Categories
Economics Programs M.I.T.

M.I.T. Economics Department’s Chair exposition of his department’s philosophy and methods. Freeman, 1952

Paul Samuelson’s Economics triggered a conservative cancel-culture backlash unlike any economics textbook before or after. In the previous post we saw how William F. Buckley, Jr.’s attack on the use by Yale professors of Samuelson’s Keynesian textbook forced the chairman of the Yale economics department to defend the honor of his department before the Old Blues (alumni).

M.I.T., home of the heretic Paul Samuelson, proved to be ground zero of this anti-Keynes reaction. This story is well-known now thanks to Yann Girard. The artifact transcribed for this post is a short essay published by Ralph Freeman who was head of the M.I.T. economics department from 1933 to 1958. In it Freeman defended the honor of his department much as Lloyd Reynolds’ essay did for Yale economics. 

Cf. “Negotiating the ‘Middle-of-the-Road’ Position: Paul Samuelson, MIT, and the Politics of Textbook Writing, 1945-55,” by Yann Girard in MIT and the Transformation of American Economics (Annual Supplement to Volume 46, History of Political Economy, ed. by E. Roy Weintraub). Durham: Duke University Press, 2014.

______________________________

President to Department Chair
“Incoming!” 

November 6, 1951

Professor Ralph E. Freeman
Economics Department

Dear Ralph:

Thank you for the Atlantic Monthly with McGeorge Bundy’s article which I have. I wish that his defense could have a wider circulation than it received in the Atlantic.

The Buckley book concerns me mainly because of its attack on Samuelson’s text and because of the wide distribution the Buckley book is receiving it is going to stir up a lot more people.

I venture to send you some of the things that come to my desk simply by way of keeping, you informed of the steady bombardment on Paul Samuelson’s text. This bombardment has been increasing in intensity. Yesterday a member of the Corporation came to see me about it. He had not previously had contact with the book, but he had been approached by various business people who were bitterly critical of the book and who brought to him a publication issued down south which raked over the old Namm comments [Benjamin Namm, “Would You Enter a Door Marked ‘Socialism’?” in Collier’s Weekly (April 29, 1950), pp. 34-49] upon the book.

I have just received a copy of the Brooking Institution study, “A Survey of Economic Education” by McKee and Moulton. I am afraid that the comments made in this study on page 17 in regard to economics textbooks will still further stir people up despite the qualifications which the authors carefully include in their statement.

I hasten to reassure you that despite the mounting criticism I stand no less steadfastly behind Samuelson’s right to take the point of view that seems right and proper to him. I think our best defense against criticism is the one that I repeatedly make, and which I assume to be wholly true, and that is that in our own teaching of economics at the Institute we do not follow any line, that we seek to present a balanced point of view and to give the student the tools so that he can reach his own conclusions. I was interested in Bundy’s statement in his Atlantic article that in attacking Mr. Buckley’s book, he did not wish to maintain that Yale was perfect and that “it is possible that Yale…..would benefit from the appointment of a strongly right-wing economist.

I am sure that so long as we can show that our own teaching of economics is not distorted in any direction and that we are not subtly indoctrinating students with any biased point of view, that we have an unimpregnable and sound position.

Yours cordially,
J. R. Killian, Jr.

JRK: mh

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Department Chair to President
“We’re cool kids, really”

Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Department of
Economics and Social Sciences

Cambridge, Mass.
November 19, 1951

President James R. Killian
Room 3-208

Dear Jim:

         As I indicated to you in a recent conversation, a group of the Department staff is preparing a new book of readings to supplement the textbook which we use in Economic Principles (14.01 and 14.02). I have been delaying writing you about this until final decision has been made as to the contents of this new book. However, a tentative table of contents is now available and I enclose it herewith.

         As you will observe, the projected book of readings aims to present a variety of points of view ranging from radical to conservative, from Marx and Engels to Pope Leo XIII. There are also readings from classical economists such as Adam Smith, Ricardo and Bastiat. Articles criticizing recent government policies are included as well as various opinions on the economics of the defense program. The use of this book will enable us to do on a large scale what we are already doing with a limited number of collateral readings.

         I should like to emphasize once more that the members of the Department as a group range around the center in their economic thinking. There are no extreme radicals or extreme conservatives among us. We try to take a view toward economic problems which is balanced and objective, and in class we try to present both sides of the controversial problems that come up for discussion.

         From some of the attacks aimed at Samuelson’s book, I get the impression that economists are to be condemned if they do not unequivocally approve of everything now being done in the name of private enterprise. This attitude, of course, is absurd. If the economic system is to be kept in working order it must be subjected to a critical analysis. In fact it is the job of the economist to do just this.

         Some of the more extreme conservatives who are today attacking the teaching of economics are inclined to adopt an ostrich-like attitude. After all we do live in a mixed economy — one that is partly private enterprise and partly government control. This is a fact. Should this fact be hidden from students? The answer is clear. But some of our critics talk as though any discussion of what they regard as undesirable trends should be eliminated or reduced to a minimum.

         I can assure you that no member of this Department is trying to undermine the system of freedom. In fact, it is quite the reverse. We are all trying to understand it with a view to making it work better and last longer. Though there is disagreement amongst us on particular issues, we are in agreement on that basic issue.

         I am not sure there is much more that I can say. We would be glad to meet any of our critics face to face in a friendly discussion of any points on which they think we are in error. We do not claim to have all the answers. Our analysis might well be improved as the result of more exchange of ideas with intelligent business men.

Yours sincerely,
[signed] Ralph
Ralph E. Freeman

REF:rw

[in pencil]

Copies of this letter sent to:

Mr Gray [Daniel M. Gray?] of Stoner Mudge [Stoner-Mudge Co., Inc. of Pittsburgh]
Bradley Dewey [Life Member of MIT Corporation, 1932-74]
Dr. Warner, Pres. Carnegie Tech [John Christian Warner (1897-1989), President 1950-65]
Donald Carpenter [Life Member of MIT Corporation, 1943-95]
John Hancock [Member of MIT Corporation, 1949-55]
Walter Beadle [Life Member of MIT Corporation, 1943-88]

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

President to Department Chair
“Be like Yale.”

November 28, 1951

Professor Ralph E. Freeman
Economics Department

Dear Ralph:

         Professor Shultz sent me a copy of an article by Lloyd G. Reynolds entitled “The State of Economics at Yale.” This article seemed to me to be a first-rate exposition of the philosophy and methods of the department at Yale. The material is set forth not in a defensive manner at all, and to me was fairly convincing.

         This is the kind of statement that I have been hoping that someone might prepare on our own department program here. I think it would be of great help to the Visiting Committee and to the department and the administration in supporting the interests of the department.

         I have returned the Reynolds article to Professor Shultz. If you haven’t seen it, you may be interested in borrowing it from him.

Yours cordially,

J. R. Killian, Jr.

JRK: mh

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Department Chairman to President
“You asked for it.”

Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Department of
Economics and Social Sciences

January 17, 1952

Dr. James R. Killian
Room 3-208
M.I.T.

Dear Jim:

I have had sent to you a little article entitled

“Economies at M.I.T.” You may recall that you suggested I try my hand at an article of this sort.

I hope it will be of some help in dealing with correspondence regarding the operations of the Department. Several others of the staff have read and expressed general approval of the contents. It has been suggested that it might be submitted to The Technology Review which might be willing to supply us with some reprints.

I welcome any criticisms or suggestions for additions or omissions.

Yours sincerely,
[signed:] Ralph
Ralph E. Freeman

REF: TW
cc: Dean Burchard

Source: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Office of the President, Records, 1930-1959, Box 93, Folder “8. Freeman, R.E., 1945-54”

__________________________

Note: the following is a transcription of the printed article found in the archive with Freeman’s letter. The typed draft sent to M.I.T. President Killian is identical, only minor editorial changes were made for publication.

Economics at M.I.T.
[1952]

The Economics Staff, with Diverse Backgrounds and Views, Aims to Impart a Technique of Logic for Solving Economic Problems in a Complex Society

By Ralph E. Freeman

                  One of the most difficult problems confronting the professional teacher of economics is the competition he meets from other and more effective teaching agencies. The writer refers to the educational impact of the home, the press, and the radio, as well as the propaganda coming from special-interest groups of one kind or another. These agencies have a competitive advantage. The teacher may be in contact with his class for only two or three hours a week for a part of a year, while his nonacademic competitors have been working on these students since their early childhood.

                  This disadvantage may seem to raise the question as to whether the economist can really teach the subject at all. Doubts on this score are further increased by the unsettled condition of the world during the last decade — a state of affairs that has created many uncertainties for the individual. A student worried about his future can hardly be blamed for indifference toward a subject which often seems dull and remote from his immediate interests. Another disadvantage is the youth and inexperience of the average college student. Favorable experience with the veterans who came to the Institute after World War II indicates that maturity is a great advantage in the study of economics. All these difficulties in the way of the teacher tend to make him humble when appraising the impression he leaves on the minds of the younger generation.

                  These obstacles, however, are also a challenge to the economist to improve his teaching techniques. The Economics staff at the Institute has been continually experimenting with new materials and methods and, though it is not fully satisfied with the results, progress has been achieved. We have tried to keep up with the increasing mass of quantitative data becoming available and to keep abreast of improvements in analytical techniques and of shifts in emphasis resulting from changing economic conditions.

                  An interesting example of such a shift is to be found in the treatment of unemployment and price levels. Prior to the 1930’s, these problems were of secondary interest to most economists. A great deal of what they wrote and taught was based on the assumption of full employment and relatively stable prices. The attention of economists was directed mainly to the way in which productive agencies were allocated among various industries and enterprises. The leading problem was to discover that distribution of human and material resources which would best promote the material well being of the people.

                  In recent years the economist’s inquiry has focused on economic fluctuations. Unemployment of resources has thus become a major problem for investigation along with a study of changes in the level of prices. Because ups and downs in employment and periods of inflation and deflation are associated with changes in income available to purchase goods and services, the spotlight has been turned on income analysis. The study of national income has been stimulated by the publication of improved statistics emanating chiefly from the Federal Government and by the development of new and better techniques of analysis.

                  These statements are not meant to imply that the traditional subjects have been abandoned. The economist is still trying to explain what the economic system is and how it operates. He is still concerned with the role of prices and profits in organizing economic activity and with the functions of money and markets in assigning labor and capital to their more productive uses. What has happened is a reorientation of these traditional inquiries around the problems of income, employment, and price levels. This new approach seems to have brought the study of economics nearer to the daily lives of people and closer to the problems with which businessmen are most vitally concerned.

                  The fact that the beginner in economics is normally young and inexperienced makes it necessary for the teacher to spend a good deal of time describing the facts of economic life. National income, for example, only becomes meaningful as it is broken down into components and expressed in quantitative terms. It is usually desirable, therefore, to start with a discussion of the income of individuals, corporations, and governments. How is the total income of the nation divided among families and groups? How are corporations organized? How do they compute their earnings? What is the role of government and what changes are taking place in the relation of the government to the individual and to business? These are among the questions with which the student of economics is confronted in the early stages of his study. In addition, in most of the subjects offered, time is devoted to describing various institutions such as banks, labor unions, and farmers’ organizations which help determine the nature and direction of economic activity.

                  The main objective of economic education, however, is not to fill the minds of students with facts and statistics, but to impart to them a technique of thinking by means of which they can analyze and solve economic problems for themselves. General principles must be developed that are applicable to a broad range of situations. Among these principles are those that can be applied in understanding changes in the price of goods, changes in wages, interest, and profits, in the general price level and in the national income.

                  The economist is concerned, for example, not so much with what the price of wheat is or has been, as he is with the forces that interact to determine the price of wheat or any other commodity. Though he may study past changes in national income, he is primarily interested in the reason why the national income shifts from one level to another. In other words, he tries to develop an integrated theoretical framework which can be used in the analysis of economic problems.

                  At M.I.T., the economist is regarded as a teacher, not a preacher. His function is not to radiate his own political views nor to propagandize for his own particular social philosophy. His job is to encourage students to form their own opinions. He is not too concerned with what these opinions are. His main job is to ensure that the opinions, whatever they may be, are reached through a logical process of thought, rather than as a result of prejudice or hearsay.

                  The Economics staff of about 30 full-time members has been recruited with this objective in view. When a new man is taken on, we ask two main questions. Is he equipped by training, experience, and intelligence to carry on creative, scholarly work in his chosen field? Is his personality such as to hold out the promise that he will be a competent teacher and a congenial and co-operative colleague? As the result of this method of selection, the group we now have includes no freaks or extremists. Though there is a broad diversity of view on many of the controversial issues of our times, all of the members of the Department share a desire to preserve and improve the free institutions of America. These men rank high in the profession and compare very favorably with economists in other leading institutions.

                  Some people may find it hard to accept the idea that divergence of opinion should be regarded as a healthy condition. Why, it may be asked, should I tolerate a colleague who disagrees with me on government controls, the merits of labor unions, taxation, monetary policy and other questions? My answer would be that differences of opinion give rise to a lively interchange of ideas which is an important element in the educational process. Progress in economics, or in any other scientific discipline, would be stifled if an effort were made to enforce conformance to a single pattern of thought.

                  No matter how firmly we may believe that a given policy is the correct one, there is always a good chance that the man with a different opinion may have something meritorious to propose on his side. A story is told of Al [Alfred E.] Smith who was traveling in upper New York State with two companions, a Protestant and a Catholic. It was early on a bitterly cold Sunday morning when the two Catholics arose to attend mass. Looking at the Protestant sleeping peacefully in his warm bed, Al Smith said to his friend: “Wouldn’t it be awful if he were right and we were wrong!”

                  The chance that the other fellow may be right, or partly right, makes it inadvisable to strive for unanimity of thought and opinion. Tolerance of diversity is necessary for the preservation of the spirit of free inquiry which is the breath of life of an institution devoted to education and research. Such tolerance is one of the main features distinguishing a democratic from a totalitarian society.

                  As indicated above, this concept is applied in the Institute’s educational practices. In all courses, whether they are offered to undergraduates or graduates, the Department of Economics and Social Science tries to present contrasting views and opinions. In the beginning course in Economic Principles, which has been required of all students at the Institute, this procedure is subjected to severe time limitation. But even here this practice is followed. For several years we have been using supplementary readings presenting divers points of view and a new collection of such readings to accompany the textbook has just been prepared — a compilation that includes extracts from economic writings of all sorts, ranging from Karl Marx to the National Association of Manufacturers.

                  Besides this course in Economic Principles, there are many others, both on the undergraduate and the graduate level. These include several in the fields of labor relations, statistics, finance, theory, and international economics. There are courses in business cycles, technological innovation, and in the economics of particular industries. The Department also offers courses in psychology and international relations. As the name implies, the Department of Economics and Social Science is one that covers a wide field. It is a part of the School of Humanities and Social Studies and has close ties with the activities of historians and others who come under the same administrative direction. The bringing together of a number of different social studies exerts a broadening influence on both staff and students. It tends to make us look at human beings as members of an ever-changing, complex society subject to many influences in addition to those of an economic nature.

                  Virtually every student at the Institute takes economics at some point in his program. In addition to those subjects included in the Humanities Program, designed for the Institute as a whole, other subjects are tailored to fit the needs of professional courses such as those offered by the Department of Business and Engineering Administration. The Department also offers a four-year curriculum for undergraduates — Course XIV — leading to a bachelor’s degree in Economics and Engineering. Through emphasis on relationships among engineering, economics, and human relations problems, this Course aims to provide students with an understanding of both technical and non-technical aspects of our industrial society.

                  There is also a graduate division. There are about 50 students in this group, most of whom are candidates for the Ph.D. degree. Many of these men have come to M.I.T. from liberal arts colleges. They go into government, business, labor unions, and teaching as professional economists.

                  Because the training of the professional economist, normally requiring about seven years, is spent mainly in the classroom and the library, his knowledge of actual business practices is more limited than if he were actively employed in industry. This limitation of experience is a handicap of which the men on the Department’s staff are acutely conscious. We do not have as much direct contact, as might be desired, with what goes on in the factories, banks, railroads, public utilities, and other business enterprises whose activities we study.

