Categories
Funny Business M.I.T.

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

__________________

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

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

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

F. Yes, Mr. Solow.

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

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

M1Thank you Mr. Chairman.

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

EHH   E. Hausman Hunt.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

F. State your name, rank.

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

F. And whom do you assist?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

F. What is the source of this slush fund?

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

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

BD. March 21, 1973;

F. What happened at that meeting?

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

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

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

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

F. Next witness. Please state your name.

PC. Paul Colson.

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

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

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

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

F. What were Prof. Samuelson’s instructions?

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

F. What happened? (eyebrows)

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

F. (eyebrows) What happened next?

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

F. What went wrong?

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

 

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

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

Categories
Funny Business M.I.T.

M.I.T. Economics Christmas skit with basketball theme, 1961

 

Spoiler alert: you are about to encounter one of the least funny economics skits in the history of the genre, so this artifact is regrettably low on entertainment value.  Still the six acts have a certain seven-acts-of-man structure: Act I (the department recruits), Act II ( advising the first-year student), Act III (graduate student complaints), Act IV (choosing guest speakers), Act V (general examinations), Act VI (job market). 

After reading the skit, you might need a palate cleansing or better: for that purpose here are a few links to the key word “Funny Business” at Economics in the Rear-view Mirror that take you to some of the greatest hits of economics skits.

____________________

ANOTHER TWO POINTS FOR THE FACULTY,
ANOTHER FOUL ON THE STUDENTS

A Christmas Drama (with suggestions for a cast), December 15, 1961

ACT I

(The curtain rises on a scene of [Edgar Cary] Brown, [Franklin Marvin] Fisher, [Charles Poor] Kindleberger and [Abraham J.] Siegel seated around a table reading applications.

SIEGEL: Here’s a guy who may be OK…No…the place is no good. A cow college. They average only 50 points a game.

BROWN:  Here’s a good one.

FISHER: What’s his record?

BROWN: Pretty darn good. Worth at least tuition plus $500. Maybe $750.

FISHER: What’s his record?

BROWN: Pretty darn good. He’s from Podunk. And they’re pretty good. He was the best they had.

FISHER: How did he score, for crying out loud?

BROWN: He’s six-feet-five, weighs 195 pounds, and fast; he averaged 23.7 points a game. He has a great set shot, never misses from the foul line, and superb off the backboard. He’s just what we need in Graduate Economics at M.I.T.

 

ACT II

(An office: Siegel is advising a student.)

SIEGEL: For the first year I would take pretty standard fare: theory, history, statistics, finance, and international, plus of course the workshop. There’s no use trying to take too much. Pace yourself.

STUDENT (perhaps [Stephen Herbert] Hymer?): I don’t have much math. Why do I need to take statistics?

SIEGEL: Ando is very good. He doesn’t always make things completely clear, but you have to take statistics if you want to be able to handle averages, to work out the point per game and point per shot records; and you need probability to help compute odds on all the league games. Statistics is a must.

STUDENT: Why the history, finance and international?

SIEGEL: International is important. You ought to know how to schedule the Harlem Globetrotters, and who has the best chance in the Olympics. One of our best graduates played on the Oxford team against Poland and Czechoslovakia. That was Chuck Cooper, and it got him a job as Walter Heller’s assistant at the Council. Finance is important. When the gamblers start bribing players you need to know how to invest the funds. And history is vital. On the general exams they always ask who was James Naismith, the man who invented basketball. That’s for every student. The good students they ask when it was invented…of course 1891. And the very best students they ask where…past, Springfield, Mass. Remember, it’s not Springfield, Illinois. That’s Abe Lincoln.

STUDENT: OK. But tell me about the last one.

SIEGEL: Theory isn’t much. [Paul Anthony] Samuelson teaches about how to make inputs for two points, and when to dribble.

STUDENT: Samuelson teaches drivel?

 

ACT III

(A group of students, griping.)

STUDENT 1 (Francis Michel Bator?): This place is no good. It’s theory, theory, theory all the way. Anyone knows that the way to win at basketball is to practice. Practice makes perfect. Theory makes perfect fools. All you do is study and take exams. “Who was James Naismith? Who was Adam Yea-Smith? When do you chop down the tree?” Bah! I say we ought to study policy. With a two-point lead and three minutes to go, should you freeze the ball or plop in an input for an output of two points?

STUDENT 2 ([Paul Narcyz] Rosenstein-Rodan?): They tell me [Robert Merton] Solow has been converted from theory to policy. He is no longer interested in questions like whether the best set shot is an inverted rectangular parabola, but real issues, like the queuing problem: how many substitutes does a team need to field five men for an hour, with one personal foul every six minutes and four personal fouls per man disqualifying. If you have too many players on the bench you get unemployment. The team needs growth. Maybe you ought to add a man and play six.

