
New Hampshire

Dear Milton:

Thanks for your letter of June 12 regarding the labeling of 301, 302, 331, and 332.

I want to have the decision with respect to the labels reconsidered this summer. Until the decision is reconsidered, I am making no changes in the titles of the courses.

Meanwhile, I would appreciate it if you would suggest alternative titles for the courses that are acceptable to you.

With best wishes to you and Rose.

Sincerely,
[signed] Gregg
H. G. Lewis

HGL/agm

[Friedman’s handwritten notes at bottom of letter:]

301, 302 Price Theory[;] Relative Price Theory

331, 332 Money and Employment Theory[;] Money, Income, Employment[;] Theory of the Price Level and Aggregate Output, Money

Source: Hoover Institution Archives. Papers of Milton Friedman. Box 79, Folder 3 “University of Chicago Minutes. Economics Department, 1965-1966”.

_________________

Memo from H. Gregg Lewis to the economics department

August 9, 1965

To: Members of the Department of Economics

From: H. Gregg Lewis

At the last meeting of the Department (June 4, 1965), the Department decided to change the name of Economics 301 and 302 to Micro-Economic Theory and Economics 331 and 332 to Macro-Economic theory. The purpose of this note is to request that the Department reconsider this action and adopt a different pair of names for these two sets of courses (and the corresponding parts of the Ph.D. Core Examination).

The term micro-economics commonly is used to denote the economics of the individual household and the individual firm. It is, therefore, a misleading title for 301 and 302. Furthermore, it is surely misleading to represent 331 and 332 as not involving consideration of the economics of individual households and firms.

For 301 and 302, I recommend that we keep the present title (Price Theory) or change it slightly to Relative Price Theory. For 331 and 332, I recommend that one of the following be adopted:

The Theory of Income, Employment, and Money
or         The Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money
or         The Theory of Income, Employment, Interest, and Money

Source: Hoover Institution Archives. Papers of Milton Friedman. Box 79, Folder 3 “University of Chicago Minutes. Economics Department, 1965-1966”.

_________________

Course descriptions from the 2000-2001 Brochure

301 PRICE THEORY I (Becker/ Murphy)

Theory of consumer choice, including household production, indirect utility, and hedonic indices. Supply under competitive and monopolistic conditions. Static and dynamic cost curves, including learning by doing and temporary changes. Uncertainty applied to consumer and producer choices. Property rights and the effects of laws. Investment in human and physical capital. (=Law 436)

[Reading List from one year later: Autumn Quarter 2001]

302 PRICE THEORY II (Reny/ Chiappori)

Economics of uncertainty. Models with asymmetric information. Game theory. PQ: Econ 301 or consent of instructor.

303 PRICE THEORY III (Chiappori/ Rosen)

The theory of production, division of labor and organization of work. The economics of the firm and the theory of supply. Cost functions, product differentiation and spatial equilibrium. Investment theory, firm size, and incentive problems. Externalities and the role of markets and prices. PQ: Econ 301 and 302 or consent of instructor.

330 THE THEORY OF INCOME I (Townsend/ Alvarez)

This course begins the study of income and macroeconomics by embedding firms, households, and financial institutions into the standard general equilibrium model. The course thus studies Pareto optima, Walrasian equilibrium, and the core in economies with separation in space, uncertainty, and/or multiple time periods and incorporates private information, incomplete markets, and other impediments to trade. Various phenomena and applications are stressed: private monies and the potential role of the monetary authority; the evaluation of local, regional, and national level financial systems in their ability to reallocate risk; the determinants of economics growth; growth with increasing inequality and financial deepening; occupation choice under wealth constraints and its impact on growth and inequality; the existence of networks such as industrial conglomerates in economies with moral hazard; optimal fiscal policy; and the role of social security. Examples are drawn from Asia, Latin America, Europe, and Africa and well as the U.S.

331 THE THEORY OF INCOME II (Lucas)

This course will deal with modern capital and monetary theory, and with applications of the theory to issues in fiscal, monetary, and banking policy.

332 THE THEORY OF INCOME III (Mulligan)

The course shares with the other two Theory of Income courses the objectives of (1) explaining human behavior as evidenced by aggregate variables and (2) predicting the aggregate effects of certain government policies. The focus of Economics 332 is to assess the empirical success of prevailing theories. Some hypotheses to be considered are consumption smoothing, intertemporal substitution, the q-theory, the neoclassical approach to fiscal policy, and the intergenerational transfer view of Social Security. The course confronts several empirical issues that are also encountered outside the field of macroeconomics such as the construction of aggregate data, choice of data set, and the measurement of expectations.

 

Source:  University of Chicago, Department of Economics Graduate Program. Brochure 2000-2001. Webpage: Courses.