                  Efforts are being made to bridge the gap between economic theory and business practice. Graduate students are encouraged to find summer employment in industry. Some of the staff members have had temporary jobs in business or government. Others have had an opportunity to get into close touch with industry through research projects. In recent years they have undertaken investigations in textiles, shoes, coal, housing, electronics equipment, and a variety of other industries. Several of our instructors act as consultants to business firms and have had ample opportunity to rub shoulders with businessmen and get a better idea of their operations and problems.

                  The Department also brings in businessmen to meet with classes and join in round-table discussions. The system of Visiting Committees is also helpful in getting the staff into touch with leaders in industry, finance, and the professions. But more of these contacts are needed. If we are to keep our feet on the ground, we must have the counsel and criticism of men of practical affairs.

                  The development of the new School of Industrial Management should be of material assistance in strengthening our contacts with leaders in the business world. Though the Department of Economics and Social Science will not be administratively a part of this School, it will be housed in the same building and will co-operate in carrying out its educational and research program. E. P. Brooks, ’17, Dean of the School, who is now in charge, is consulting with business leaders and hopes to enlist their aid not only in planning the project but also in executing the plans. The Department of Economics and Social Science should benefit, at least indirectly, from these extensive outside relationships.

                  We are grateful to the Alumni and other friends of the Institute who have taken an interest in our work. The Department is indebted to the companies which have supported our Industrial Relations Section, and have helped finance graduate fellowships and research activities; it hopes for a continuation of this interest and support. Such support will be needed if the Department is to maintain its position and to improve and expand its operations.

                  The number of students being graduated from Course XIV is now relatively small. and the demand for their services is high; but in the future we hope to increase the enrollment, and employment conditions are not likely to continue as favorable as they are today. This Course is new and therefore not yet widely known. Because it combines basic education in engineering and science, as well as in economics, and other social studies, its graduates have a broad background that should make them useful in a wide variety of jobs.

                  This spring the Department of Economics and Social Science expects to move into the recently acquired Sloan Building along with the School of Industrial Management. Readers of this article are invited to come and visit us in our new quarters. We will show you our Industrial Relations Library and our Psychological Laboratory. We will tell you about the Scanlon Plan that is making a valuable contribution to the betterment of employer-employee relations. We will describe research projects under way and point with pride to a growing list of publications by members of the Department. We would like to discuss with you the plans we have for future development in psychology and political science. The reader may be interested in meeting some of the staff or in talking to groups of students and if he can bear it, we will also tell him about some of our trials and tribulations. And perhaps he may have something on his mind he would like to tell us. If so, we will gladly listen. Our new address will be 50 Memorial Drive.

Source: The Technology Review (April 1952), pp. 304-6, 320.

Image Source: This portrait of Ralph Freeman can be found in the 1950 yearbook. The copy used here comes from the MIT Museum website where it no date has been provided. Colorized by Economics in the Rear-view Mirror.

Categories
Economics Programs Undergraduate Yale

Yale. The State of Economics at Yale. Reynolds, 1951

 

The chairman of Yale’s economics department in 1951, Lloyd G. Reynolds, found his department in the crosshairs of alumni enraged by the charge of collectivist indoctrination leveled by young William F. Buckley, Jr. (Yale ’1950) in his book that was a call-to-action for religious and individualist alumni of Yale to voice their opposition to the influence of atheism and collectivism on campus. Paul Samuelson’s textbook Economics was offered as Exhibit No. 1 of the collectivist rot found in the Yale economics department. Buckley’s bottom-line was explicit though not specific. 

Image Source: PBS, American Masters. S38 EP3: The incomparable Mr. Buckley.

“I shall not say, then, what specific professors should be discharged, but I will say some ought to be discharged. I shall not indicate what I consider to be the dividing line that separates the collectivist from the individualist, but I will say that such a dividing line ought, thoughtfully and flexibly, to be drawn. I will not suggest the manner in which the alumni ought to be consulted and polled on this issue, but I will say that they ought to be, and soon, and that the whole structure of Yale’s relationship to her alumni, as has been previously indicated, ought to be reexamined.
Far wiser and more experienced men can train their minds to such problems. I should be satisfied if they feel impelled to do so, and I should be confident that the job would be well done.”

SourceGod and Man at Yale: The Superstitions of “Academic Freedom”Chicago: Henry Regnery Company, 1951 (pp. 197-8).

And so, in the interest of damage control, Reynolds found himself out on the stump speaking to alumni and other potential donors. This post gives us Reynold’s response to youthful calumny from the future darling of the extreme conservative fringe in the U.S.

____________________

An earlier post on Yale economics

1999 musings about Economics at Yale by a few Yale economics professors.

____________________

In Memoriam: Lloyd Reynolds
[2005]

Shaped fields of labor relations and economics

Lloyd G. Reynolds, a scholar who shaped the fields of labor and economic development and transformed Yale’s Department of Economics, died April 9 at his home in Washington, D.C., after a series of strokes.

He was 94 years old.

Born and raised on a frontier settlement in the Canadian province of Alberta, Reynolds earned a B.A. at the University of Alberta, an M.A. at McGill University and a Ph.D. at Harvard University. He held an instructorship at the latter institution before becoming a professor at Johns Hopkins University.

During World War II, as federal spending increased at a furious pace, Reynolds took leave from Johns Hopkins to serve in 1942-1943 as chief economist of the War Manpower Commission, and in 1943-1945 as a public member of the Appeals Committee for the National Labor Relations Board. At these institutions, he successfully labored to prevent wartime budget deficits from turning into price and wage inflation.

During and after the war, Reynolds served widely in governmental and private agencies as labor mediator, consultant, officer and committee member, lending his analytic, organizational and administrative skills to the Bureau of the Budget, the Agency for International Development, the Industrial Relations Research Association, the Ford Foundation, the National Bureau of Economic Research and the American Economic Association.

In 1945, Reynolds joined the Yale faculty, where he remained for 35 years until his retirement in 1980. In 1951, he became chair of Yale’s Department of Economics. In the next eight years, he increased the number of faculty in economics from 31 to 65, including such notable scholars as William Fellner, Tjalling Koopmans, John Montias, Hugh Patrick, Gustav Ranis, James R. Tobin, Robert Triffin and Henry Wallich. Two later won Nobel Prizes. A third Nobel Laureate, Simon Kuznets, was soon wooed back to Harvard.

In later years, Yale President Kingman Brewster liked to tell the story of meeting Reynolds on Martha’s Vineyard. Brewster remembered asking Reynolds, “Would you take me out behind the barn some day and tell me how it is you turned one of the worst departments in the country into one of the best?”

“I don’t have to take you out behind the barn,” replied Reynolds. “It’s very simple — just be willing to hire people who are brighter than you are.”

Early in his term as chair, Reynolds confronted the firestorm caused by the publication of “God and Man at Yale,” in which William Buckley criticized “the hot collectivist turn taken by the [economics] faculty after the war” and argued that such faculty should be fired. “Whit Griswold [Brewster’s predecessor as Yale president] sent me out on the road,” he liked to recall, “with the football coach, to talk to the alumni. Usually the coach spoke first, and after that … the alumni didn’t much want to hear about the economics department.”

Twice during the 1950s, Reynolds took brief leaves from Yale to direct the Ford Foundation’s new program of support for developing countries. At the end of that decade, he convinced Ford to donate $15 million to establish the Yale Economic Growth Center, where he served as founding director until 1967. The center annually brings together about 30 faculty and visiting economists studying the growth process.

When Reynolds retired from Yale, the Graduate School minutes recorded a tribute which reads in part: “[I]n the early 1950s, he was able to convert a spirited defense of the department against right wing critics into an occasion for the substantial infusion of outside resources. It was his great capacity to recognize talent in others which helped attract a first-rate faculty, including the move of the Cowles Commission to Yale.”

In 1949, Reynolds published “Labor Economics and Labor Relations” (Prentice Hall). Now in its 11th edition, this textbook is widely credited with creating the field of labor economics. Over the course of a half century, Reynolds published 10 scholarly books and dozens of articles in the fields of labor economics, economic development and comparative economic systems. He published five introductory economics texts, trying his ideas out first on Yale’s undergraduates. Reynolds was an institution at Yale graduations, where for more than 30 years, as senior fellow of the college, he carried the Berkeley mace as he led the seniors into the Old Campus.

Reynolds had a lifelong fascination with mountaineering, a passion that took him to the summit of Mt. Blanc at age 23, and to the top of Kilimanjaro at age 41. In his 50s, on three Nepal treks with his wife, he reached the Mt. Everest Base Camp and the Annapurna glacier.

Reynolds was married for 63 years to Mary Trackett Reynolds, who died August 28, 2000. He is survived by three children, Anne Skinner of Williamstown, Massachusetts, Priscilla Roosevelt of Washington, D.C., and Bruce Reynolds of Charlottesville, Virgina; as well as seven grandchildren and eight great-grandchildren. He was a member of the Century Club of New York, the Cosmos Club in Washington and the West Bend (Wisconsin) Country Club.

A memorial service in Reynolds’ honor will be held at 1:30 p.m. on Saturday, June 11, in Battell Chapel, corner of Elm and College streets.

SourceYale Bulletin & Calendar, Vol.33, No. 27 (April 22, 2005). Links added by Economics in the Rear-view Mirror.

____________________

The State of Economics at Yale
[1951]

By Lloyd G. Reynolds,
Chairman of the Department of Economics.

The following paper was delivered by Mr. Reynolds at the meeting of the Alumni Board on October 20th. During the meeting the Board passed a unanimous resolution that it should be published in the November issue of Y.A.M.

AMERICAN economists in 1951 are doing about the same things they have been trying to do for the past hundred and fifty years. First, we aim to present a clear picture of what the economic system looks like and how it operates. How many business concerns, big and little, are there in the United States? How are they organized and managed? How much money do they take in and pay out, and for what purposes? How many people work for a living in the United States? What work do they do and how much are they paid for doing it? A great deal of economics is concerned simply with providing an accurate description of our economic institutions and how they have changed over the course of time.

Economic Analysis

BUT economists are not content to operate only at the level of description. We are interested always in the question of why things happen as they do in the economy. Why does one kind of work pay 80 cents an hour and another $1.50? Why does wheat sell for $2.50 a bushel and cotton for 33 cents a pound? Why has the retail price level risen by 10 per cent since June 1950? In order to answer this sort of question one needs not only a knowledge of facts but methods of arranging and thinking about the facts — in short, what we call economic theory or economic analysis. Theory is not just day — dreaming or idle opinion. It plays much the same role in economics as in physical science. It is a way of organizing and focussing facts to explain and predict economic events.

                  Economics aims to be, and is steadily becoming, a factual, quantitative science. It aims to get behind mere opinion to a solid basis of truth. The tests of an economist are these: is he thoroughly grounded in the facts and the history of our economic system? Has he mastered the methods of analysis which economists have gradually been developing over the past century and more? Can he use these methods with skill and good judgment to explain and predict actual developments in the economy? If he cannot pass these tests, it does him no good to come around claiming that he is a warmhearted fellow who wants to improve the lot of the workingman, or that he is a sound conservative and a hundred per cent American. If he cannot pass the tests, we would not trust his judgment, we would not give him an advanced degree in economics, we would not employ him for the Yale faculty.

                  I want to make it clear that economics and politics are quite different things. The study of economics can of course be applied to political issues — it would not be of much use otherwise. Our courses involve discussion of taxation systems, tariffs, the federal budget, labor laws, social security, foreign economic aid, agricultural price supports, and a host of other issues. But the job of an economist with respect to these issues is not to say what policies should be followed. His task is to discover and point out the consequences of different possible policies. Ideally, economics should be able to say what will happen if the tariff on pottery is reduced by ten per cent or the federal minimum wage is raised ten cents an hour. Whether the public, or our students, like and approve what will happen is up to them. Economics is not politics, and it is not up to us to sway people in one political direction rather than another.

Ground Rules

ECONOMISTS are also human being of course, and I see nothing wrong with an economist occasionally expressing his personal opinion on a political issue. But he should be careful to point out when he is stepping out of his shoes as a scientist and speaking as a plain citizen. He should also be mindful of contrary opinions, and should not strive just to convert his hearers to his own point view. I believe that these ground rules are well observed in the teaching of economics at Yale. I don’t think there is much political preaching in our courses and if there is some it is certainly not all on the same side. The department includes everything from Roosevelt Democrats to Hoover Republicans, and our students have ample opportunity for exposure to different points of view.

                  This brings me to my main point — the state of the Yale Department of Economics and its prospects for the future. I note first a substantial strengthening of our senior staff since the end of the war. In the first year after the war, we had nine teaching members of the department in the rank of assistant professor and above. Today we have sixteen men in the professorial ranks. The newcomers to the department have been most carefully chosen from among dozens of a candidates whom we have considered in the last five years. They are men of whom Yale can well be proud, not only scholars but as individuals. They are highly regarded by their colleagues in New Haven and by their fellow-economists throughout the United States — so much so that we are constantly fending off raids from other institutions which want to hire them away from us.

                  Our two most recent appointments are Professor Henry Wallich, who comes to us from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, where he has been chief of research and has also acted as consultant to several of the Latin American countries in the revision of their banking systems; and Professor Robert Triffin, who has had a distinguished career with the Federal Reserve Board, the International Monetary Fund, and as American representative on the governing board of the European Payments Union. These men, both excellent economists with a wealth of practical background, have at one stroke put us ahead of any university in the country in the area of international finance and international trade.

Research and Teaching

NOW a word about the job which we are trying to do here. As scholars, we are all concerned with trying to push back the frontiers of knowledge in our chosen field. During the last two years alone, members of the department have published ten books on subjects as diverse as the pricing of military supplies, the effect of federal taxation on executive compensation and retirement systems, the history and structure of the American cigarette industry, and the human relations problems of a large public utility company. We have other studies currently in process, some of which I will mention in a moment. I do not think that any department of economics in the country excels the Yale department in terms of the quality and significance of its research work.

                  Our main responsibility in the University, however, is for teaching. How are we doing on this front? Judging from the comments of the students who come though my office, and from other reliable sources of student opinion, I would say that about half of our undergraduate courses are excellently taught. The other half are good solid courses but not outstanding, and we may even have one or two which are a bit on the dull side. The department has currently under way a thorough study of our course offering and degree requirements in the College, and we are of course seeking continuously to strengthen the teaching staff in areas of weakness. We expect that these efforts will bear fruit in a steady increase in the quality of our teaching work.

                  Our most difficult teaching problem has been the course in elementary economics, Economics 10. It is enormously difficult to cover all aspects of the economic system in a year’s time and to arrange the material in the best possible way. No one textbook or combination of textbooks is ever fully satisfactory. I can assure you that the Department has given much prayerful thought to this matter over the past five years. We have changed both the structure of the course and the reading assignments almost every year. The course is still not ideal — it never will be — but it is a good deal better than the course we were giving four or five years ago.

                  An even more serious problem in this course has been to find enough fully qualified instructors. We were faced just after the war with the largest enrollment in the history of the University. In the peak year we had almost fifty divisions of Economics 10, requiring a staff of 20 to 25 instructors. There are just not that many good economists, even at Yale. We were forced to take on a considerable number of partially-trained men from the graduate school as teaching assistants, often on very short notice. Some of these men turned in an excellent teaching job but we also drew a few lemons who had to be dropped after a short time.

                  This phase is now happily behind us. Enrollments have declined to a more normal level, and we are much better staffed to handle them. Of the nine men teaching in Economics 10 this year, only one is without previous teaching experience; and this man is a mature individual who in fact owned and operated a profitable business for several years before coming here for graduate study.

                  The central purpose of our teaching work is to give students an understanding of the history and present operation of American economic institutions, and to train them to think systematically about the economic issues of the day. We hope to develop habits of reflection and careful analysis which will stand our students in good stead as they emerge to take their place as citizens and as leaders of public opinion.

                  We are not trying to sell the American economic system to our students as one might sell a package of breakfast food. We believe that such an approach is both futile and unnecessary. We have found from experience that, if our economic institutions are carefully explained and thoroughly understood, the great majority of students will support them of their own accord. They will support them, not in a spirit of blind adherence to a fixed creed, but with an understanding of why they prefer our system to any sort of totalitarian regime. They will seek to perpetuate American institutions, not by freezing them into a fixed mold, but by striving constantly to improve them over the years to come. This outlook, which I would term intelligent conservatism, is characteristic of most of our faculty members and most of our student body.