STUDENT 3 ([Robert] Evans?): What’s bad is to have to play far away from the Sloan building. Those workshops on top on Walker and over in the Armory are OK, but they are too far away. We need the Ford Foundation to give us a workshop right here.

STUDENT 1: Haven’t you heard? The talk is that the new building to go up in the back lot is a library. But as I see its dimensions unfold- 90 feet by 50 – and transparent backboards and netting and grandstands, I can’t believe it’s a library. It must be a basketball court.

 

ACT IV

(A meeting of the G.E.A.)

RALPH BULL (played by [Robert Lyle] Bishop?): Do any of you fellows have suggestions for speakers besides Cousy, Russell, Jungle Jim Lusketoff, and that 6.8 outstanding economist, [John Kenneth] Galbraith, who can stand with his head coming up through the basket?

STUDENT B: What about Milton Friedman? He is under the five feet which some say is the minimum allowable in a monetary theorist, but he sure is good at the far-fetched shot.

STUDENT B: Why not get Clifford Odets?

RALPH BULL: Clifford Odets? Why him?

STUDENT B: Don’t you remember the famous line in “Awake and Sing”? “My brother Sam joined the Navy. He don’t know from nothin’, that dumb basketball player.” I want to know whether the emphasis is “that dumb basketball player” or “the [sic] dumb basketball player”. Are there any smart basketball players?

 

ACT V

KINDLEBERGER: As chairman of this exam, let me tell you that you have the right to pick the order of your exam. Do you want to start with Theory, or Statistics?

STUDENT (Samuelson?): I think I’ll start by jumping against Fisher, your professorship, sir. Ando’s the smaller, so I’ll take him last when I’m tired.

KINDLEBERGER: All right. (Student and Fisher face each other. Kindleberger blows whistle and throws imaginary ball. Cheers of amazement from faculty.)

FISHER: Very well. I have decided to let you combine Theory and Economic History.

STUDENT: Hey, Ref, your Ph.D.ship, sir, I’m not responsible for History. Isn’t that a foul?

KINDLEBERGER: I didn’t see nuthin’.

FISHER: Consider the population explosion of the last 150 years. Discuss the relative roles of (a) men and (b) women in this affair.

ANDO [Albert Keinosuke] : Good shot. That’s two points for our side.

STUDENT: I don’t know that, your cap-and-gownship, sir, but I know the roles are neither reflexive, symmetric, or transitive.

KINDLEBERGER: (blows whistle) Foul. You used big words in a generals. That’s only permitted the faculty.

FISHER: I’ll give Albert my free throw.

ANDO: (taking the foul shot) Please discuss the role of the nearly decomposable take-off in the application of a priori oligopoly theory to the A&P case.

STUDENT: Hey! You guys are ganging up on me.

ANDO: Well, you outnumber us in class.

STUDENT: (driving hard for basket) It can be set up as a nine-dimensional matrix problem and the latent roots dispensed with. I think the take-off is fine if done along the turnpike, watching out for model changes in passing cars.

ANDO: Fantastic! (Faculty huddle.)

KINDLEBERGER: That was a good answer. We’ve decided to give you an Excellent minus for being a good scorer, but to ask you to leave the Institute for fouling out on personals.

KINDLEBERGER, ANDO, FISHER: Rah, team!

 

ACT VI

DOMAR [Evsey David]: Well, you have the degree wrapped up, and now want a job. Not bad. You got a good grade on the orals, and would have gotten a top grade if you hadn’t thought that Stilt Chamberlain played for the Celtics and failed to distinguish Slippery Sam Jones from Casey Jones. Your thesis was entirely satisfactory, on a good topic: How to Get to the Boston Garden from Madison Square Garden: An Application of the Turnpike Theorem. And you even did languages: basketball communication in the Ivy League, or basketball with a broad A. Now the job. What do you think? Big Ten? Ivy League? Small liberal arts? Girls’ rules like Wellesley or Vassar? Or maybe the real big time: Kentucky, Long Island University, St. Joseph’s in Brooklyn, Notre Dame. L.I.U. is to economics like M.I.T. was to economics.

STUDENT (perhaps [Max Franklin] Millikan?): I don’t now if I’m ready for the Big Time.

DOMAR: What about applying some of your basketballmetrics for the government? They need our graduates. Or for an oil company. Maybe you would like to take a ball and a whistle and go abroad, demonstrating technical assistance to underdeveloped countries. There are jobs like that.