_________________

Course descriptions from the 2010–11 Brochure

30100     PRICE THEORY I  (Murphy / Becker)

Theory of consumer choice, including household production, indirect utility, and hedonic indices. Models of the firm.  Analysis of factor demand and product supply under competitive and monopolistic conditions.  Static and dynamic cost curves, including learning by doing and temporary changes.  Uncertainty applied to consumer and producer choices.  Property rights and the effects of laws.  Investment in human and physical capital.  (=LAWS 43611)

30200     PRICE THEORY II  (Becker / Murphy / Sonnenschein)

The first five weeks of this course are a continuation of ECON 30100, Price Theory I.

The second half of the course will be devoted to the Walrasian model of general competitive equilibrium as developed by Arrow and Debreu.  This will begin with a brief development of the consumer and producer theories, followed by the welfare theorems connecting equilibria and optima and a treatment of the classical existence of equilibrium theorem.  The core of an economy, a limit theorem relating the core to the set of competitive equilibria, and models in which agents are small relative to the market will also be considered.  Finally we will study general equilibrium under some alternative assumptions; such as, informational asymmetries and rational expectations equilibrium, public goods and Lindahl equilibrium, financial general equilibrium and asset pricing.  (=LAWS 43621)

30300    PRICE THEORY III  (Reny / Myerson)

The course begins with expected utility theory, and then introduces the fundamental ideas of game theory: strategic-form games, Nash equilibrium, games with incomplete information, extensive-form games, and sequential equilibrium.   Then the course will focus on the effects of informational asymmetries in markets and the problems of moral hazard and adverse selection. Topics include: optimal risk sharing, signaling and screening in competitive markets, principal-agent problems, strategic and informational incentive constraints, incentive efficiency, and mechanism design for auctions and bilateral trading.

33000     THE THEORY OF INCOME I  (Alvarez)

This course formulates and analyzes aggregate general equilibrium models to study classical questions in macroeconomics. The course starts with the formulation and analysis of competitive equilibrium in the general equilibrium models, including the 1st and 2nd welfare theorem. The first applications of this model are: social security (using an OLEG model), optimal risk sharing, and asset pricing (using a one period model with uncertainty). Most of the remaining applications focus on dynamic models without uncertainty. To do so we study tools to characterize optimal solutions of control problems: Hamiltonian, calculus of variations and dynamic programming. The main application of these tools is the neoclassical growth model in many variations: determinants of steady state and balanced growth path, endogenous growth, effect of variable labor supply, TFP changes and of investment specific technical progress, habit formation, the q-model of investment, taxation of capital and labor, optimal taxation a la Ramsey, among others.

33100     THE THEORY OF INCOME II  (Stokey)

This course will focus on the use of recursive general equilibrium models to study various macroeconomic questions.  On the substantive side, particular topics include models with idiosyncratic (insurable) and aggregate (uninsurable) risk; issues in dynamic fiscal policy (Ricardian equivalence, tax smoothing, capital taxation); models of asset pricing; issues in monetary policy (money demand, the welfare cost of inflation); time consistency; and aggregate models with price setting. On the methodological side, the course will focus on dynamic programming and other recursive modeling techniques.

33200     THE THEORY OF INCOME III  (Mulligan)

The course shares with the other two Theory of Income courses the objectives of (1) explaining human behavior as evidenced by aggregate variables and (2) predicting the aggregate effects of certain government policies.  Economics 33200 considers some of the prevailing business cycle theories, and their application to the recession of 2008-9.  Some hypotheses to be considered are the q-theory of housing investment, the neoclassical approach to fiscal policy, and whether government spending has a “multiplier.”  The course confronts several empirical issues that are also encountered outside the field of macroeconomics such as the construction of aggregate data, choice of data set, and the measurement of expectations.

Source: University of Chicago, Department of Economics Graduate Program 2010-11, Introduction. Webpage: Graduate Course Descriptions, 2010-11.

Image: Irwin Collier (right) taking a break during an earlier archival expedition to the Hoover Institution Archives…Milton Friedman (left).

 

Categories
Funny Business M.I.T.

M.I.T. “The Greatest Faculty Skit Ever Written”, ca. 1974

 

The following faculty skit comes from the M.I.T. department of economics when memories of the Senate Watergate Hearings (summer of 1973) were still very fresh in everyone’s memories.  This skit was likely presented at the 1973-74 annual skit party.  Frederick Mishkin received his B.S. in 1973 from M.I.T. and his first year as a graduate student at M.I.T. was in 1973-74. Other graduate students named were either second year or thesis-writers.

I presume “E. Hausman Hunt” was a blend of the names of the MIT econometrician Jerry Hausman and the Watergate conspirator E. Howard Hunt.

“Bob Dean” was likely a blend of the names of Robert Hall (who taught the course 14.123) and Nixon’s special counsel John Dean (wife’s name Maureen).

“Paul Colson” might have been a blend of the names of Paul Joskow and Charles Colson, Nixon’s man for “dirty tricks” and who claimed he would have walked over his own grandmother to get Nixon reelected.

“F.” would appear with the remark about not understanding “goyim” to have been Frank Fisher.