                  How do our students come out from this sort of training? If you could read the departmental examinations which our economics majors write at the end of the senior year, I believe you would find that most of them show a good grounding in economic facts and economic analysis. They also show a healthy diversity of political viewpoint. We do not and should not turn out students whose minds are tailored to a particular pattern. If a student is intellectually honest, accurate in his use of facts, willing to state his basic premises, capable of reasoning logically from those premises — then I respect him. Let him come out where he will, politically speaking. I believe this is good American doctrine and sound educational policy.

                  I realize that some people hold a contrary point of view. They believe that the function of an economics department should be to propagandize students for a particular political and economic creed, that only professors willing to swear allegiance to this creed should be allowed to teach, and that students should be carefully protected against contrary opinions. This totalitarian outlook, though it has had much success in Europe, seems to me completely at variance with American traditions. The members of the economics department at Yale would, I am sure, be unalterably opposed to the establishment of any official party line on economic questions. I do not see how a free university in a democratic country can take any other view.

                  Now before closing I want to admit in all humility that there are many things wrong with our understanding of economics and our teaching of it. A great deal of the economics currently taught in universities is undoubtedly unrealistic, ivory-tower, out of touch with the facts of economic life. Too many of the books which we read and teach were written strictly in the library. Too many of our teachers of economics have had no contact with practical affairs.

                  I want to assure you that this ignorance of the real world is not deliberate on the part of the professors. It comes about mainly because of the way in which young economists are trained and employed. On finishing college, a prospective economist is usually advised to go directly into graduate school to work toward the hallowed Ph.D. without which his future career is hopeless. If he is a really good student he may receive a fellowship to support him in his studies. This phase lasts at least three or four years, during which time he spends his life mainly in the classroom and the library. As he hears the end of his graduate training, he begins to cast about for a job and, if he is capable and lucky, he lands an instructorship somewhere. But he is now being paid to educate students, and only incidentally to educate himself. He is not especially encouraged to wander outside the academic walls. If he does so on his own initiative and tries to learn something about business operations, he may quite possibly be rebuffed by executives who are busy with their own affairs or worried at the idea of stray professors wandering around the plant.

                  I am very conscious, and I believe any economist who has had much contact with industry is conscious, of how much economists have to learn about the facts of life and how wide a gap still exists between economic theories and business practice. I have given much thought to the question of how young teachers in their formative years can gain more experience of practical affairs, and have a few ideas on the subject. The difficulty, is that all of my ideas would cost money and money is not the most plentiful thing on the University scene.

                  We are not taking a defeatist view of this problem. We have already made some beginnings toward building bridges between industry and the University community. Professor Healy’s work in transportation has brought him into close contact with the largest railroad systems in the country. Professor Bakke’s studies of human relations in industry have included a thorough analysis of the management structure of a large New England Company, and he is going on from this to similar studies in other companies. I am currently working, along with my colleague Professor Miller, on a study of top management organization and policy which will involve discussions with the top officers of a dozen or so companies. Professor Westerfield, who has been in charge of our teaching of money and banking for many years, is president of a highly successful savings and loan association. Professor Wallich, I am sure, will not neglect his banking contacts in New York because of his move to New Haven.

                  We believe in this sort of thing and hope to develop it increasingly in the future. We consider that the factories, stores and offices of the country are the laboratories in which a real science of economics can be developed. There are difficulties, of course, in using these laboratories without upsetting normal business operations, but we are confident that these difficulties can be overcome. We believe that in this way the practical experience of men of affairs can be gradually translated into economics textbooks and economics teaching. If some of you can take a little time from your businesses to educate us, we shall stand a better chance of educating our students. Until both you and we have done more in this direction, economics will continue to be too largely an ivory tower subject.

                  I have tried to give a realistic picture of our present situation, not simply a rosy one. We are certainly doing a better job than we were doing five years ago, and five years ahead we expect to be doing still better. But we are not complacent about our progress. We realize that we have still a long way to go and will never do the job perfectly. We welcome advice and suggestions on what we are doing. We hope for sympathetic interest and support.

Source: Yale Alumni Magazine (November 1951), pp. 18-20. A copy of this article was provided to Economics in the Rear-view Mirror directly by the Yale Alumni Magazine. On behalf of the history of economics community I thank the executive editor, Mr. Mark Branch for his help.

Image Source1954 Fellow, Lloyd G. Reynolds. John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation.

 

Categories
Economics Programs M.I.T.

M.I.T. Graduate Program in Economics Brochure, 1974-1975

It was fifty years ago this September that I entered the graduate program in economics at M.I.T. This is why the brochure outlining the graduate program as of the academic year 1974-75 is something I am particularly delighted to add as the newest digitized artifact to Economics in the Rear-view Mirror. 

In other news, I just realized that I am now older than everyone seen on the faculty portrait taken in 1976.

_______________________

Most of the faculty members of the MIT department of economics on the steps of the Sloan Building (E52) in 1976.

Names of the assembled have been provided in an earlier post.

_______________________

MIT’s 1961 graduate economics brochure has been transcribed and posted earlier.

_______________________

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
The Graduate Program in Economics
1974 – 1975

TABLE OF CONTENTS
  1. General Information
    1. Program of Studies
      1. Ph.D. in Economics
      2. Interdepartmental Ph.D. Programs
      3. Master’s Program
    2. Admission to the Graduate School
    3. Fellowships, Scholarships, and Financial Assistance
    4. Foreign Students
    5. Living Arrangements
    6. Graduate Economics Associations
  2. The Ph.D. Program in Detail
    1. General Plan of the Program
    2. The Core of the Graduate Curriculum
      1. Economic Theory
      2. Mathematics
      3. Econometrics
      4. Economic History
    3. Special Fields

Schematic Schedule of Typical Entering Student

    1. Dissertation
  1. Graduate Subjects in Economics
    1. General Economics and Theory
    2. Industrial Economics
    3. Statistics and Econometrics
    4. National Income and Finance
    5. International, Interregional, and Urban Economics
    6. Labor Economics and Industrial Relations
    7. Economic History
    8. Economic Development
  2. The Faculty in Economics
MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
The Graduate Program in Economics
1974–75

    1. General Information
      [Table of Contents]

                  Graduate study in economics began at M.I.T. in 1941 and has since developed to its present size of some 110 full-time students and 33 faculty members. Its major emphasis is on the training of doctoral candidates in a broad program of advanced study and research for professional careers in universities or colleges, in governmental and private research organizations, or in business or financial concerns. At the present time the demands on a professional economist are such that the depth and breadth of the doctoral program have become indispensable training for a successful career. The Department, therefore, ordinarily admits to full-time graduate study only candidates for the Ph.D. In order to maintain a close and continuing contact between students and faculty, the entering class is normally held to 30.

    1. Program of Studies
      [Table of Contents]

      1. Ph.D. in Economics
        [Table of Contents]

                  The doctorate normally requires the full-time concentration of the student for three or four years. Formal requirements are limited in number. The candidate must (1) demonstrate a mastery in five fields of study in economics, one of which is economic theory, both micro and macro; (2) achieve a specified level of competence in economic history, econometrics, and statistics; (3) submit and defend a dissertation that represents a contribution to knowledge; and (4) be in residence for a minimum of two years.

                  These requirements are met not merely by passing some appropriate set of subjects, but through an over-all preparation of subject matter and techniques that goes beyond course work. Candidates may differ in their rate of progress toward the satisfaction of these requirements, depending on their background, preparation, and interests. Normally, however, the satisfaction of requirements, other than the dissertation, is completed by the end of the second year.

                  The dissertation is a test of the candidate’s ability to conduct independent research — to formulate a significant topic and to bring to bear on it the analytic and quantitative tools of economics. The dissertation is prepared under the direction of departmental committee. Upon submission of the completed thesis, the candidate is examined orally by the thesis committee.

                  The Department has no general foreign language requirements. When a foreign language is essential for full access to the literature in the field of the student’s major interest (for example, European Economic History, Communist Economies) or to his thesis research, a language requirement will be imposed by the Department upon the recommendation of the Thesis Supervisor or the Graduate Registration Officer. Such a requirement will be administered by the Department of Foreign Literatures and Linguistics, and can be met by satisfactory course work at other schools, at M.I.T., or by examination.

      1. Interdepartmental Ph.D. Program
        [Table of Contents]

Occasionally students may desire a program that overlaps more than one department, but which in content and depth meets doctoral standards. At the initiative of the student, and with the approval of faculty members of each department, arrangements can be made to have the Dean of the Graduate School appoint a committee to guide the entire Ph.D. program. For details see the Graduate Student Manual. One such program, for instance, has been worked out with the Department of Urban Studies and Planning.

      1. Master’s Program
        [Table of Contents]

                  In very special and rare cases, students are admitted for study programs leading to the M.S. in Economics. This is awarded upon the satisfactory completion of a program, approved by the Graduate Registration Officer, of a year’s full-time study, including the presentation of a satisfactory thesis. The master’s program usually involves completion of the Department’s core requirements (see below), a semester of econometrics, and two semesters of a special field, in addition to the thesis.

    1. Admission to the Graduate School
      [Table of Contents]

                  To be admitted into the program, a student must hold a Bachelor’s degree or its equivalent from an accredited college or university. It is not essential that the undergraduate degree be in economics. Graduate students entering the Department have had a wide variety of major background preparation varying from literature to physics. Some preparation in undergraduate economics, especially in economic analysis, is almost a necessity. Candidates who, upon admission, are deficient in mathematics are strongly urged to take mathematics in the summer before entering the program or work on a recommended self-study program in calculus to prepare for 14.102 Mathematics for Economists.

                  Completed application forms for admission must be submitted to the Admissions Office at M.I.T. by January 15 of the calendar year in which the applicant wishes to enter. In addition to the Institute application forms, the Department expects each applicant to submit a statement (one or two pages) explaining his interest in economics. An informal questionnaire is provided for his general guidance. Entrance is normally in September. February entrance is granted only under exceptional circumstances, since many subjects given in the spring are continuations of work given in the fall.

                  All applicants are urged to take the Graduate Record Examinations no later than the January preceding the September in which they wish to enter. They should take the quantitative and verbal aptitude tests as well as the test in economics. (Information can be obtained by writing to Graduate Record Examinations, Educational Testing Service, Box 955, Princeton, New Jersey 08540. Students in western states or in eastern Asia or the Pacific should write to 1947 Center Street, Berkeley, California 94704.)

                  Decisions regarding admission are the responsibility of the Departmental Graduate Admissions Committee, which bases its judgment on the undergraduate academic record of the applicant, both in general and with respect to particular subjects, on the letters of recommendation, and on the Graduate Record Examinations. Further information may be secured by writing to the chairman of the committee. Notices of acceptance are sent out by April 1, and candidates have until April 15 to notify the Department of their choice.

    1. Fellowships, Scholarships, and Financial Assistance
      [Table of Contents]

                  While in the past virtually all graduate students received financial aid through scholarships, fellowships, or assistantships, the financial situation has changed to such an extent that complete support can no longer be assured. Moreover, the outlook is so uncertain that no definite statement is possible, even about minimum aid. Every effort will be made within the limits of our financial resources to support students who perform effectively. In view of this uncertainty, the Department is making efforts to expand the number of research assistantships, but students should expect to earn or borrow a larger proportion of their support than has been true in the past.

                  The sources of financial support are varied. (1) Many students are assisted by fellowships for which there is a national competition, such as those given by the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Ford Foundation, the Danforth Foundation, the Canada Council, and by foreign governmental agencies. Applications for such fellowships must be made directly to the appropriate foundation or agency, and an application for admission must also be made to M.I.T. (2) Awards of scholarships or fellowships are also made from M.I.T. funds or endowments. These include the Hicks Fellowship in Industrial Relations, the Graduate Economics Alumni Fellowships, endowed Institute fellowships, and a limited number of departmental awards. (3) A third group of students is supported by part time teaching and research assistantships and instructorships. In the past, research and teaching assistantships have been limited to candidates who have passed their general examination and are engaged in thesis research. However, in the light of the present financial stringency, these rules may be relaxed somewhat with respect to limited research assistantships for second year students. (4) Finally, students in good standing can avail themselves of loans through the Office of Financial Aid. U.S. citizens who are planning to be teachers may avail themselves of an NDEA loan, a substantial portion of which is forgiven upon entry into and continuance in teaching. They are also eligible for government-insured loans that are partially subsidized. Foreign students. however, may borrow only through the Graduate Loan Fund at the prime interest rate.

                  Entering students should apply for financial aid not later than January 15 of the calendar year in which they plan to enter. First-year awards are made on April 1, and applicants are given until April 15 to accept. Departmental awards for second and subsequent years are made in June. It is entirely appropriate for students to apply both for national awards and to M.I.T., since the outcome of national competitions is known before our awards are announced. Fellowships normally will include some cash payment toward living expenses, up to $2,000 for a single or married person without dependents, made in two equal installments at the beginning of each term. In offering scholarships and fellowships, the Department takes into account need as well as professional promise.

                  Remuneration for research assistantships varies, but in 1974-75 is normally at the rate of $6,585 per academic year for half-time work, out of which tuition of $3,350 must be paid. A half-time teaching assistantship in 1974-75 covers the tuition and pays $3,510 for the academic year — a total of $6,860. A very few half-time instructorships, for students who have demonstrated conspicuously effective teaching as an assistant, cover tuition plus $4,345 for living expenses — a total of $7,695 for the academic year.

                  As a supplement to academic-year appointments, both interdepartmental and departmental research groups are possible sources of full-time summer employment.

                  The academic performance of the student body is periodically reviewed to determine whether or not normal academic progress is being made. Failure to maintain normal progress may result in reduction or withdrawal of financial support. Students are invited at all times to discuss academic problems with their graduate registration officer, and the Department makes every effort to accommodate the needs of individual students.

    1. Foreign Students
      [Table of Contents]

                  The Department has always welcomed foreign graduate students. They have typically constituted a significant portion of the student body. Some M.I.T. fellowships are available to entering foreign students, though the number is limited and the competition severe. Foreign students have an additional burden of transportation expense to cover and for this reason it is highly desirable to try to obtain at least partial support from other sources as well.

                  General information on scholarships, grants and travel can be obtained from the Institute of International Education, 809 United Nations Plaza, New York, New York, 10017, or from the Cultural Affairs Officer or the United States Information Service Office nearest the student’s place of residence.

                  Foreign applicants are required to submit evidence of their ability to carry on studies in English. Applicants whose native language is not English are required to take the test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL). Students whose schooling has been in English may request a waiver from the Advisor to Foreign Students at M.I.T. TOEFL is administered by the Educational Testing Service, Princeton, New Jersey, 08540; registration material and information about the test may be obtained by writing to the above address.

    1. Living Arrangements
      [Table of Contents]

                  The Department is located in the Sloan Building, which, along with the adjoining Hermann Building, contains contiguous faculty offices, classrooms and seminar rooms, and student and faculty lounges. This complex also houses the Sloan School of Management, the Department of Political Science, and the Center for International Studies. The Dewey Library occupies two floors of the Hermann Building and contains the social science collection at M.I.T., reading rooms, and carrels to which thesis writers are assigned individually.

                  On-campus housing for graduate students is limited. Applications should be sent to the On Campus Housing Office, Room E18-307, M.I.T. Help in securing off-campus housing is given by the Community Housing Service, E18-306, M.I.T. Students should be alerted to the fact that Cambridge rental units are limited and in heavy demand. Transportation is convenient; the Sloan Building is located one block from the Kendall Square subway station.

    1. Graduate Economics Associations
      [Table of Contents]

                  The Graduate Economics Association, composed of all graduate students, is a lively organization that sponsors monthly seminars and social events, and is one of the channels through which mutual student-faculty problems are discussed. The seminars permit discussions of current research by distinguished economists and occasional dialogues between faculty members. They are often followed by small dinners to which graduate students and faculty are invited, permitting more discussion among visitors, students and faculty. The Association annually elects nine student representatives to participate as voting members in Department meetings and other Department committees. Student representatives are full participants in all matters except those involving specific, identifiable individuals, or undergraduate matters. This policy at present excludes the discussion of details, but not the general policy, of tenure decisions, review of non-tenure faculty, new appointments, review of student performance, admissions and financial support.