STUDENT: No. I guess I’m fussy. What I’d like is just what all the gang would like, to stay here at Cambridge with Harvard and the Celtics, and to referee like you and [Robert Lyle] Bishop and Samuelson, always blowing off your whistle and shouting foul, going first class to conferences, and shouting foul, foul, foul at the students.

 

Source:  M.I.T. Archives. MIT Department of Economics records, Box 2, Folder “GEA 1961-67”.

Image Source:  Boston Celtics players Tom Heinsohn, Bill Russell, Bob Cousy, Bill Sharman and Frank Ramsey in 1960. “Twelve of the greatest Celtics players of all time”  from Boston.com website (March 18, 2018)

 

Categories
Courses Curriculum M.I.T.

M.I.T. Student evaluations of second term core macroeconomics. Solow, Foley. 1967-70

 

The economic theory core courses at M.I.T. during the four academic years 1966/67 through 1969/70 consisted of two terms of microeconomic theory (“Economic Analysis”, 14.121 and 14.122) and two terms of macroeconomic theory (“Theory of Income and Employment”, 14.451, and “Economic Growth and Fluctuations”, 14.452). The instructors for the course by academic year were: 

14.121 (Term 1) 14.122 (Term 2) 14.451 (Term 1) 14.452 (Term 2)
1966/67 Bishop Samuelson Eckaus

Solow

1967/68

Bishop Samuelson Domar Solow
1968/69 Bishop Samuelson Domar

Foley

1969/70

Bishop Samuelson Domar

Foley

A retrospective evaluation survey of these four courses was conducted (probably) sometime in late-1970. The original student responses wound up in Evsey Domar’s files and can be found today in his papers in the Economists’ Papers Archive at Duke University.

Previous posts provided the responses for Robert Bishop’s Economic Analysis (14.121), Paul Samuelson’s term of Economic Analysis (14.122) and Evsey Domar’s National Income and Employment (14.451).

In this post we’ll have a look at Robert M. Solow and Duncan Foley’s course, Economic Growth and Fluctuations (14.452) covering the topics:

Growth theory
Empirical Aspects of growth
Cycle theory
Empirical aspects of cycles
Monetary aspects of growth.

First I provide the information about the course found in the announcement in the MIT course catalogues that essentially remained unchanged for the years from which the evaluations were solicited. From the departmental course staffing reports in the M.I.T. archives, we discover that the course announcements for 1968/69 and 1969/1970 incorrectly listed Miguel Sidrauski and Solow as instructors of 14.45. Duncan Foley replaced Solow as instructor of this course in those two years. Here is an example where having the ex post staffing reports allows us to identify some inaccuracies found in the catalogues.

 Next I include the cover letter for the questionnaire sent out along with a tabulation of responses to the qualitative questions regarding the amount of economics presumed, the amount of mathematics and the balance of the course among the topics nominally covered.

 Finally, and very much worth reading!, the interested visitor will find transcriptions of the written student comments concerning the course. Of the four courses that together made up the economic theory core at M.I.T. in the late 1960’s, students were clearly the most satisfied with their Economic Growth and Fluctuations  course.

____________________

Announcement in the Course Catalogues

14.452T Economic Growth and Fluctuations (A)

[Solow]
Prereq.: 14.451
Year: G (2) 4-0-8

Application of theory of income and employment to analysis and measurement of changes in level of economic activity over time, and to study of inflation. Solow

MIT. Catalogue 1966-67: p. 292.

page 219:

“ ‘T’ at the end of a subject number indicates that (1) a change has been made in the content or units of the subject or (2) the number was previously assigned to a different subject.
‘(A)’ following the name of a subject indicates that it is an approved subject for a graduate degree…
‘G’ is a graduate subject.
The time distribution of the subject, showing in sequence the units allotted to: recitation and lecture; laboratory, design, or field work; and preparation. Each unit represents 15 hours of work. The total unit credit for a subject is obtained by adding together all the units shown. One unit of recitation or lecture credit, and two units of laboratory or design credit, are each equivalent to one semester hour.”

Catalogue 1967-68: Course number drops T, p. 307

Catalogue 1968-69: course instructor listed as Sidrauski [Note: Duncan Foley actually taught the course, see below], p. 312

Catalogue 1969-70:  course instructor listed as Solow [Note: Duncan Foley actually taught the course, see below],p. 294.

____________________

Course staffing and enrollments 14.452
Second terms of 1966/67 through 1969/70

1967: Term II. 3 hours/week. 39 regular students, 1 Listeners.

Professor R. M. Solow with Instructor M. Sidrauski

1968: Term II. 3 hours/week 52 regular students, 2 Listeners.