Roger Backhouse graciously made his copy of this skit available for transcription. I have corrected many typos in the original text. If I ever identify the author, I shall update this post. 

__________________

The Greatest Faculty Skit Ever Written
(in 1 hour, 15 minutes)

F. This here meeting will now come to order. Let the minutes show that this is the 732nd meeting of the Special Subcommittee of the Econometrics [sic] Society investigating the notorious Westgate affair.

M1: Mr. Chairman, a point of personal privilege—

F. Yes, Mr. Solow.

M2: I’ve been out of town testifying for IBM in Tulsa for the last 7 months. Could you fill me in on what’s been happening?

F. On the night of June 20, 1972 several graduate students were apprehended breaking into Gary Becker’s office. It appeared that these students were after Prof. Becker’s manuscript on a theory of marriage. Several pieces of evidence point [to] the fact that these students were after Prof. Becker’s manuscript on a theory of marriage. Several pieces of evidence point [to] the fact that a well known Eastern economist (with initials PAS) may have funded this break-in for as yet unknown reasons. This committee has been called to investigate this matter.

M1Thank you Mr. Chairman.

F. Will the first witness step forward to testify?
Please state your name.

EHH   E. Hausman Hunt.

F. What have you been doing for [the] last 3 months?

EHH.  I’ve spent the last 3 months in Charles St. Jail polishing up my lecturing technique. If I could only speak a little faster during my lecture, just think how much more material I could cover.

F. Is it true that you were in charge of organizing the burglary of Becker’s office?

EHH. Yes; I used several graduate students from MIT: my first choices were Rick Kasten and Roger Gordon but we had to reject them since we were afraid they were too talkative. However I finally settled on Rick Mishkin and Glenn Loury; Mishkin because he was so calm and organized; and Louryto comply with equal opportunities satisfy HEW.

F. Is it true that you write econometrics papers under a pseudonym?

EHH. Yes, I’ve just produced my 43rdpaper on the identification problem using the pseudonym “Franklin M. Fisher”

F. Well, I may be an old country bullfrog, but…
Next witness, please

(BH steps forward; Maureen sits in his lap; F. gives the eyebrows to the audience)

F. State your name, rank.

BD. I’m Bob Dean, special assistant professor.

F. And whom do you assist?

BD. Prof. Paul Anthony Samuelson, BA, PhD, L.H.D, L.L.D, Litt.D. (hon), LSD.

F. Can you describe briefly your part in the Westgate affair?

BD. Prof Samuelson was working on a theory of marriage at the same time as Prof. Becker. He had just succeeded in developing the formal first order conditions for the optimal marriage (using the LeChatelier principle) when he discovered Prof Becker’s work. He asked me to arrange for him to get a look at Prof. Becker’s manuscript.

F. Isn’t it true that you got married on or about this same period?

BD. Yes, that was also part of Prof Samuelson’s theory of marriage. He had also arranged for an empirical part of this work; after deriving the first order conditions, he hired a computer programmer to search for the optimal marriage in the department. Maureen and I were chosen. Pressured by Samuelson we agreed to get married.

F. How did you afford your honeymoon on an assistant prof’s salary?

BD. I borrowed some money from a departmental slush fund.

F. What is the source of this slush fund?

BD. It was accumulated for the sale of lecture notes from 14.123; why else do you think we sell those notes?

F. (eyebrows) I see. When did you again meet with Prof Samuelson?

BD. March 21, 1973;

F. What happened at that meeting?

BD. We received instructions from Prof. Samuelson on how to behave on our honeymoon. We asked Prof. Samuelson if it would be OK if our marginal utilities were not equalized; he said that “it would be wrong.”

F. Why was Prof Samuelson taking such an interest in your honeymoon?

BD. He wanted to be sure that his theory involved only “empirically refutable propositions”. He was also worried that we might behave too formally.

F. I don’t think I’ll ever understand you goyim.

F. Next witness. Please state your name.

PC. Paul Colson.

F. For what purpose were you hired by Prof Samuelson?

PC. I was supposed to ghost write the empirical part of the paper.

F. It says here (looking at notes) that you are one of the most dedicated of the applied econometricians?

PC. Yes, I’d run over my own grandmother to get a t-statistic greater than 2.

F. What were Prof. Samuelson’s instructions?

PC. As you know, Prof Samuelson was worried that Bob and Maureen Dean might be too formal on their honeymoon; I was sent along to collect data on their performance.

F. What happened? (eyebrows)

PC. As I peered into their motel room, I saw Bob come out of the bathroom dressed in pajamas and say to Maureen: I offer my honor. Maureen came out in her nightgown and replied I honor your offer.

F. (eyebrows) What happened next?

PC. From then on it was just honor and offer all night.

F. What went wrong?

PC. We forgot to check the second-order conditions and it was only a saddle point.

 

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

Image Source: Photo from U.S. Senate Watergate hearings. From left to right: minority counsel Fred Thompson, ranking member Howard Baker, and chair Sam Ervin of the Senate Watergate Committee.