                  The Black Graduate Economics Association provides a forum for the development and utilization of economic tools for solving the problems faced by Black people, encourages policies and programs which help increase the supply of highly qualified Black economists, opens lines of communication with other Black graduate students, Black economists, and the Black community, stimulates academic excellence, and provides outlets for various social activities. The BGEA has helped develop audio-visual aids now in use in many Black colleges’ economics departments, engaged in Institute recruiting projects, and participated in conferences of Black economists and administrators of Black colleges and universities. An econometric model of income and expenditures in Black communities is in its initial stage of development as a research project.

  1. The Ph.D. Program in Detail
    [Table of Contents]

    1. General Plan of the Program
      [Table of Contents]

Students who complete the Ph.D. program should have a thorough understanding of the existing principles of economic theory and of the economic structure; an ability to think systematically about, and apply quantitative methods to, economic problems. The program gives roughly equal emphasis to these two goals, with formal courses and examinations to meet the first, and seminars, workshops, papers and the dissertation to meet the second. The student spends most of his first two years attempting to understand the existing ideas of economics. A basic principle of the program is that these ideas are sufficiently worthwhile so that their study is a necessary prelude to their use or criticism.

                  Throughout the program, there are formal provisions for students to engage in original work. During the first two years, term papers are often required. During the second year each student prepares a research paper as part of the requirement in econometrics. Second-year students are also encouraged to take part in workshops in their fields of primary interest. After passing the general examination, at the end of the second year or earlier, students spend full time in their own independent, original work. Their only formal obligation is to participate actively in the weekly meetings of the workshops in their fields of research.

    1. The Core of the Graduate Curriculum
      [Table of Contents]

                  The Department offers an integrated set of subjects in economic theory, mathematics, econometrics and economic history.

      1. Economic Theory
        [Table of Contents]

                  The core in economic theory consists of two subject-years equally divided between microeconomics (14.121-14.124) and macroeconomics (14.451-14.454). These subjects are described in Section III of this report. The material is divided into half-semester subjects. The microtheory sequence starts in the fall term and runs through the first year, while the macrotheory sequence starts in the spring term and continues through the fall term of the second year. A qualifying examination on these subjects is offered three times a year — in September, December-January, and May — that must be passed in order to satisfy this part of the core requirement. The examination will cover each of the eight portions of the theory core, and a syllabus is available for each.

                  When a student feels sufficiently well qualified in the subject matter of any of the theory core subjects, he may take the qualifying examination, either before or after a particular set of lectures is offered. Only a passing grade is recorded when the examination is taken in advance of the lectures. If he fails to pass, he can then enroll for that particular section of theory and take the examination again at the end of that term. Should he pass some portion of theory by the preliminary examination, he could substitute a subject in advanced economic theory in the half-term in which he would have taken the basic theory subject. In principle, it is possible to pass all eight units of the theory core in this way and to proceed directly to more advanced work.

                  The Schedule for the Qualifying Examination in Theory is as follows:

Subject matter covered in: Preliminary Regular Make-up
14.121-122 Sept.-Year I Dec.-Year I Sept.-Year II
14.123-124, 14.451-452 Jan.-Year I May-Year I Jan. Year II
14.453-454 Sept.-Year II Dec.-Year II Sept.-Year III

      1. Mathematics
        [Table of Contents]

                  The minimal core requirement in mathematics is calculus and linear algebra. Calculus is required for Statistics (14.381). While not stated as a formal prerequisite for the core theory subjects, it is virtually a necessity for mastering them.

                  If a student’s preparation in calculus were inadequate to satisfy the prerequisite for 14.102 Mathematics for Economists, the completion of the statistics and economics core requirements would be postponed a year. Econometrics (14.382 and 14.383 and most advanced theory subjects (14.141-14.149) require linear algebra. Students who have had a year of calculus and who want more mathematical training normally would take Mathematics for Economists (14.102) in the first term.

      1. Econometrics
        [Table of Contents]

                  The econometrics and statistics core requirement can be satisfied by (1) Statistics (14.381); (2) either Econometrics (14.382 and 14.383) or Applied Econometrics (14.388); and the completion of a piece of empirical research the equivalent of a term paper. This paper is due by the end of the fall term of the second year.

                  Entering students who lack calculus, and cannot take 14.102 in the first term, have two choices: either to postpone the three-term sequence: 14.381, 14.382, and 14.383 — to their third through fifth terms, or to take the two-term sequence, 14.381 and 14.388, in their third and fifth terms.

      1. Economic History
        [Table of Contents]

                  The core requirement in economic history is the satisfactory completion of one subject in American Economic History (14.731), European Economic History (14.733), or Russian Economic History (14.781).

    1. Special Fields
      [Table of Contents]

                  In addition to the satisfactory completion of the core requirements, competence in four special fields must be demonstrated, two by passing a general examination and two by either satisfactory course work or a general examination. Preparation for a field examination normally consists of a year’s course work. Satisfaction of a field by course work alone requires the achievement of a grade of B or better in each of the two terms of subject matter. (The econometrics and history requirements can be satisfied with a grade of B-.) The areas in which the Department offers specialization are: advanced economic theory, international economics, labor economics, economic development, urban economics, monetary economics, fiscal economics, statistics and econometrics, economic history, industrial organization, comparative economic systems, Russian economics, human resources and income distribution, and, outside the Department, finance, production, transportation, and operations research. It is possible to use econometrics as a field without preparation beyond the core requirements. Economic history can be offered as a field by adding a second subject to the one satisfying the core requirement.

                  Students normally demonstrate competence in all four fields by the end of their second year. That is, they normally finish their required course work and general examinations by that time. In the event that scheduling or other difficulties interfere with this timing, one field other than theory or econometrics (including the paper — see II.B.3 above), or one subject in a field and in history, may be postponed until the third year. Before making such a deferment, students should consult with their Graduate Registration Officer.

                  Students planning to take the general examination before the end of the second year — the usual time — should consult in advance with their Graduate Registration Officer. In any case, such students would still be held to the above schedule.

Schematic Schedule of Typical Entering Student
[Table of Contents]

[First year] [Second year]
1st [term] 2nd [term] 3rd [term] 4th [term]
Theory: Micro 14.121-2 14:123-4
Theory: Macro 14.451-2 14-453-4
Statistics and Econometrics 14.381

or 14.381

14.382 14.383

14.388

Mathematics 14.102
Special Fields and History 1 subject 1-2 subjects 2 subjects 4 subjects
Total Number of Subjects 4 4 4 4

*The minimal number of subjects to satisfy the special field and history requirements depends on whether history or econometrics is offered as a special field. If neither are offered, 9 subjects are required; if history, 8 subjects; if econometrics, 7 subjects; if both, 6 subjects.

    1. Dissertation
      [Table of Contents]

                  Upon satisfaction of the core and field requirements, the Ph.D. candidate embarks on original research culminating in a completed dissertation that is defended orally. Thesis writers are required to participate in the workshop most germane to the subject of their thesis over the period of time they are working on it. Upon agreement on a topic with a primary thesis supervisor, a secondary thesis supervisor will be chosen by the student, subject to the approval of the Graduate Committee. A third faculty reader will be appointed by the Graduate Committee in consultation with the candidate when a final draft of the thesis will reasonably be expected to be completed within six months. The third faculty reader will have as his main function the unitary reading of the complete final draft of the thesis. These three faculty members will be the candidate’s thesis committee and are responsible for its acceptance and final defense.

                  In order to give adequate time for the final thesis review and revision, the completed draft must be submitted for final review a month before the Institute dates for submission of the dissertation. In 1975 the formal Institute dates are January 5, May 2, and August 11.

  1. Graduate Subject in Economics
    [Table of Contents]

    1. General Economics and Theory
      [Table of Contents]
14.101 Mathematics for Economists
Prereq.:—————
Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-6
Elementary calculus. Applications in economics.
(Not offered 1974-75)

 

14.102 Mathematics for Economists
Prereq.: 14.101
Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-6
Vector spaces and matrices; multivariate calculus and maximization with equality constraints; elementary differential equations. H. A. Freeman

 

14.121 Microeconomic Theory I (A)
Prereq.: 14.04
Units
Year: G(1) (1st half of term) 2-0-4
Monopoly, oligopoly, product differentiation, monopsony. Comparison with pure competition. Comparative statics. Partial equilibrium welfare analysis. R. L. Bishop

 

14.122 Microeconomic Theory II (A)
Prereq.: 14.121
Units
Year: G(1) (2nd half of term) 2-0-4
Introduction to the theory of resource allocation and the price system. Emphasis on the use of efficiency prices as a guide to decentralized decision making. M. L. Weitzman

 

14.123 Microeconomic Theory III (A)
Prereq.: 14.122
Units
Year: G(2) (1st half of term) 2-0-4
Theory of the producer and consumer. Cost functions, expenditure functions. Theory of distribution. Introduction to general equilibrium. H. R. Varian

 

14.124 Microeconomic Theory IV (A)
Prereq.: 14.123
Units
Year: G(2) (2nd half of term) 2-0-4
Capital theory and welfare economics. P. A. Samuelson

 

14.132 Schools of Economic Thought (A)
Prereq.:14.122
Units
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
Economic ideas developed by different groups of economists in recent times. R. L. Bishop,
P. A. Samuelson

 

14.141 General Equilibrium Theory
Prereq.:14.124
Units
Year: G(1) (2nd half of term) 2-0-4
General equilibrium. Existence and stability of competitive equilibrium. The core of an economy. (Not offered in 1974-75) F. M. Fisher

 

14.142 Mathematical Programming and Economic Theory (A)
Prereq.:14.122
Units
Year: G(2) (1st half of term) 2-0-4
A rigorous treatment of linear and non-linear programming with applications to economic model building, including activity analysis and input-output. M. L. Weitzman

 

14.143 Advanced Theory of the Market III (A)
Prereq.: 14.122
Units
Year: G(2) (2nd half of term) 2-0-4
Oligopoly and product differentiation, advertising, equilibria with seasonal or cyclical demand shifts. R. L. Bishop

 

14.144 Applied Price Theory
Prereq.:14.122
Units
Year: G(1) (1st half of term) 2-0-4
Applications of price theory treated topically. Selected topics in price theory, with focus changing from year to year. Current emphasis is on the economics of exhaustible and renewable natural resources. R. M. Solow

 

14.145 Economics of Uncertainty
Prereq.:14.124
Units
Year: G(2) 3-0-9
Individual behavior under uncertainty. Equilibrium and welfare under uncertainty. Search and information. J. A. Hausman,
P. A. Diamond

 

14.148 Advanced Topics in Microeconomic Theory (A)
Prereq.:14.124
Units
Year: G(2) Arr.
14.149 Advanced Topics in Microeconomic Theory (A)
Prereq.:14.124
Year: G(2) Arr.
Advanced topics in microeconomic theory of current interest. Staff

 

14.151 Mathematical Approach to Economics (A)
Prereq.:14.122
Units
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
The use of mathematical methods in all the fields of economics. P. A. Samuelson

 

14.191 Economics Seminar (A)
Prereq.:14.121, 14.122
Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-6
14.192 Economics Seminar (A)
Prereq.:14.121, 14.122
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
Special economic problems. In 1974-75, 14.192 — Economics of Public Sector. J. Rothenberg

 

14.193 Seminar: Topics in Economics (A)
Prereq.:14.121, 14.451
Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-6
14.194 Seminar: Topics in Economics (A)
Prereq.:14.122, 14.452
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
Topics in economics of current interest. Staff

 

14.195 Reading Seminar in Economics (A)
Prereq.:14.122
Units
Year: G(1) Arr.
14.196 Reading Seminar in Economics (A)
Prereq.:14.122
Year: G(2) Arr.
Reading and discussion of special topics in economics. (Open to advanced graduate students by arrangement with individual numbers of the staff.) Staff

 

14.197 First-Year Graduate Seminar (A)
Prereq.: 14.04
Units
Year: G(1) 2-0-6
Seminar limited to first-year graduate students. Discussion of projects of students, professional literature, methodology, economic policy, extending beyond regular curriculum. J. N. Bhagwati

    1. Industrial Economics
      [Table of Contents]
14.271 Problems in Industrial Economics (A)
Prereq.: 14.04
Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-6
Small and large enterprises in the American economy; market structures; degrees of monopoly and competition; requisites of public policy. M. A. Adelman

 

14.272 Government Regulation of Industry (A)
Prereq.: 14.271
Units
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
Follows 14.271. Development of anti-trust policy, generally and in specific cases. “Public utility” price fixing, government ownership as alternative. P. L. Joskow

 

14.291 Industrial Economics Seminar (A)
Prereq.:14.271
Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-6
14.292 Industrial Economics Seminar (A)
Prereq.:14.271
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
Readings, discussions, reports on such topics as industrial price policies, government regulation of industry, competitive practices, and similar problems in industrial economics. Staff

    1. Statistics and Econometrics
      [Table of Contents]
14.371 Statistical Inference (A)
Prereq.: 18.02
Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-9
A compact one-term course in elementary probability and statistical Inference. Axiomatic probability, random variables, distribution functions, mathematical expectation, generating functions, transformations of random variables, simple correlation and regression models, the normal distribution, sampling theory, point and interval estimation, maximum likelihood, least squares, testing statistical hypotheses. The exposition is somewhat more mathematical than

14.381.

H. A. Freeman

 

14.373 Time-Dependent Probability (A)
Prereq.: 14.371 or 18.303
Units
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
Markov chains and Markov processes, the relevant ergodic theorem, Kolmogorov equations, time series theory; spectral density functions, harmonic representation, autoregressive models. H. A. Freeman

 

14.374 Design and Analysis of Scientific Experiments (A)
Prereq.: 14.381
Units
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
Application of statistical theory to the design and analysis of scientific experiments. Factorial and fractional factorial designs. Applications to experimentation in the physical, chemical, biological, medical, and social sciences. H. A. Freeman

 

14.381 Statistical Method in Economics (A)
Prereq.: 14.101 or 18.02
Units
Year: G(1) 4-0-8
Self-contained introduction to probability and statistics which serves as a background for advanced econometrics. Elements of probability theory, sampling theory, asymptotic approximations, decision theory approach to statistical estimation focusing on regression, hypothesis testing and maximum likelihood methods. Illustrations from economics and application of these concepts to economic problems. J. A. Hausman

 

14.382 Econometrics I (A)
Prereq.:14.102, 14.381
Units
Year: G(2) 4-0-8
14.383 Econometrics II (A)
Prereq.:14.382
Year: G(1) 4-0-8
Theory and economic application of the linear multiple regression model. Identification and structural estimation in simultaneous models. Analysis of economic policy and forecasting in macroeconomic models. A term paper involving substantive original empirical research is required in 14.383. R. F. Engle, R. E. Hall, J. A. Hausman

 

14.386 Advanced Topics in Econometrics (A)
Prereq.: 14.383
Units
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
Selected topics including specification error, non-linear estimation, simulation, aggregation, and the derivation of economic policy models. (Not offered in 1974-5) R. F. Engle, R. E. Hall, J. A. Hausman

 

14.388 Applied Econometrics (A)
Prereq.: 14.102, 14.381
Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-9
Theory and practice of econometrics. The linear regression model, tests of hypotheses, generalized least squares, distributed lags, and simultaneous equations. Emphasis on applications. A term paper required. R. F. Engle

 

14.391 Workshop in Economic Research (A)
Prereq.:14.124, 14.454
Units
Year: G(1) 2-0-10
14.392 Workshop in Economic Research (A)
Prereq.:14.124, 14.454
Year: G(2) 2-0-10
Designed to develop research ability of students through intensive discussion of dissertation research as it proceeds, carrying out of individual or group. research projects, and critical appraisal of current reported research. Workshops divided into various fields, depending on interest and size. Staff

    1. National Income and Finance
      [Table of Contents]
14.451 Macroeconomic Theory I (A)
Prereq.: 14.06
Units
Year: G(1) (1st half of term) 2-0-4
Macroeconomic analysis of general equilibrium. Financial markets and investment. Intertemporal equilibrium and growth models. S. Fischer

 