Professor R. M. Solow with Instructor M. Sidrauski

1969: Term II.  3½ hours/week, 49 regular students, 1 Listeners

Assistant Professor D. K. Foley with Michael Rothschild

1970: Term II. 3 Hours/week. 43 regular students, 0 Listeners.

Associate Professor D. K. Foley with Instructor S. Kennedy (grader)

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

____________________

THEORY QUESTIONNAIRE

There are two problems that the theory sequence must continually face if it is going to be as useful as possible. The first of these is adjusting to the changing background of the incoming students. The second is adjusting to the changing needs of students who will use the theory course as background for other courses and research. This questionnaire is an attempt to gather information of the current state of the theory sequence relative to these two questions. The enclosed forms contain an outline of each of the theory courses and asks three questions.

These pertain to each heading in the course outline:

Does the course assume too much or too little economics background in this area?
Does the course use too much or too little mathematics in this area?
Given the overall constraint of time, is this area gone into too deeply or not deeply enough?

For each of the questions there is room to check too much or too little, no check at all to be given if the course is about right. Please put the year in which you took the theory courses at the top of each page. There is also room in each area for more detailed comment. Use this space to be specific on the changes in the given areas which you feel would be improvements—particularly in answer to question 3. Use the space at the bottom of each page to comment on topics that are not on the list, but should appear in the course; or to make other comments we haven’t thought to ask for.

Please return to 52-380 (Miss Pope) before Tuesday, October 21.

 

[Summary for Robert Solow from 10 student responses:
of which 2 from 1966-67; 8 from 1967-68]

Ec 452:

Economic background Math

Coverage

Growth theory

Too little: 1

Too much: 0

Too little: 0

Too much: 0

Too deep: 1

Not deep enough: 1

Empirical Aspects of growth

Too little: 1

Too much: 0

Too little: 0

Too much: 0

Too deep: 0

Not deep enough: 0

Cycle theory

Too little: 1

Too much: 0

Too little: 0

Too much: 0

Too deep: 0

Not deep enough: 0

Empirical aspects of cycles

Too little: 0

Too much: 0

Too little: 0

Too much: 0

Too deep: 0

Not deep enough: 0

Monetary aspects of growth

Too little: 0

Too much: 0

Too little: 0

Too much: 0

Too deep: 0

Not deep enough: 2

From the student comments on Solow’s course
Each bullet point from a different student

YEAR TAKEN: 1966-67

  • Cycle theory: Should be dropped.
    Monetary aspects of growth: Needs to be intensified.

 

YEAR TAKEN: 1967-68

  • An excellent course.
  • This course is very adequate—except more could be done perhaps by going faster with no loss of comprehension.
  • Well-done course.
  • As these courses were taught two years ago there was too little integration of the two terms. Partly this reflects a real gap in macro theory itself; I would like to see an integration of the Patinkin-type of analysis into growth theory.

 

[Summary for Duncan Foley from 12 student responses:
of which 10 from 1968-69; 2 from 1969-70]

Ec 452:

Economic background Math

Coverage

Growth theory

Too little: 0

Too much: 0

Too little: 0

Too much: 1

Too deep: 3

Not deep enough: 1

Empirical Aspects of growth

Too little: 0

Too much: 0

Too little: 0

Too much: 0

Too deep: 0

Not deep enough: 4

Cycle theory

Too little: 0

Too much: 0

Too little: 0

Too much: 0

Too deep: 0

Not deep enough: 4

Empirical aspects of cycles

Too little: 0

Too much: 0

Too little: 0

Too much: 0

Too deep: 0

Not deep enough: 5

Monetary aspects of growth

Too little: 0

Too much: 1

Too little: 0

Too much: 2

Too deep: 1

Not deep enough: 3

 

From the student comments on Foley’s course
Each bullet point from a different student

YEAR TAKEN: 1968-69

  • Cycle theory and Empirical aspects of cycles: little done but that’s probably a good think.
  • 452 is, by and large, a very good course
    Growth theory: very good
    Empirical aspects of growth:  good
    Cycle theory: We covered difference eq. cycle models in one day which is what they deserve. Some other approach might be worthwhile.
    Empirical aspects of cycles: Not covered at all
    Monetary aspects of growth: very good
  • Growth theory: course devoted almost solely to this topic.
    Difference equations ought to be specifically covered, with some applications [noted for both 14.451 “multiplier and accelerator” topic and 14.452 “Cycle theory”.
  • General comment: Heuristic “proofs” and extensive examples to tie in reality would have been most useful.
    The course was not as satisfying as it undoubtedly could have been. This was an obvious case of the teacher trying too hard in a new course. Too much of the Socratic method was employed.
  • Foley let students ask irrelevant questions.
  • Empirical aspects of growth: data was almost nonexistent!
    Cycle theory: difference equations in 2 days! Monetary aspects of growth: This was covered but a little more would have suited my personal taste only.
  • In general 452 was good; 451 seemed weak.