14.452 Macroeconomic Theory II (A)
Prereq.: 14.451
Units
Year: G(2) (2nd half of term) 2-0-4
Determination of aggregate output, employment, and prices under static conditions. Keynes and alternate theories. The Phillips Curve. Inflation in the short and long run. R. E. Hall

 

14.453 Macroeconomic Theory III (A)
Prereq.: 14.452
Units
Year: G(1) (1st half of term) 2-0-4
Quantitative macroeconomics. Consumption, investment, and other components of aggregate demand. Structure of complete econometric models of the U.S. economy R. E. Hall

 

14.454 Macroeconomic Theory IV (A)
Prereq.: 14.453
Units
Year: G(1) (2nd half of term) 2-0-4
Growth models. Capital theory. R. M. Solow

 

14.458 Advanced Topics in Macroeconomic Theory (A)
Prereq.: 14.454
Units
Year: G(1) Arr.
14.459 Advanced Topics in Macroeconomic Theory (A)
Prereq.: 14.454
Year: G(2) Arr.
Advanced topics in macroeconomic theory of current interest. Staff

 

14.462 Monetary Economics I (A)
Prereq.: 14.122, 14.452
Units
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
Examination of sources and determinants of supply of money with special attention to roles of commercial banks, Federal Reserve System, and Treasury. Discussion of nature of demand for money. Role of monetary policy in determination of level of economic activity. (Not offered in 1974-5; substitute 15.432 Capital Markets and Financial Institutions) F. Modigliani

 

14.463 Monetary Economics II (A)
Prereq.: 14.122, 14.452
Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-6
General equilibrium theory of money, interest, prices, and output; portfolio problems, cost of capital, and the effects of monetary phenomena on investment and accumulation of wealth with special reference to problems arising from uncertainty. S. Fischer

 

14.471 Fiscal Economics I (A)
Prereq.:14.122, 14.452
Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-6
14.472 Fiscal Economics II (A)
Prereq.:14.122, 14.452
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
Examination, both theoretic and quantitative, of governmental fiscal institutions and behavior: the budget process, taxation, expenditure, pricing, and debt activities. P. A. Diamond, A. F. Friedlaender

 

14.482 Income Distribution Economics (A)
Prereq.: 14.124
Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-9
Modern theories and empirical studies of the determinants of the distribution of income and wealth. L. C. Thurow

    1. International, Interregional, and Urban Economics
      [Table of Contents]
14.572J Regional Economic Analysis (A)
Prereq.: 14.03 or 14.05
Units
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
Analysis of regional economies with emphasis on the sources, characteristics, and implications of spatial concentrations of economic activities. Urban development in its regional setting is examined and the special problems of lagging areas in both developing and developed countries. Methods of integrating national and regional planning. J. R. Harris

 

14.573J Urban Economic Analysis I (A)
Prereq.: 14.03 or 14.05
Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-6
Patterns and processes of growth and structural change within metropolitan areas. The land use market and the spatial structure of the metropolitan community. The housing market: demand and supply, growth, aging, and renewal. The urban transportation system and its problems. Models of the metropolis. In each of these topics, emphasis on the resource allocation process, its efficiency and implications for income distribution. W. C. Wheaton

 

14.574J Urban Economic Analysis II (A)
Prereq.: 14.573J
Units
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
Continuation of 14.573J. The nature and problems of government decision-making in metropolitan areas. The economies of segregation, congestion, and pollution in the metropolitan area. Urban-suburban relations; market and government. Welfare economics and the normative theory of local public policy. Applied normative analysis: criteria for public expenditures; cost benefit analysis. Examination of public policy issues in current urban problems; poverty, race, the spatial form of the city, optimal land use patterns, growth and renewal, development and new communities. J. Rothenberg

 

14.581 International Economics I (A)
Prereq.: 14.04, 14.06
Units
Year: G(1) 4-0-8
Theory of international trade and applications in commercial policy. J. N. Bhagwati

 

14.582 International Economics II (A)
Prereq.: 14.581
Units
Year: G(2) 4-0-8
Adjustment in international economic relations with attention to foreign exchange markets, balance of payments, and the international monetary system. C. P. Kindleberger

    1. Labor Economics and Industrial Relations
      [Table of Contents]
14.671J Labor Economics (A)
Prereq.: 14.64 or 15.663
Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-6
Primary emphasis on the structure of labor markets and the determinants of wage levels, unemployment, the distribution of income and employment opportunity. Special attention will also be given to the impact of unions on both wage and non-wage elements of collective bargaining in the light of the characteristics and objectives of particular unions. Other special topics growing out of recent research in labor economics. M. J. Piore,
C. A. Myers

 

14.672J Public Policy on Labor Relations (A)
Prereq.: 14.64, 15.663
Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-6
Major trends in legislation and other government activities affecting the work place. Topics include wage and price controls, equal opportunity employment, and government regulation of union organization, collective bargaining, industrial disputes, wages and hours of work, and work-place health and safety. The broad economic and social questions raised by these trends also explored. M. J. Piore
D. Q. Mills

 

14.674J Comparative Systems of Industrial Relations and Human Resource Development (A)
Prereq.: 14.64, 15.663
Units
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
International and comparative analysis of industrial relations systems and systems of human resource development. Concentration on an examination of selected issues involving interest groups and the strategies of economic development, including discussion of the nature and functions of labor and management organization in different contexts; the role of the state in establishing procedures and in shaping the substance of industrial relations; the participation of interest groups in the formulation of economic and social policy: manpower and economic growth in the context of comparative systems of human resource development; worker participation in management, and other topics. C. A. Myers
E. Tarantelli

 

14.691J Research Seminar in Industrial Relations (A)
Prereq.:14.671J or 14.672J
Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-6
14.692J Research Seminar in Industrial Relations (A)
Prereq.:14.14.691J
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
Discussion of important areas for research in industrial relations, frameworks for research, research techniques, and methodological problems. Centered mainly on staff research and the thesis research of advanced graduate students C. A. Myers

 

14.672J Public Policy on Labor Relations (A)
Prereq.: 14.64, 15.663
Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-6
Major trends in legislation and other government activities affecting the work place. Topics include wage and price controls, equal opportunity employment, and government regulation of union organization, collective bargaining, industrial disputes, wages and hours of work, and work-place health and safety. The broad economic and social questions raised by these trends also explored. M. J. Piore
D. Q. Mills

 

    1. Economic History
      [Table of Contents]
14.731 American Economic History (A)
Prereq.: 14.121
Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-6
Survey of the beginnings of American industrialization, emphasizing a quantitative approach and the nineteenth century. Topics include effects of government economic policies, such as land distribution and tariffs, the importance of railroads, profitability of slavery. P. Temin

 

14.732 Russian Economic History (A)
Prereq.: 14.122
Units
Year: G(2) 3-0-9
A comparative study of the major problems in Russian economic history prior to 1917 both for their own sake and as a background for understanding of the events of 1917 and of the Soviet policies since. The topics covered vary yearly depending on the interests of the participants, but the land and peasant problems and industrialization methods emphasized. E. D. Domar

 

14.733 European Economic History (A)
Prereq.: 14.121
Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-6
Development of the European economy since 1750 and, especially since 1850, with emphasis on growth and slowdown, the transition from local to national and European-wide institutions, and extra-European relations. C. P. Kindleberger

 

14.734 Problems in Economic History (A)
Prereq.: 14.731, 14.732, or 14.733
Units
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
Analysis of problems of industrial society, concentrating on the century after 1860 and on the American experience. Topics vary yearly and include effects of wars on welfare and growth, the nature of the long deflation of the late nineteenth century, the contrast in international relations before and after 1914, the depression of the 1930’s. P. Temin

    1. Economic Development
      [Table of Contents]
14.771 Problems of Economic Development (A)
Prereq.: 14.122, 14.452
Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-6
Analysis of problems of the rural sector in developing countries, urban-rural migration, unemployment, sectoral balance and efficiency of private resource allocation. R. S. Eckaus

 

14.772 Theory of Economic Development (A)
Prereq.: 14.122, 14.452
Units
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
Analysis of problems of international trade and development; study of structure and use of planning models for development policy and use of cost benefit analysis. J. N. Bhagwati

 

14.773 Optimal Growth Theory (A)
Prereq.: 14.124, 14.454
Units
Year: G(2) 3-0-9
The optimal growth problem, duality theory, development and application of the maximum principle. The behavior of optimal trajectories for a variety of situations. (Alternate years. Offered 1974-75.) M. L. Weitzman

 

14.774J Transfer and Adaptation of Technology in Developing Countries (A)
Prereq.: Permission of Instructor
Units
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
Consideration of the problems of transferring and adapting technologies originating and used in the richer countries of the world to the developing nations. Specific topics include: political, institutional, economic, and engineering issues involved in the transfer of technology. R. S. Eckaus, F. Moavenzadeh, N. Choucri

 

14.782 Capitalism, Socialism and Growth (A)
Prereq.: 14.122, 14.452
Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-6
A comparative study of capitalist and socialist economies mainly from the point of view of development and growth, and with major emphasis on the economy of the Soviet Union. E. D. Domar

 

14.783 Theory of Central Planning (A)
Prereq.: 14.124
Units
Year: G(2) 3-0-9
Multilevel planning. Decomposition principles and their application. Planning with prices and with quantities. Materials balancing and input-output. Applications of inventory theory. The problems posed by non-convexities. (Alternate years. Not offered 1974-75.) M. L. Weitzman

  1. The Faculty in Economics
    [Table of Contents]

Morris A. Adelman, Ph.D., Harvard; Professor of Economics.

Sidney S. Alexander, Ph.D., Harvard; Professor of Economics.

Jagdish N. Bhagwati, Ph.D., M.I.T.; Professor of Economics.

Robert L. Bishop, Ph.D., Harvard; Professor of Economics; Chairman, Graduate Admissions Committee.

E. Cary Brown, Ph.D., Harvard; Professor of Economics; Head of Department.

Peter A. Diamond, Ph.D., M.I.T.; Professor of Economics; Graduate Registration Officer; Chairman, Department Graduate Committee.

Evsey D. Domar, Ph.D., Harvard; Professor of Economics; Graduate Placement Officer.

Richard S. Eckaus, Ph.D., M.I.T.; Professor of Economics; Graduate Registration Officer; Chairman, Committee on Economic Research.

Robert F. Engle, III, Ph.D., Cornell; Associate Professor of Economics.

Stanley Fischer, Ph.D., M.I.T.; Associate Professor of Economics.

Franklin M. Fisher, Ph.D., Harvard; Professor of Economics (on leave).

Harold A. Freeman, S.B., M.I.T.; Professor of Statistics.

Ann F. Friedlaender, Ph.D., M.I.T.; Professor of Economics.

Robert E. Hall, Ph.D., M.I.T.; Professor of Economics; Graduate Registration Officer.

John R. Harris, Ph.D., Northwestern; Associate Professor of Economics.

Jerry A. Hausman, Ph.D., Oxford; Assistant Professor of Economics.

Karl G. Jugenfeldt, Ph.D., Visiting Professor of Economics (Spring Term).

Paul L. Joskow, Ph.D., Yale; Assistant Professor of Economics.

Charles P. Kindleberger, Ph.D., Columbia; Professor of Economics.

Edwin Kuh, Ph.D., Harvard; Professor of Economics.

Franco Modigliani, D.Jur., Rome, and D.Soc.Sci., New School of Social Research; Institute Professor; Professor of Economics.

Charles A. Myers, Ph.D., Chicago; Professor of Industrial Relations.

Michael J. Piore, Ph.D., Harvard; Associate Professor of Economics (on leave, Spring Term).

Jerome Rothenberg, Ph.D., Columbia; Professor of Economics.

Paul A. Samuelson, Ph.D., Harvard; Institute Professor; Professor of Economics.

Abraham J. Siegel, Ph.D., California (Berkeley); Professor of Industrial Relations; Associate Dean of Management.

Robert M. Solow, Ph.D., Harvard; Institute Professor; Professor of Economics.

Lance J. Taylor, Ph.D., Harvard; Professor of Nutritional Economics.

Peter Temin, Ph.D., M.I.T.; Professor of Economics.

Lester C. Thurow, Ph.D., Harvard; Professor of Economics (on leave, Spring Term).

Hal R. Varian, Ph.D., California (Berkeley); Assistant Professor of Economics.

Martin L. Weitzman, Ph.D., M.I.T.; Professor of Economics.

William C. Wheaton, Ph.D., Penn.; Assistant Professor of Economics.

Source: M.I.T., Institute Archives. MIT Department of Economics Records, Box 2, Folder “Department Brochures”.

Categories
Economics Programs Economists M.I.T.

M.I.T. Department of Economics Annual Report by E. Cary Brown, 1975-1976

The following annual report of the M.I.T. department of economics was most likely written for the care and feeding of administrators and the members of the department’s visiting committee. This report covers what was my second year of graduate school, so for folks from that time it reads like an annual Holiday newsletter to the family.

_______________________

Department of Economics
1975 – 76

Undergraduate Program

The long-run impact of the past year’s changes in the Institute Requirement in the Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences is not yet clear. Unquestionably they have increased the Department’s enrollment, but the precise amount is uncertain because simultaneously a major revision was made in the two introductory economics subjects. In the past year enrollments were larger than previously, but smaller than in the transition of the previous year. Nearly 200 of the Class of 1976 concentrated in economics for their Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences Requirement. Of all students presently enrolled, 327 (primarily juniors and seniors) have elected to concentrate in economics.

Undergraduate majors remain steady in numbers. As in 1974-75, 20 degrees were awarded. In the spring term the Undergraduate Economics Association was reactivated. Its weekly meetings with faculty led to several proposals for revision of the undergraduate program, and several student-faculty socials were organized.

Graduate Program

Enrollment has been remarkably steady in the graduate program. The number of applications for admission was virtually identical to the average of the previous six years. Next year’s entering class of 32 will be slightly larger than average, and will have fewer foreign students and more women, reflecting a shift in the percentage of applications from these groups. Four students from minority groups are expected to be in this class.

Financial support for the graduate student has changed very little over the last several years. We are still fortunate in having from one-third to one-half of the entering students on National Science Foundation Fellowships. For the whole student body, there has been an increase in the support by US foundations (other than NSF) and a decrease in support provided by M.I.T.

The number receiving the Doctor of Philosophy increased somewhat in the past year to 21. For the first time, two American blacks received degrees.* The class fared well in placement, their median salary offer totaling 24 percent above that of 1971. Like the past average, 86 percent went into teaching and 14 percent into non-teaching positions.

*Samuel Myers, Jr. Ph.D. thesis: “A Portfolio Model of Illegal Transfers”, supervised by Robert Solow.
Glenn Loury. Ph.D. thesis: “Essays in the Theory of the Distribution of Income”, supervised by Robert Solow.
See: William Darity Jr. and Arden Kreeger, “The Desegregation of an Elite Economics Department’s PhD Program: Black Americans at MIT“, History of Political Economy 46 (annual suppl.)

The Graduate Economics Association awarded the outstanding teacher in the Department prize to Professor Stanley Fischer.

PUBLIC SERVICE ACTIVITIES

The faculty has always been involved in public service activities tying research to the public interest. In connection with M.I.T.’s participation in the Bicentennial Celebration, Professor Jagdish N. Bhagwati set up a recent conference on the New International Economic Order: Professor Ann F. Friedlaender is planning one for this fall on Air Pollution and Administrative Control. Through the German Marshall Fund, Professor Richard S. Eckaus is organizing a fall conference on economic problems of Portugal. Professor Franco Modigliani arranged a conference through the Bank of Finland on International Monetary Mechanisms.

Various Congressional committees and government agencies have been advised. Professor Peter A. Diamond served on the Consultant Panel on Social Security for the Congressional Research Service. Professors Rudiger Dornbusch and Fischer and Institute Professor Paul A. Samuelson prepared a report for the US Department of Commerce on international financial arrangements. Professor Robert E. Hall was a member of the Advisory Committee on Population Statistics, Bureau of the Census. Professor Jerry A. Hausman served on the Econometrics Advisory Committee to the Federal Energy Administration. Institute Professor Modigliani was a consultant and member of the Committee on Monetary Statistics, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. Institute Professor Samuelson consulted with the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the US Treasury, and the Congressional Budget Office. Professor Charles A. Myers was a member of the National Manpower Policy Task Force. Institute Professor Robert M. Solow served as Deputy Chairman, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.