 

YEAR TAKEN: 1969-70

  • I do not like the Socratic method, especially when applied to solving differential equations.
    Monetary aspects of growth: good.

Source:  Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Economists’ Papers Archive. Evsey D. Domar Papers.Box 16, Folder “Student Evaluations (1 of 2)”.

Image Sources: Duncan Foley  from his homepage. Robert Solow from the website MIT Museum.

 

 

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

M.I.T. Advanced Economic Theory. Uncertainty and Capital Theory. Readings and Exam. Solow, 1965

 

Topics in advanced economic theory in 1965 was taught at M.I.T. by Robert Solow. The topics discussed were uncertainty and capital theory. This post provides information that was found stored in three different folders in Robert Solow’s papers at the Economists’ Papers Archive at Duke University. Together in one place we now have the reading lists for the topics, the final exam questions and even the class list. For the little it is worth knowing, Robert Hall of Stanford and William Nordhaus of Yale were awarded A’s in the course. I certainly hope that their scientific reputations will not be affected by that revelation.

____________________

Spring 1965

14.192 Advanced Economic Theory
I. Economics of Uncertainty

K. Arrow, “Alternative Approaches…,” Econometrica, October 1951.
D. Bernoulli, “Exposition of a New Theory…,” Econometrica, January 1954.
M. Friedman and L. J. Savage, “Utility Analysis…,” JPE, August, 1948, also in Readings in Price Theory.
H. Markowitz, “The Utility of Wealth,” JPE, April, 1952.
I. Herstein and J. Milnor, “An Axiomatic Approach…,” Econometrica, April, 1953.
J. Pratt, “Risk Aversion…,” Econometrica, January-April 1964.
H. Latané, “Criteria for Choice Among Risky Ventures,” JPE, April, 1959.
J. Tobin, “Liquidity Preference…,” Rev. of Econ. Stud., February, 1958.
K. Arrow, “The Role of Securities…,” Rev. of Econ. Stud., April, 1964.
J. Hirschleifer, “Efficient Allocation…,” AER, May, 1964, 77-96 (including relevant discussion)
K. Arrow, “Uncertainty and the Economics of Medical Care,” AER, December, 1963.

Source:  Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Economists’ Papers Archives. Robert M. Solow papers, Box 68, Folder “Reading Lists”.

____________________

Spring 1965

14.192 Advanced Economic Theory
Reading List on Capital Theory

I. Fisher: Theory of Interest, passim.
K. Wicksell: Lectures on Political Economy, Vol. I, Part II and Appendix on Akerman.
O. Lange: “the Place of Interest…”, Rev. of Econ. Studies, 1935-1936.
L. Metzler: “Rate of Interest and…”, JPE 1950, “Corrections”, JPE 1951.
P. Samuelson: “Some Aspects of the Pure Theory…”, QJE 1937
___________: “Rate of Interest under Ideal Conditions”, QJE 1939.
T. Koopmans: Three Essays on the State of Economics, pp. 105-126.
R. Radner: Notes on the Theory of Economic Planning.
E. Malinvaud: “The Analogy between…”, Rev. of Econ. Studies, 1961.
R. Solow: “Substitution and Fixed Proportions…”, Rev. of Econ. Studies, June 1962
________:  Capital Theory and the Rate of Return, Chapters 1, 2.
E. Phelps: “Substitution, Fixed Proportions,….”, International Economic Review, September 1963.
K. Arrow: “…Learning by Doing”, Rev. of Econ. Studies, June 1962.
R. Findlay: “The Robinsonian Model…”, Economica, February 1963 and “Comments” by Robinson and Findlay, Economica, November 1963.

Source:  Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Economists’ Papers Archives. Robert M. Solow papers, Box 67, Folder “14.192 Capital Theory”.

____________________

Final Examination
14.192 Advanced Economic Theory
Spring 1965

  1. Suppose Caius, a Petersburg merchant, has purchased commodities in Amsterdam which he could sell for 10,000 rubles if he had them in Petersburg. He therefore orders them to be shipped by sea, but is in doubt whether to insure them. He is well aware that at this time of year, of 100 ships which sail from Amsterdam to Petersburg, 5 are usually lost. How much wealth must Caius possess apart from the goods under consideration in order that it be sensible for him to abstain from insuring the shipment at a price of 800 rubles? And what fortune should be possessed by the man who offers to provide this insurance in order for him to be rational in doing so? Work out for an arbitrary utility function and specialize to the logarithmic case.
  2. In a perfectly competitive economy, it requires c (X) many years of labor, and nothing else, to build a machine which requires X men to operate it and has a capacity of one unit of output a year. The wage in terms of output is w and is expected to be constant forever. The market rate of interest is r, also constant. For given w, find the competitive equilibrium values of x and r. How does x change with w?
  3. By investing one unit of labor now (at real wage w) you can start a yoghurt-process. T units of time later, by investing one more unit of labor you can collect f (T) units yoghurt and start another identical yoghurt-process. There is a competitive capital market. You intend this yoghurt business to go on forever at the scale of one process. Discuss the determination of the best T, and implications for r and w.
  4. An investor with wealth W must divide it between holding cash, M, and holding one-year bonds in value B, paying interest at rate r. The return of principal is sure but the interest rate is random. Interest income is subject to a proportional tax at rate t. If the investor is a Bernoullian expected-utility maximizer and a risk-averter, how will his holding of bonds respond to a change in the tax rate? Explain the economics of your answer.

Source:  Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Economists’ Papers Archives. Robert M. Solow papers, Box 68, Folder “Examinations and Quizzes”.

____________________

From the Final Grade Sheet

Second Term 1964-65
Subject number: 14.192
Subject name: Economics Seminar
Staff member in charge: [signed] R. M. Solow

Graduate students of economics who were awarded grades
[There were 5 A’s and 7 B’s]:

Bing, Peter C.
Bischoff, Charles W.
Blackburn, Anthony J.
Carter, D. Nicholas G.
Hall, Robert E.
Havens, John J. Jr.
Kamiya, Denzo [Emeritus Professor,Keio Univ.]
Kheir El Dine, H. Miss
Mazur, Michael P.
Moskowitz, Warren E.
Nordhaus, William D.
Schulson, Louis J.

Source:  Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Economists’ Papers Archives. Robert M. Solow papers, Box 68, Folder “Examinations and Quizzes”.

____________________

(Preliminary) Class List

14.192 ADVANCED ECONOMIC THEORY
W 1:00-3:00
Professor Robert M. Solow

Bing, Peter C.
Bischoff, Charles W.
Blackburn, Anthony J.
Carter, D. Nicholas G.
Chacholiades, Miltiades  LISTENER
DeMenil, George F. DROPPED APRIL 13, 1965
Hall, Robert E.
Havens, John J. Jr.
Kamiya, Denzo
Kheir El Dine, H.
Mazur, Michael P.
Moskowitz, Warren E.
Schulson, Louis J.
Suva, Felipe
Wales, Terrence J. LISTENER
Cohen, Malcolm S. LISTENER
Stiglitz, Joseph
La Malfa, Giorgio LISTENER

Note:  William Nordhaus who received a grade in the course was not included in this preliminary class list. Felipe Suva and Joseph Stiglitz appear on this list but were not included in the gradesheet.

Source:  Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Economists’ Papers Archives. Robert M. Solow papers, Box 68, Folder “Reading Lists”.

Image Source:  Robert Merton Solow at the M.I.T. Museum website.

Categories
Carnegie Institute of Technology Columbia Curriculum M.I.T. Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania. Memos from Ando and Dhrymes to the curriculum committee, 1965

 

The significance for the history of economics of the following three memos is that they provide an illustration of the diffusion (infiltration?) of the M.I.T. canon to other departments. Albert Ando taught a few years at M.I.T. before coming to Penn and Phoebus Dhrymes (M.I.T., Ph.D., 1961) wrote his dissertation under Kuh and Solow.  The memos were sent to the curriculum committee of the department of economics at the University of Pennsylvania in January 1965 (at least the Ando memo is dated January 14, 1965 and it explicitly refers to the Phoebus memo and their recommendations to the Mathematics Committee that are undated).

Obituaries for both Ando and Dhrymes have been added to this post and precede the three memos.

Economics in the Rear-view Mirror thanks Juan C. A. Acosta who found these memos in the Lawrence Klein Papers at the Duke University Economists’ Papers Project and has graciously shared them for transcription here. 

Addition to post: At Banca d’Italia, N. 7 – Albert Ando: a bibliography of his writings.

_______________________________

Albert Keinosuke Ando
1929-2002
Obituary

Dr. Albert Ando, professor of economics, SAS and professor of finance, Wharton, died on September 19 [2002] at the age of 72.