Several faculty members have been involved with the National Academy of Sciences and its related organizations. Professor Eckaus prepared a report, Appropriate Technology for Developing Countries, for the Board on Science and Technology for Developing Countries of the National Academies of Science and Engineering. Professor Franklin M. Fisher served on a National Academy panel on the Effects of Deterrence and Incapacitation; Professor Friedlaender was on the Executive Committee, Assembly of Behavioral and Social Sciences, National Research Council; Institute Professor Modigliani was on the Finance Committee; Institute Professor Samuelson served on the Editorial Board of the Proceedings; and Institute Professor Solow chaired the Steering Committee on Environmental Studies.

Professor Eckaus led an OECD Mission to Portugal that included Professors Lance Taylor and Dornbusch.* Professor Paul L. Joskow was a consultant to OECD in energy. Professor Evsey D. Domar was a member of a delegation of economists sent by the American Economic Association to the Soviet Union. Institute Professor Modigliani, who gave much time to the problems of stabilization in Italy, was a member of the Board of Directors of the Italian Council for Social Sciences.

*Along with several graduate students among whom were Paul Krugman, Andrew Abel and Jeffrey Frankel. Paul Krugman has written a short note about this experience with a picture!

The Brookings Institution Panel for Economic Activity included Professors Dornbusch and Hall, with Institute Professors Modigliani, Samuelson, and Solow as senior advisors to it. Professor Friedlaender served on the examining committee, Graduate Records Examination, Educational Testing Service. Institute Professor Modigliani served on the Committee on Economic Stabilization, Social Science Research Council. Professor Fisher is a member of the Board of Governors of Tel Aviv University. Institute Professor Solow continues as Trustee for the Institute of Advanced Study.

RESEARCH

International topics seem to dominate the research interests of the faculty. Professor Bhagwati, in addition to his work in developing countries and international trade theory, has given attention to a proposal for applying taxation to the brain drain. Professor Eckaus studied the role of financial markets and their regulation and the behavior of income distribution in economic development. Professor Taylor had three major areas of research: the development of nutrition planning models in Pakistan, international food aid and reserve policies, and growth and income distribution in Brazil.

Professor Morris A. Adelman’s continuing research on the world oil market, Professor Joskow’s analysis of the international nuclear energy industry, and Professor Martin L. Weitzman’s examination of OPEC and oil pricing involve applied microeconomics with international implications.

Research in various applied microeconomics areas was responsible for the second largest fraction of faculty effort. Institute Professor Solow continued to research the economics of exhaustible resources, and Professor Weitzman completed his analysis of the optimal development of resource pools. Professor Joskow has explored the future of the electric utility industry and its financing, the future of the US atomic energy industry, and the pattern of energy consumption in the US. He is developing a simulation model of the energy industry, and is reviewing the regulatory activities of government agencies in general and the health care sector in particular. Professor Hausman examined the Project Independence Report and is analyzing the choice of new technologies in energy research.

In the transporation field, Professor Friedlaender surveyed the issues in regulatory policy for railroads and alternative scenarios in federal transporation policy. Professor Jerome Rothenberg examined such problems in urban transportation as pricing policies, demand sensitivity to price, and modeling locational effects. Professor William C. Wheaton considered an optimal pricing and investment policy in highways under a gasoline tax.

Inextricably intertwined with urban transportation are questions of urban location and housing. Professor Rothenberg carried out research in such aspects of this problem as microeconomics of internal migration, supply-demand for housing in multizoned areas, the impact of energy costs on urban location, and the development of a model of housing markets and of metropolitan development and location that can be applied to general policy questions. Professor Wheaton developed an equilibrium model of housing and locational choice based on Boston experience.

Institute Professor Modigliani also conducted research on the housing market, but his interest comes primarily from the side of stabilization policies and similar macroeconomic problems. He also participated in a review after 20 years of his life cycle hypothesis of saving, made monetary policy prescriptions for both the US and Italy, reflected on the description of financial sectors in econometric models, and explored more deeply the application of optimal control to the design of optimal stabilization policies in economic models. Institute Professor Samuelson reviewed the art and science of macromodels over the 50 years of their development. Professor Friedlaender completed a quarterly macromodel of the Massachusetts economy. Professor Hall developed a model to deal with income tax changes and consumption.

Public economics has both macro and micro aspects, both of which are represented in the Department’s research. With Visiting Professor James A. Mirrlees, Professor Diamond theorized about public shadow prices with constant returns to scale, and about the assignment of liability. He also has generalized the Ramsey tax rule and continued his research into an optimal Social Security system. Professor Hausman is reexamining the cost of a negative income tax; Professor Rothenberg analyzed the distributional impact of public service provision; and Professor Wheaton explored intertemporal effects of land taxes, fiscal federalism in practice, and the financial plight of American cities.

Besides such theoretical research, there was significant research of an entirely pure nature. Professor Robert L. Bishop reexamined the measurement of consumer surplus. Professor Fisher extended his exploration of the stability of general equilibrium and of aggregate production functions. Professor Weitzman investigated the welfare significance of national product in a dynamic economy. Professor Hal R. Varian further explored the theory of fairness, non-Walrasian equilibria, and macromodels of unemployment and disequilibrium. Professor Hausman examined the econometric implications of truncated distributions and samples, of probit models, and of simultaneous equation models. In historical research, Professor Domar was concerned with serfdom, while Professor Charles Kindleberger investigated the role of the merchant in nineteenth-century technologic transfer.

Publications

Professor Bhagwati edited Taxing the Brain Drain: A Proposal and Brain Drain and Taxation: Theory and Empirical Analysis, and coauthored Foreign Trade Regimes and Economic Development: India. Professors Dornbusch and Kindleberger published numerous papers on implications of the new international monetary exchange structure for exchange rates, price stability, international trade, and international capital movements. Professor Weitzman continued his study of the Russian economy with a paper on the new Soviet incentive model.

With Visiting Professor of Management Ezio Tarantelli*, Institute Professor Modigliani published Labor Market, Income Distribution and Private Consumption (in Italian) and various papers on stabilization policy in Italy. He also wrote papers on inflation and the housing market and edited New Mortgage Designs for Stable Housing in an Inflationary Environment. Professor Hall’s labor market research resulted in papers on persistence of unemployment, occupational mobility, and taxation of earnings under public assistance. Professor Michael Piore wrote on labor market stratification and the effect on industrial growth of immigration from Puerto Rico to Boston. Professor Fisher had several publications on indexation and adjustment of mortgages to inflationary episodes. In the realm of economic history, Professor Temin published Reckoning with Slavery and Did Monetary Force Cause the Great Depression?

*Ezio Tarantelli was the victim of a Red Brigades’ assassination in 1985.

Institute Professor Samuelson published theoretical papers on factor price equalization and trade pattern reversal. In the realm of pure research, he put out papers on nonlinear and stochastic population analysis, optimal population growth, and the optimal Social Security system implied in a lifecycle growth model. He also brought out the tenth edition of his famous text, Economics: An Introduction Analysis.

FACULTY

Visiting Professor John R. Moroney was here from Tulane University; Visiting Professor Mirrlees came in the spring term from Nuffield College, Oxford University. Regular faculty on leave were Professors Fisher and Joskow in the fall and Professor Weitzman in the spring.

It is a pleasure to report the promotion to Associate Professor of Jerry A. Hausman. A new appointee, Professor Jeffrey E. Harris, with the unusual background of an M.D. and a Ph.D. in economics, will provide long-sought coverage in health economics.

Professor Kindleberger will retire as Ford Professor and become a Senior Lecturer on a half-time basis. Since 1948, when he came as an Associate Professor, Professor Kindleberger has been an effective teacher, scholar, participant in faculty governance, and counselor to governments and the public. He has trained the leading international economists of the next generation; he has produced a dozen books and more than a hundred articles in international trade and finance and in economic history. He epitomizes the highest kind of academician.

Several honors were bestowed on members of the Department. Institute Professor Modigliani will complete his year as President of the American Economic Association. Professor Myers received a Distinguished Alumni award from Pennsylvania State University. Professor Fisher was F.W. Paish Lecturer to the Association of (English) University Teachers of Economics. Institute Professor Solow received a D. Litt. from Warwick University, and Institute Professor Samuelson, a D.Sc. from the University of Rochester.

EDGAR CARY BROWN

Source: MIT Libraries, Institute Archives and Special Collections. MIT Department of Economics Records, Box 1, Folder “Annual Report 1975-6”.

Image Source: Building E52, Alfred P. Sloan Jr. Building, later Morris and Sophie Chang Building

 

https://mitmuseum.mit.edu/collections/subject/building-e52-alfred-p.-sloan-jr.-building-later-morris-and-sophie-chang-building-52

Categories
Chicago Economist Market Economists Gender

Chicago. Notes on conversation with U Chicago president Colwell by T.W. Schultz, 1946

Biblical Greek Scholar/Theologian Ernest Cadman Colwell served under Chancellor Robert M. Hutchins as the president of the University of Chicago from 1945 to 1951. Theodore W. Schultz was the relatively new head of the Department of Economics who met with Colwell in late September 1946 to brief the president on developments in the economics department, especially with respect to efforts being made in pursuit of several economists needed to fill the gaps left by Henry Simons’ death (1946), Chester W. Wright’s retirement (1944), resignations by Jacob Viner (1946) and Simeon E. Leland (1946), and Oskar Lange’s leave of absence (1945-).

We see in the memorandum of conversation transcribed below that John and Ursula Hicks posed a spousal hire issue needing a creative solution before an actual offer could be made and that sixty year old Frank Knight was due some sort of a “senatorial courtesy” to get him on board with the majority of the department who badly wanted to extend an offer to thirty-one year old Paul Samuelson. 

_________________________

Chicago Economics in 1946

Mitch, David. “A Year of Transition: Faculty Recruiting at Chicago in 1946.” Journal of Political Economy 124, no. 6 (2016): 1714–34. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26549915. Especially the online supplemental materials, where the following memo is quoted in part.

_________________________

More on the Pursuit of Samuelson
by Chicago

Harro Maas, “Making Things Technical: Samuelson at MIT” in E. Roy Weintraub (ed.) MIT and the Transformation of American Economics (Durham: Duke University Press, 2014), pp. 272-294.

Roger Backhouse. Founder of Modern Economics: Paul A. Samuelson. Vol. I: Becoming Samuelson, 1915-1948 (Oxford University Press, 2017), Chapter 28 “Commitment to MIT.”

_________________________

Discussion with Ernest C. Colwell
(25 September 1946)

This discussion with President Colwell was highly satisfactory in that we considered in some detail and carefully, a number of important developments affecting the Department of Economics as follows:

1. I indicated to Mr. Colwell that the role of the Department of Economics at the University of Chicago should be reviewed, with the view of achieving a better division of labor among universities within the U. S. and internationally. An increasing number of universities can do creditable undergraduate work in economics, and also satisfactory graduate work up to and beyond the master’s. There are upwards of two score of such institutions in the U. S. Meanwhile, the number of students seeking training at the undergraduate level, and also in graduate work, has increased rapidly, and the post war promises further growth in numbers. Meanwhile, many Western countries are looking to the U.S. for some of their advanced education in other fields as well as in economics), this along with the development that is taking place within the U. S., suggests that the time has come for the University of Chicago to allocate its resources even more largely to the most advanced reaches of economics. I proposed that we examine carefully the implications of this kind of refocusing of our program. I was pleased that Mr. Colwell found himself drawn to the kind of analysis I was presenting. He made several contributions to it and concurred with the analysis itself. He very cordially urged the Department to examine this thesis and reconstitute itself to serve more effectively, taking full account of the division of labor within American academic institutions.

2. I reviewed in some detail the state of the Department, pointing out the losses that have come as the result of the death of Simons, the retirement of Wright, the resignations of Viner and Leland, and the leave of absence of Lange. I expressed our pleasure in achieving the appointment of Friedman and Blough, and reaffirmed my confidence in our judgment in seeking these appointments.

With regard to additional appointments, the following individuals were discussed.

(1) Mr. and Mrs. Hicks. I reviewed the agreements we had with Mr. Hutchins, which were the foundation of negotiations last spring. I indicated that the Hicks would arrive this week to be with us the fore-part of the fall quarter. If as a result of this opportunity of being together during part of the fall quarter, the Hicks see a real opportunity for their professional efforts at the University of Chicago, and we continue to be genuinely interested in bringing them to this University, would we be permitted to offer Mr. and Mrs. Hicks the salaries and positions that we had discussed last spring realizing we might have to go higher in the case of Mr. Hicks, for I was convinced his standing warranted our paying the maximum. Mr. Colwell said he was willing to authorize an offer of $10,000 to Mr. Hicks, and probed with me for a while the merit of making it higher instead of offering a position to both individuals. It was my judgment that our bargaining power would be at a maximum if we would offer both individuals a position, but that we could escape the liability of dual membership in one family by making the offer to Mrs. Hicks a term appointment — perhaps that of a Lecturer or Research Associate, say for three years at $3,000, and then reconsider at the end of three years, where she would have the privilege of withdrawing or redefining her relationship, and the Department would likewise have that privilege. Thus, the commitment would be permanent in the case of Mr. Hicks, but meaningful in terms of time turned into professional task to Mrs. Hicks and yet allowing flexibility in her case. Mr. Colwell accepted my proposal to proceed with an offer to both Mr. and Mrs. Hicks along the lines I have outlined.

(2) I reported Mr. Viner’s observations that it was not likely Mr. Robbins would leave the London School of Economics, and that, at least for a year, there was no point in making an indirect approach again to see whether or not he might feel free to accept an appointment in this country. Mr. Colwell fully concurred.

(3) I reviewed our offer to Mr. Colin Clark to come to the University of Chicago as guest professor for a year. I also pointed out we had included in the offer $1000 for travel expenses. I Indicated further that several of my colleagues were disposed to feel that we should now make an offer of a permanent appointment to Mr. Clark, since he is not able to obtain leave of absence to come as visiting professor. I then indicated why I felt, although tentatively, that it was unwise to make this move for a permanent relationship with the Department until we had a chance to become personally acquainted with Mr. Clark, although I continue to have a high regard for his professional work as evidenced by his major writings. Mr. Colwell concurred with the view I expressed, namely, we should not make an appointment on a permanent basis, but should try to get Mr. Clark to come as a visiting professor, if not this year, perhaps next year.

(4) I reviewed the case of Albert G. Hart, indicating that he had accepted a position at Columbia before we could approach him with an offer, and that it was important to his own growth to take the position at Columbia for a year. My plan is to approach him at the end of the year, let him weigh alternatives, including the opportunities as he sees them at Columbia. My proposal to Mr. Colwell was that we approach Hart along in February or March in order to induce him to come to Chicago. We discussed Hart’s background in some detail, Mr. Colwell concurred in the procedure I outlined to him.

(5) I then outlined at some length the case of Paul Samuelson of M.I.T. Mr. Colwell had not had the privilege of visiting with Samuelson at the time he was here. Samuelson visited with Hutchins and Gustavson, as far as Central Administration was concerned. I stated it was my judgment that Samuelson is one of the younger men in economics who has a high probability of achieving a distinguished career as an economist, and that in this respect his promise is most outstanding; that I had no doubt of the merits of the case intellectually and would press for an appointment, were that the only consideration, without delay, but that I had to achieve, however, an acceptance of Mr. Samuelson in the Department, not that a majority was lacking; a mandate existed satisfying the University administrative requirements. But the obstacle lies in what in substance is a matter of “senatorial courtesy” in behalf of the most distinguished and senior member of the Department, Professor Frank Knight. I expressed the hope it would be possible to have Professor Knight concur in the appointment and feel it was being made without any discourtesy to him and his professional role and standing in this University and in the profession. I felt this end must and could be achieved and that I was going to give a great deal of effort to it in the coming months. Pending the full exploration of what can be done in this connection I wanted to reserve decision as to whether or not to recommend the appointment of Mr. Samuelson. Mr. Colwell discussed at some length his own appraisal of the problem I had presented. He seemed to be pleased with the approach that was implicit in what I was relating to him. He made the point, and made it explicitly, that if the intellectual stature of Samuelson is as high as my judgment indicated, that it was exceedingly important the University move toward an appointment. I felt sure, though, that he was disposed to await the wishes of the Department, weighing carefully the factors I had tried to describe to him.

  1. At this point Mr. Colwell took me back to my general thesis, namely, the refocusing of the goals of the Department and the use of its resources, urging me to give active attention to this task. Whereupon I suggested the achievement of this role might well mean the setting up of 5 to 7 positions in the Department for individuals to spend 2 to 5 years at this university in what would be essentially a post-doctoral role as scholars, then accept positions elsewhere consistent with their accomplishments and promise. Mr. Colwell was drawn to the proposal as I had put it and referred briefly to similar planning and developments in other fields.

T. W. Schultz.

Source: University of Chicago Archives. Department of Economics, Records. Box 42, Folder “3”.

Categories
Biography Economists

Before he was Frank Samuelson, father of Paul, he was Ephraim Chodorowski from Ratzki-Russia (now Poland)

Thanks to an inquiry regarding Paul Samuelson’s father’s geographic roots from loyal Economics in the Rear-view Mirror friends Krzysztof Nowak-Posadzy and Piotr P. Pieniążek, I have pulled up a few artifacts to add to the digital record of Paul Samuelson’s ancestry.

In case you ever wondered: the pre-Samuelson surname of the family was “Chodorowski”.

Ephraim Chodorowski arrived in New York on the steamship Blücher in November 1904, sailing in steerage (the historical analogue to what economy class air travel has become). The records indicate that he used both his birth name as well as his new name “Frank Samuelson” for about a decade.

On the issue of Paul Samuelson’s parents being first cousins: from death records of the state of Illinois for Frank Samuelson and Ella Lypski Samuelson’s brother Alfred Meyer Lypski we find:

Frank Samuelson’s parents (Leo Chodorowski and Jennie Epstein);
Ella Lypski’s parents (Meyer Lypski and Anna Epstein)

It is not too much of a stretch to presume that Jennie and Anna Epstein were sisters which is entirely consistent with Frank Samuelson and Ella Lypski having been first cousins.

A low-quality copy of Frank Samuelson’s 1922 passport photo turned up in my search of the ancestry.com databases. Still it is cool to have found.

Somewhat inconsistently (apologies) I use underlined italics to indicate handwritten insertions into official records. Bold-face is sometimes used within documents to indicate information that has been stamped into spaces for the declarations of intention for naturalization.

________________

Frank Samuelson’s 1939 obituary

SAMUELSON—Frank [Chodorovski] Samuelson, beloved husband of Ella, dear father of Harold, Paul, and Robert, fond brother of Herman, Irving, Edda Gurevitz of Kovno, Rachiel, and Rachel Schah of Kishinev. Funeral Tuesday. 3 p.m., at chapel, 3125 Roosevelt-rd. Burial Jewish Waldheim.

Source: Chicago Tribune (May 9, 1939), p. 25.

________________

State of Illinois Death Record
for Frank Samuelson

Name: Frank Samuelson
Birth Date: 1 Aug 1886
Birth Place: Ratzki, Poland
Death Date: 8 May 1939
Death Place: Chicago, Cook, Illinois
Burial Date: 9 May 1939
Burial Place: Forest Park, Cook, Ill.
Cemetery Name: Cong. A Israel
Death Age: 52
Occupation: Pharmacist
Race: White
Marital Status: M
Gender: Male
Residence: Chicago, Cook, Ill.
Father Name: Leo Samuelson (sic)
Father Birthplace: Ratzki, Poland
Mother Name: Jennie Epstein
Mother Birth Place: Ratki, Poland
Spouse Name: Ella Samuelson
FHL Film Number: 19153415

Source: Illinois, U.S., Deaths and Stillbirths Index, 1916-1947 accessed through Ancestry.com

________________

From the Passenger Lists
from Hamburg, November 1904

Name: Ephraim Chodorowski
Gender: Male
Ethnicity/Nationality: Russian
Marital Status: Single
Occupation: Kaufmann [most likely meaning retail salesperson]
Departure Age: 20
Birth Date: abt 1884
Residence Place: Racki (sic)
Departure Date: 19 Nov 1904
Departure Place: Hamburg, Germany
Arrival Places: Dover; Boulogne-sur-Mer; New York
Ship Name: Blücher
Shipping Line: Hamburg-Amerika Linie (Hamburg-Amerikanische Packetfahrt-Actien-Gesellschaft)
Ship Type: Steamship
Ship Flag: Germany
Accommodation: Steerage

Source:  Hamburg Passenger Lists, 1850-1934. Staatsarchiv Hamburg, Auswandererlisten, Volume 373-7 I, VIII A 1, Band 160. Accessed through ancestry.com website.

________________

Declarations of intention for naturalization
by Frank Samuelson (Ephraim Chodorowski) and his cousin Frank Lipski
filed on 18 March 1910

United States of America
Department of Commerce and Labor
Bureau of Immigration and Naturalization
Division of Naturalization

DECLARATION OF INTENTION
(Invalid for all purposes seven years after the date hereof)

Circuit Court of the United States, Northern District of Illinois

ss: In the Circuit Court of The United States

I, Ephraim Chodorowski, aged 24 years, occupation Druggist, do declare on oath/affirm that my personal description is: Color white, complexion fair, height 5 feet 6 inches, weight 143 pounds, color of hair brown, color of eyes gray other visible distinctive marks none; I was born in Ratzka Russia, on the 15th day of September, anno Domini 1885; I now reside at 1137 Desplains Street.

I emigrated to the United States of America from Hamburg Germany on the vessel Bluecher; my last foreign residence was Varsau Russia.

It is my bona fide intention to renounce forever all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, and particularly to Nicholas II Emperor of all the Russias, of which I am now a citizen/subject; I arrived at the port of New York, in the State of New York on or about the 30th day of November, anno Domini 1904; I am not an anarchist; I am not a polygamist nor a believer in the practice of polygamy; and it is my intention in good faith to become a citizen of the United States of America and to permanently reside therein: SO HELP ME GOD.

[signed] Ephraim Chodorowski
(Original signature of declarant)

Subscribed and sworn to/affirmed before me this 18th day of March, anno Domini 1910

H. S. STODDARD, Clerk of the Circuit Court of the United States, Northern District of Illinois.
By Alma [sp?] V. Shoemaker, Deputy Clerk.

Source: U.S. Federal Naturalization Records, 1856-1991. Circuit Court, Northern District, Illinois. Declarations V. 6 (P29-End)-9, 1909-10. Accessed at ancestry.com.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

United States of America
Department of Commerce and Labor
Bureau of Immigration and Naturalization
Division of Naturalization

DECLARATION OF INTENTION
(Invalid for all purposes seven years after the date hereof)

Circuit Court of the United States, Northern District of Illinois

ss: In the Circuit Court of The United States

I, Frank Lypski, aged 19 years, occupation Druggist, do declare on oath/affirm that my personal description is: Color white, complexion fair, height 5 feet 5 inches, weight 145 pounds, color of hair brown, color of eyes brown other visible distinctive marks none; I was born in Suvalki Russia, on the ???th [28th in other records] day of December, anno Domini 1890; I now reside at 1135 Desplains Street.

I emigrated to the United States of America from Liverpool England on the vessel Romania; my last foreign residence was Suvalki Russia.

It is my bona fide intention to renounce forever all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, and particulary to Nicholas II Emperor of all the Russias, of which I am now a citizen/subject; I arrived at the port of New York, in the State of New York on or about the 23rd day of March, anno Domini 1902; I am not an anarchist; I am not a polygamist nor a believer in the practice of polygamy; and it is my intention in good faith to become a citizen of the United States of America and to permanently reside therein: SO HELP ME GOD.

[signed] Frank Lypski
(Original signature of declarant)

Subscribed and sworn to/affirmed before me this 18th day of March, anno Domini 1910

H. S. STODDARD, Clerk of the Circuit Court of the United States, Northern District of Illinois.
By Alma [sp?] V. Shoemaker, Deputy Clerk.

Source: U.S. Federal Naturalization Records, 1856-1991. Circuit Court, Northern District, Illinois. Declarations V. 6 (P29-End)-9, 1909-10. Accessed at ancestry.com.

________________

1910 U.S. Census
Chicago City, Cook County, Illinois
Enumerated April 16, 1910

Head of Household: Jacob Stiene (28 yrs)
[note original name probably Gladstein as seen in a letter to Alfred Lypski in his passport application, in other records the surname was spelled “Stine”.]

Wife of Head of Household: Fannie Stiene (22 yrs)

Brothers-in-law of head of household: Alfred (23 yrs, single) and Frank (19 yrs, single) Lypski

Sisters-in-law of head of household: Ella (22 yrs, single) and Sarah Lypski (16 yrs, single)

[So the Lypski siblings were Fannie, Alfred, Frank, Ella, and Sarah. Ella and Fannie look to be twins. Jacob and Frank share a grandfather.]

Frank Samuelson:

Cousin of Head of Household: [sic, actually Frank was the cousin of the wife of the household and so necessarily cousin of her brothers and sisters listed.]

Age in 1910: 24
Birth Date: 1886
Birthplace: Russia
Home in 1910: Chicago Ward 19, Cook, Illinois
Street: 1135 Des Plaines Street
Race: White
Gender: Male
Immigration Year: 1904
Relation to Head of House: Cousin
Marital Status: Single
Father’s Birthplace: Russia
Mother’s Birthplace: Russia
Able to speak English: English
Occupation: Drug [store]
Industry: Clerk
Employer, Employee or Other: Wage Earner
Attended School: Y
Able to read: Y
Able to write: Y
Out of work: N
Number of weeks out of work: 0

______________

Naturalization Petition: C-362

Family name: Chodarowski (sic)
Given name or names: Efhraim
Address: 1780 Broadway, Gary, Ind.
Certificate no. (or vol. and page): P-782
Title and location of court: US Dist., Lake Co., Hammond Ind.
Country of birth or allegiance: Russia
When born (or age): Sept. 15, 1885
Date and port of arrival in US: [blank]
Date of naturalization: Oct. 16, 1917

Source: U.S. Federal Naturalization Records, District and Circuit Courts, Northern District, Illinois, Index to Naturalization Petitions. Accessed through Ancestry.com

________________

DRAFT REGISTRATION CARD, 1918

First name: Frank
Middle name: [blank]
Last name: Samuelson
Permanent Home Address: 508 Polk, Gary, Lake County, Ind.
Age in years: 33
Date of birth:  August 15th, 1885
Race: White [checked]
U.S. Citizen: Naturalized [checked]
Present Occupation: Druggist
Employer’s Name: Economical Drug Store
Place or Employment or Business: 1651 Broadway, Gary, Lake County, Ind.
Nearest Relative: Ella Samuelson, 508 Polk, Gary, Lake County, Ind.

[signed] Frank Samuelson

REGISTRAR’S REPORT

Description of Registrant

Height: Medium
Build: Medium
Color of Eyes: Gray
Color of Hair: Brown
Has person lost arm, leg, hand, eye, or is he obviously physically disqualified? (Specify.) No.

[Signed by Magistrar]
Date of Registration Sept. 12, 1918

Local Board
Div. No. 1
Gary, Indiana
Federal Bldg.

Source.  U.S. World War I Draft Registration Cards, Indiana, Gary City 1. Accessed through Ancestry.com

________________

U.S. Passport Application
(Form for Naturalized Citizen,
edition of January, 1919)

United States of America,
State of Indiana
County of Lake

I, Frank Samuelson, a Naturalized and Loyal Citizen of the United States, hereby apply to the Department of State, at Washington, for a passport. For myself.

I solemnly swear that I was born at Ratzki-Russia on August 15th, 1885; that my father, Leo Samuelson, was born in Russia and is now residing at Roumania; that I emigrated to the United States, sailing from Hamburg Germany about Nov 1st , 1904; that I resided 17 years, uninterruptedly, in the United States from 1904 to 1922, at Chicago IIl. 5 Yrs. Gary Ind. 12 Yrs that I was naturalized as a citizen of the United States before the District Court of United States at Hammond Indiana, on Oct. 16th, 1917, as shown by the Certificate of Naturalization presented herewith; that I am the identical person described in said Certificate that I have reside outside the United States since my naturalization at the following places on the following periods: [left deliberately blank] and that I am domiciled in the United States my permanent residence being at Gary in the State of Indiana, where I follow the occupation of Druggist.

My last passport was obtained from Never had one on [“Date”, left deliberately blank] and was [“Disposition of passport”, left deliberately blank]. I am about to go abroad temporarily, and intend to return to the United States within one year with the purpose of residing and performing the duties of citizenship therein: and I desire a passport for use in visiting the countries hereinafter named for the following purposes:

Roumania, Poland, Lithawania to visit father, sisters and other relatives.

I intend to leave the United States from the port of New York , sailing on board the Olympia on Aug 12, 1922.

OATH OF ALLEGIANCE.

Further, I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion: So help me God.

[signed:]  Frank Samuelson

Sworn to before me this 13th day
of July, 1922
Chas . [illegible]
Deputy Clerk of the U.S. Dist. Court at Hammond Indiana

Description of Applicant.

Age: 36 years
Stature: 5 feet, 6 inches, Eng.
Forehead: High
Eyes: gray
Nose: medium
Mouth: small
Chin: medium
Hair: brown
Complexion: medium
Face: medium
Distinguishing marks: moles on right cheek

IDENTIFICATION

July 13, 1922

I, Jacob Brooks, solemnly swear that I am a native/naturalized citizen of the United States; that I reside at Chicago, Illinois; that I have known the above, named Frank Samuelson personally for 10 years and know him/her to be the identical person referred to in the within-described certificate of naturalization; and that the facts stated in his/her affidavit are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.

[signed:] Jacob Brooks
(Occupation) Druggist
(Address of witness) 915-E 55th St., Chicago Ills

Sworn to before me this 13th day
of July, 1922
Chas . [illegible]
Deputy Clerk of the U.S. Dist. Court at Hammond Indiana

Applicant desires passport to be sent to the following address:

Frank Samuelson
356 Adams St.
Gary Indiana

A signed duplicate of the photograph to be attached
hereto must be sent to the Department with the appli-
cation, to be affixed to the passport with an impression
of the Department’s seal. [see top of this post]

Source.  U.S. Passport Applications, 1795-1925. Roll 2017/1922. Accessed through Ancestry.com

________________

Illinois Death Index

Name: Alfred Meyer Lypski [brother of Ella Lypski Samuelson]
Birth Date: abt 1887
Death Date: 12 Feb 1936
Death Place: Chicago, Cook, Illinois
Death Age: 49
Gender: Male
Father Name: Meyer Lypski
Mother Name: Rebecca Epstein
Spouse Name: Jennie Lypski
FHL Film Number: 1926849

Source: Illinois, U.S., Deaths and Stillbirths Index, 1916-1947 accessed through Ancestry.com

Categories
Economists Harvard

Harvard. Copy of Schumpeter’s letter to Crum regarding Samuelson’s course performance, 1936

Following the last post that provided a transcription of Joseph Schumpeter’s letter of recommendation for Marion Crawford, this post gives us a glimpse of the 20 year old “youngster” who would marry Marion Crawford a few years later.

_______________________________

Schumpeter asking for instructor feedback for Samuelson’s SSRC fellowship

February 12, 1936

Prof. Leonard Crum
Holyoke 46

Dear Leonard:

You know, perhaps you don’t, that the Social Science Research Council has now adopted a policy for their pre-doctoral fellowships to ask a man to act as what they call a sponsor to the fellow. I am acting in this capacity for Samuelson and it is part of my duties to collect opinions from his other teachers to send to them so that they know how their lambs are shaping up, and notably whether they should get an extension for another year.

Samuelson seems to have done very well in your course. In any case, I would be very grateful if you would be good enough to send me or to sent [sic] the Social Science Research Council (Committee on Social Research Personnel, R. H. Shryock, 230 Park Avenue, New York City) your opinion about that youngster.

I really feel that I need not apologize for intruding upon you during your well earned rest because I believe that this little bit of official business will make you feel sweet liberty from the rest all the more intensely.

With best wishes,

J. A. Schumpeter

Source: Harvard University Archives. Department of Economics, Correspondence and Papers, 1930-1961. Box 21, Folder “Joseph A. Schumpeter 1933-1942”.