Dr. Ando was born in Tokyo, Japan in 1929 and came to the United States after World War II. He received his B.S. in economics from the University of Seattle in 1951, his M.A. in economics from St. Louis University in 1953, and an M.S. in economics in 1956 and a Ph.D. in mathematical economics in 1959 from Carnegie Institute of Technology (now Carnegie Mellon University). Dr. Ando came to Penn in 1963 as an associate professor of economics and finance and became professor of economics and finance in 1967. He held this position until his death.

Dr. Lawrence Klein, Nobel laureate in economics and professor emeritus of economics wrote the following about his colleague.

After World War II many Japanese scholars visited the United States for general education and to modernize their training in some key subjects. Albert Ando, Professor of Economics and Finance, who died of Leukemia last week was an early arrival in the 1940s. He was educated at Seattle and St. Louis Universities and often expressed gratitude at the career start provided by his Jesuit teachers in an adopted country.

He completed the doctoral program in mathematical economics at the Carnegie Institute of Technology, where he was strongly influenced by Herbert Simon with whom he collaborated in research papers on aggregation and causation in economic systems. He also worked closely with another (Nobel Laureate to be) Franco Modigliani on the life cycle analysis of saving, spending, and income.

Dr. Ando was on the faculties of the Carnegie and of the Massachusetts Institutes of Technology before moving to the University of Pennsylvania, where he remained since 1963. He had visiting appointments at universities in Louvain, Bonn, and Stockholm. He consulted with the International Monetary Fund, the Federal Reserve Board, The Bank of Italy, and the Economic Planning Agency of Japan. He held many positions as an editor of scholarly journals and wrote numerous articles and books.

The main contributions of Professor Ando were in econometrics (theory and applications), monetary analysis, demographic aspects of household economic behavior, economic growth, and economic stabilization. His work on the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, University of Pennsylvania, and Social Science Research Council (MPS) model was of great benefit for the research department of the Federal Reserve Board, and his more recent work on econometrics for the Bank of Italy had been very fruitful.

He served as chairman of the graduate group in the economics department, 1986-1989, and developed excellent working relationships with many advanced students. He set very high standards, and those he worked with as thesis supervisor benefited greatly. He was extremely loyal and dedicated to their work, maintaining close connection with them after they departed from the University.

During his long and fruitful career, he earned many honors–as Fellow of the Econometric Society, as a Ford Foundation Faculty Research Fellow; as a Guggenheim Fellow, and a Japan Foundation Fellow. He was given the Alexander von Humboldt Award for Senior American Scientists.

Albert Ando is survived by his wife of 35 years, Faith H. Ando, two professorial sons, Matthew and Clifford, and a daughter, Alison, who has just been admitted to the New York Bar. His mother, sister, and brother, live in Japan.

–Lawrence Klein, Professor Emeritus of Economics

Source: University of Pennsylvania. Almanac. Vol. 49, No. 6, October 1, 2002.

_______________________________

Phoebus James Dhrymes
(1932-2016)

Phoebus J. Dhrymes (1932-2016), the Edwin W. Rickert Professor Emeritus of Economics, was a Cypriot American econometrician who made substantial methodological contributions to econometric theory.  Born in the Republic of Cyprus in 1932, Phoebus Dhrymes arrived in the United States in 1951, settling with relatives in New York City. After a few months, he volunteered to be drafted into the US Army for a two-year tour of duty; afterwards he attended the University of Texas at Austin on the GI Bill. In 1961 he earned his Ph.D. from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology under the supervision of Edwin Kuh and Robert Solow (Nobel Laureate 1987).  After a year-long post-doctoral fellowship at Stanford, he began his professorial career at Harvard, then moved to the University of Pennsylvania, and then UCLA.  In1973 he joined the Department of Economics at Columbia University; he was named the Edwin W. Rickert Professor of Economics in 2003 and retired in 2013.

Econometrics refers to that aspect of the economist’s work concerned with quantifying and testing economic trends. Phoebus Dhrymes‘early research focused on problems of production and investment, but he soon turned to more methodological work and produced important results on time series and on simultaneous equations.  Throughout his career, Phoebus Dhrymes placed much emphasis on the dissemination of scientific knowledge. In the early 1970s he helped found the Journal of Econometrics, which has become the leading journal in this field.  He was also on the advisory board of the Econometric Theory, and was managing editor and editor of the International Economic Review.He was a fellow of the Econometric Society and the American Statistical Association.Dr. Dhrymes was also one of the founders of the University of Cyprus, from which he was later awarded an honorary degree.