Image Source: Original black-and-white photo of Samuelson from the slideshow at the M.I.T. Memorial Service (April 10, 2010).  Colorized by Economics in the Rear-view Mirror.

Categories
Economists Gender Harvard Radcliffe

Radcliffe. Schumpeter Letter Supporting Marion Crawford, 1937

Paul Samuelson’s first wife (they were married in Cambridge in 1938) and mother of their six children, Marion Estelle Crawford (b. 1915, d. 1978) graduated Phi Beta Kappa from Radcliffe in 1937, with an A.B. summa cum laude in economics. For graduate study she was awarded a Harvard Annex Fellowship in 1937-38.   In 1938-39 she received an Augustus Anson Whitney and Benjamin White Whitney Fellowship. She was awarded an A.M. in economics in 1940. Her sole publication was “The Australian Case for Protection Reexamined” (Quarterly Journal of Economics, November 1939). Her New York Times obituary closed with the sentence “She retired when her first child was born in 1946.”  It was still a time when motherhood was an absorbing state.

_________________________

High-School Honours

Source: Berlin High School (Wisconsin) 1933 Yearbook Mascoutin, pp. 16-17.

_________________________

Senior Yearbook Picture
Radcliffe, 1937

SourceThe Radcliffe 30 and 7, p. 48.

_________________________

Copy of Joseph Schumpeter’s letter supporting Marion Crawford’s application for a fellowship

February 11, 1937

Dr. Bernice Cronkhite, Dean
Radcliffe College
Cambridge, Massachusetts

This is to support Miss Marion Crawford’s application for a fellowship for the next academic year. There cannot be any doubt but that she is one of our best students and that every effort should be made to make her further study financially possible. She proves her ability by the fact that, being a senior, she takes graduate courses with the utmost ease, and in fact much better than most of the graduates, whether male or female. Her equipment should prove particularly useful in the present state of economics, and I feel confident that her work will do credit to her and to Radcliffe.

Very sincerely yours,

J. A. Schumpeter

Source: Harvard University Archives. Department of Economics, Correspondence and Papers, 1930-1961. Box 21, Folder “Joseph A. Schumpeter 1933-1942”.

Image Source: Detail from a black-and-white photo of Marion Crawford and Paul Samuelson from the slideshow at the M.I.T. Memorial Service for Paul Samuelson (April 10, 2010).  Colorized by Economics in the Rear-view Mirror.

Categories
Economist Market Economists Harvard

Harvard. Memo to Provost supporting Galbraith appointment. Black, 1947

 

As surprising as it might sound, the Harvard economics department couldn’t always get whom they wanted (Theodore Schultz). As a consequence we are able to observe an aggressive strategy employed by a member of one side in the departmental hiring dispute.  Professor John D. Black attempted to play the rebound in re-pleading his case for John Kenneth Galbraith’s appointment to a newly established professorship. Indeed by writing directly to the Provost, Black could have been charged with at least an additional count of “working the ref”. The episode is well summarized in Richard Parker’s biography of Galbraith (John Kenneth Galbraith: his life, his politics, his economics, pp. 226-227). Still, there is nothing quite like the pleasure of watching sharp elbows at work in the service of intradepartmental politics as revealed in the complete letter posted below.  Black was not afraid to push nativist buttons in referring to anti-Galbrathians among his colleagues: “European clique” (cf. Haberler in 1948 on Galbraith vs Samuelson), “the monetary-fiscal policy axis” and “gaudy Keynesian trappings”.

A cynical nose can detect more than a whiff of a self-serving plea to strengthen the prospects of Black’s own field and style of research. 

Archival note: Parker refers to a copy of the letter in Black’s papers with the Wisconsin Historical Society, this post is based on a copy of the letter I found in Galbraith’s papers at the JFK Presidential Library.

Economics in the Rear-view Mirror provides the outlines and exams for Black’s courses on the marketing of agricultural commodities from 1947-48).

____________________

December 22, 1947

Provost Paul Buck
University Hall
Cambridge, Massachusetts

Dear Provost Buck:

As you are no doubt aware, it was I who last year nominated Galbraith for the joint professorship to the School of Public Administration and in the Department of Economics. It was my judgment at that time that in view of his experience in public affairs and acknowledged great ability he surely should be considered for this position. The voting last year confirmed my judgment surprisingly. Excluding Schultz, to whom the appointment was offered, and Tinbergen from the Netherlands, he ran neck and neck with Yntema for top place in all of the balloting, with Samuelson next, and Smithies in seventh place. Tinbergen owed his strength to the European clique in the Department of Economics (by no means all European born), who have a European idea of the function of a university, und would have been a misfit in this appointment.

The voting of course reflected in large measure the conceptions of the voting members as to the needs of the appointment. A majority of my colleagues in the Department of Economics thought of it in terms simply of getting another high-grade technical economist, with little thought for the needs of the School of Public Administration. To meet this situation, I prepared and read at one of last year’s joint meetings on the appointment, the following statement, which I now I now submit anew, as still describing the conditions of the appointment:

The decision as to an appointment in economics at this time raises the whole question of the future of the Graduate School of Public Administration and its meaning for the Departments of Economics and Government.

The first point to make under this head is that the two departments named, without the Graduate School of Public Administration, are destined to become conventional departments in these fields, not distinguishable from similar departments in other universities, except for probably having better faculties than most of them. Even the latter distinction could easily fade in the next decade or two. With the Graduate School of Public Administration working with them, they both have possibilities of becoming super-graduate departments, by building on top of the usual graduate offerings in these fields a type of advanced graduate instruction that deals with problems of the sort that arise in the higher levels of policy-making in government. The seminars now given are well worth while from this point of view, but they fell much sort of realizing their possibilities. The two departments therefore very much need the Graduate School of Public Administration. It offers them a real opportunity to achieve greatness and become important influences in our national life. On the other hand, the School can get nowhere without the regular graduate work of the two departments as a foundation. The School and the two departments should therefore work closely together, each helping the others at each step in their advancement.

This means looking at a problem, such as that of the new appointment, as a common problem, and asking the question what kind of an appointment now will promote best the progress of the departments and the School?

Before answering this question, we need to go back and consider the basis on which the School was conceived. Those who formulated the program for the School finally settled down on training in policy-making as the great opportunity for a school of public administration at a university like Harvard. They exhibited a kind of prescience and inner wisdom in so doing that would almost seem like a miracle except for the fact that it did grow almost inevitably out of the situation.

In the two or three years following the founding of the School, much actual headway was made in realizing the objective of training for policy-making. The program of the School and it method made a strong impression in government circles and in the world of education. Since then, the School has lost considerable of the advantage of such a splendid start. If it does not take hold with vigor again and press forward along the lines laid out, it will lose it entirely in five or ten more years and become nothing more than a minor adjunct of the two conventional departments of the University. This the departments themselves cannot afford to let happen. Neither can Harvard University.

Looking at the present problem in this light, there can be no doubt that the great weakness in our present situation is in persons qualified to train advanced graduate students in policy-making, who have the aptitude for it as well as the background. The interests of the departments are in such an appointment at this time. The training in policy-making, comparatively speaking, is not suffering now, and will not suffer for several years, because of deficiencies in the preliminary graduate training needed as a foundation for it.

Also needing to be considered are important and somewhat similar relations to other departments of Harvard University, particularly to the Graduate School of Business Administration, to the Law School, and to the new Department of Social Relations. The School can add something of high importance to each of these if its seminars in the policy-making function are adequately developed; and in turn its contribution will be much enriched by what workers in these fields have to offer.

An appointment at this time of one new professor qualified as indicated will not of course take us far alone the way we need to go. But it will make a good start. We shall need mainly two things in addition: A. Additional research funds for the different seminars — to be used in employing research associates, financing field work, statistical laboratory work, etc., B. Some appointments wholly on the faculty of the School. Funds for both of these, especially the first, can be obtained if sought in earnest.

In conclusion, it should be stated that the School has made a start exactly along the right lines. It does not need in the least to back up and take a fresh start, but instead only to pick up what it has and go forward with it.

You, Provost Buck, do not need to be told that since I made this statement, the School has done exactly what I was hoping for. Almost certainly now at least three of the major seminars of the School will have research projects combined with them, each with small staffs of research associates. Steps are being taken to bring the School into effective working relations with the Law school and the Department of Social Relations. The need for an appointment that will strengthen its instruction in the policy-making function has in consequence become even more urgent then it was a year ago.

When it came time to offer nominations again this year, I felt that in view of the strong vote for Galbraith last year, surely he should be considered again. The third men in the top three this year, Smithies, has been substituted for Samuelson by those who supported Samuelson last year, apparently for two reasons: one, they now admit Samuelson’s shortcomings in the policy role, and consider Smithies a better candidate from this point of view; two, they expect to have Samuelson appointed to the full professorship now vacant in the Department of Economics. There seems to be more general acceptance than year ago of my conception of the needs of the appointment.

It has been necessary for me to make this last statement because it is the basis for the most important factor in the whole situation as it now develops, namely, that to appoint both Smithies and Samuelson at this time would further unbalance the work in economics at Harvard in the direction of the monetary-fiscal policy axis, since both of these men work mainly along these lines. The simple fact of the matter is that the men working in money and banking, fiscal policy and international trade, plus a few (in theory mostly) who vote with them on appointments, already constitute a voting majority in the Department of Economics. (You will remember that they did their utmost to prevent Dunlop’s appointment two years ago.) To add one more to this axis at this time would be highly unfortunate. It is, of course, not their voting which is most important — it is the narrowing effect which they have on the teaching and research in economics at Harvard. Those two appointments would contribute more than usual to such narrowing, since they are Keynesians in addition.

Of course none of these in this axis considers that he is narrow. In their discussions, to be sure, they draw in all phases of the economy. But they organize it all in terms of a single framework of reference. They pour it all, as it were, through one narrow funnel, and do some sieving in the process. As to how much they may mislead themselves in so doing, — and unfortunately some of the policy-makers of the nation; we have had abundant evidence in the past two years.

We can be reasonably certain that within ten or fifteen years, the Keynesian system of economic thinking will have been pretty well taken in stride. It would be unfortunate if at that time Harvard found itself with a faculty in economics too largely clothed in outworn habiliments. The economies of that day will have a different cast then the pre-Keynesian; but it will have lost much of its gaudy Keynesian trappings.

One of the first stories told me about Harvard when I arrived in 1927 was of President Eliot’s having been asked why Harvard University’s Department of Psychology had never developed a “school” of thought in that field, as had the Departments of Cornell and Columbia, and of his having answered that if he had discovered that his Department of Psychology was becoming dominated by one school of thought he would have hastened to appoint the strongest man he could find of an opposing school.

Of course this last point is no argument for the appointment of Galbraith. It is merely an argument against appointing Smithies if Samuelson is going to be appointed to the Department of Economics — and the pressure for Samuelson’s appointment is very strong in the Department of Economics.

I do not propose to present any strong affirmative arguments in support of Galbraith’s appointment. I nominated him because I believed that he should at least be considered. It has been the votes of my colleagues that has put him in the running, and I prefer that they tell you their reasons. I would not want him appointed if in their judgment, and that of the ad hoc committee, he is not the strongest man for this joint appointment.

I say this even though I would hope that if Galbraith were appointed he could spare a small fraction of his time to helping me give the two year courses which I now give in Commodity Distribution and Prices (ordinarily called Marketing.) Even though I am now giving these two courses, with the help of one-fifth of the time of an annual instructor, in addition to three full year courses in the Economies of Agricultura (with help of part of the time of one visiting lecturer) besides supervising a score of doctor’s theses, I shall manage somehow if I can get some other regular help with the three courses in the Economics of Agriculture.1

____________

  1. The undergraduate course in marketing had 90 students in the fall term, and the graduate course had 12 plus 8 auditors. This course was offered to Harvard undergraduate in 1946-47 for the first time, except for sone special instruction in food marketing given to armed service prospects during the war. The graduate course has been given since 1933.

    ____________

It may also be of interest that 12 of the 120 Ph.D’s reported as conferred in Economics in the United States in 1946-47 (12 months) were to candidates writing theses under my direction. (See September 1947 American Economic Review.)

There have, however, been some statements made about Galbraith in faculty discussions that must be commented upon in the interest of truth and sound decision. It has been said of him that he is “not a highly competent technical economist.” All this means is that he has published no articles in which he has applied methods of statistical and mathematical analysis, to the development of refinements of economic and monetary theory. I have no doubt of Galbraith’s ability to do this when this is the important thing for him to do. The simple truth is that a man of his breadth of comprehension is likely to find himself mainly absorbed in dealing with broad fundamental economic relationships; and this is especially true in times as disturbed as those in which he has been doing his writing. When asked, in the summer of 1947, to read a paper on the current economic situation, I entitled this paper “Fundamental Elements in the Current Agricultural Situation,” and I wrote as follows:

“The day and the hour seem to call for analysis in terms of broad fundamentals. This is no occasion for the refinements of theory and their application; but rather for over-simplification and over-emphasis on a few vital elements. Something of accuracy is lost in consequence; but this is not relatively important in the emergency that confronts us. There are wild horses loose in the world and the first task is to bring them to leash. Later we can break them to the plow and the cart.”

This statement is truer today than it was in 1942. If any economist of today is turning out articles or books presenting analysis of refinements, he is doing it because he lacks real power of analysis of the larger issues of the day, or as a by-product of such analysis, or as relaxation from the steady grind of his regular job. No doubt some of Smithies’ articles fit into these latter descriptions. Galbraith’s writings of the past ten years have covered the larger aspects of a very broad range of subjects.

Another criticism has been that he is not a good speaker. It is true that he often speaks haltingly when extemporizing. He needs time to find the exact word he wants. But he writes excellent papers, and reads them very effectively. (John Williams reported at a recent faculty meeting that his paper and Ed Mason’s were the outstanding papers at a full meeting in Philadelphia. His paper at the Atlantic City meeting in December 1946 was an outstanding performance.) In fact, he has become a very effective writer. To have a man in the Graduate School of Public Administration who can write as effectively as Galbraith on public questions of the day will be a highly valuable asset.

It needs to be added that he is effective in the classroom in spite of halting for a word now and then. The secret of this is that he has an uncanny sense for the vital points in a classroom discussion the same in analyzing public issues, and for putting these in their proper perspective. He is also a very stimulating influence among students in private discussion.

Rating higher in my scale of values than in those of many other academicians is capacity. Some of my colleagues do twice as much teaching, research and writing as some others, and do it fully as well or better. Galbraith has demonstrated a high order of capacity.

The other adverse report concerning Galbraith is not so easy to analyze. It is that he does not handle public relations well, nor even his relations with colleagues and subordinates. Surely a man of Galbraith’s type needed a man of different sort to work alongside him and handle the difficult public relations of OPA. And surely Leon Henderson was not that man. He was less apt at it even than Galbraith. The public relations man for OPA had to say “No” very often; and Galbraith does not have the ease of manner for such an assignment. Given time enough to plan for it in advance, he is able to differ with his colleagues and associates in a pleasant and gracious manner; but not in haste and under pressure, and especially when some body is trying to “put something over”.

No doubt a factor in his relations with others has been his urge to get on with the job and not waste too much time talking about it. I must confess a kinship with him in this respect. He no more than I should be assigned task a with many administrative decisions.

On this point, I am ready to predict without any hesitancy that Galbraith’s relations with his colleagues in the School and in the Department of Economics, should he receive this appointment, would be more congenial by a wide margin then those now generally prevailing in these departments; also that in the role of a Harvard professor, his relations with the public and with government officials would be unusually cooperative and friendly.

Perhaps a word is in order as to why I did not vote for Yntema. Most of all, I do not want to take a chance on either of two things (1) that he will prefer to continue with his present job, thus postponing our filling this appointment for another year: (2) that he will accept the appointment, but will want to continue a tie-us with CED that will remain his main interest. We cannot afford any more such tie-ups. Second, he seems to be so well fitted to his present assignment that I do not believe he would fit ours.

Very truly yours,

John D. Black

Source: John F. Kennedy Presidential Library. John Kenneth Galbraith Papers. Box 519. Series 5. Harvard University File, 1949-1990. Folder: “Correspondence Re: Appointment of JKG as Professor of Economics. 12/22/47—3/22/50”.

Image Source:  Professor John D. Black in Harvard Class Album 1945.

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.