He wrote a series of influential textbooks including Distributed Lags:  Problems of Estimation and Formulation. This work was translated into Russian and published by the Academy of Sciences of the Soviet Union, and in the 1970s Dr. Dhrymes was invited to visit the (now former) Soviet Union, specifically Moscow and Novosibirsk. At the time such visits were unusual events for westerners, requiring rarely-issued visas and security clearances, particularly for centers of research such as Novosibirsk.

In a 1999 interview he characterized his books as “filters that distill and synthesize the wisdom of many contributors to the subject.   On this score, I was influenced in my writing by the way I learn when studying by myself.”  (Econometric Theory, 18, 2002)

Dr. Dhrymes is survived by his daughter, Alexis, and his sons, Phoebus and Philip. In his personal life, he was regarded as a generous, kind and gentle man, always there for his family. He came from humble beginnings, and garnered great respect from his family and friends for his achievements. He spoke often of how much he enjoyed teaching. He was always available to his students.He encouraged individualized thinking and understanding of processes rather than rote memorization in learning. He had a warm and affable demeanor, recalled fondly by former students and family members. He will be sadly missed.

Source: Obituary for Phoebus J. Dhrymes at the Columbia University Department of Economics Website.

_______________________________

Memorandum

To: Herbert Levine, Chairman, Curriculum Committee
From: Albert Ando
Subject: Offerings and Requirements in Macroeconomics, Monetary Theory, and Related areas in General Economics Ph.D. Program

  1. Macroeconomics

Enclosed herein is a copy of the outline and references of Economics 621 [The outline and references will be posted later] as I am offering it this fall. It is fairly similar to [the] one year course in macroeconomics which is required of all Ph.D. students at MIT. I am sure that opinions would vary on details, but it is my view that this represents more or less the topics and literature that all Ph.D. students in economics should be familiar with. Ideally, I think there should be another major topic at the end of the outline dealing with current problems and policies.

It is fairly clear that this outline could not be covered in one term, particularly under our present system in which there are only 13 to 14 weeks of classes for a term. As a matter of fact, this fall, with a great deal of rushing throughout the term, I will be able to finish the static part of the outline by the end of the fall term, but certainly no further.

This suggests that the required macroeconomics for Ph.D. students should be two term sequence of courses, the first term dealing essentially with the Keynesian static analysis, and the second term with dynamics, i.e., business cycles and growth models.

  1. Monetary Economics

I have just discovered that Economics 622 is taught without any prerequisite, and that there will be some students in 622 who have not had any macroeconomic theory this spring. I am somewhat stunned, and do not see how I will be able to teach a satisfactory course under the circumstances. This situation is indicated by the fact that 622 is required not only of Ph.D. students in economics but also of master’s candidates, and therefore it is apparently impossible to exclude the students from 622 who have not had 621. An obvious temporary solution is to make those students who have not had 621 wait until next year to take 622. In my view, elements of monetary problems should be included in the first term of the required macroeconomics course, and courses in monetary theory should be made elective. The course in monetary theory should then be taught assuming that students have had adequate preparation in macroeconomics and microeconomics, particularly the theory of general equilibrium, at the level where we can discuss the research and developments in the past dozen years or so, bringing students up to a point where they can draw a thesis topic from their work in the course. There is a room for an argument that there should be another course in addition to the advanced theory course, which deals with more traditional money and banking material. As a matter of fact, I offered two courses in monetary economics at MIT for several years, one dealing with traditional money and banking material taking the one term each of macro and micro economics as prerequisites, and another highly theoretical and advanced course taking two terms each of macro [and] micro economics as prerequisites. It seems to me, however, that Economics 639, Monetary Problems and Policies, should serve as the good traditional money and banking course, so that only one additional course seems to be needed.

  1. Microeconomics and Mathematics

After some discussion with Dhrymes, it is fairly clear that microeconomics should also be taught as a two term sequence. A possible division between two terms would be to deal with partial equilibrium analysis of consumers and firms during the first term, and with the general equilibrium analysis and welfare economics in the second term.

During this fall term, Dhrymes and I found it necessary to conduct a few special remedial sessions in mathematics so that some rudimentary notions of calculus and linear transformation will be available in the discussions in theory courses. The idea, of course, is to arrange so that all students are equipped with minimum of mathematics by the beginning of the second term. If the recommendation of the committee on mathematics is adopted, so that students will learn elementary calculus and the matrices and linear transformation, including rudiments of linear differences and differential equations at the level suggested by the committee it is possible to synchronize it with theory courses so that theory courses will be using only those mathematics students are learning in mathematics remedial courses. For instance, the first term of macro theory would not require too much mathematics except the notion of the systems of equations and their solutions, and the first term of micro theory not much more than the condition of extremum in a fairly informal manner. In the second term, on the other hand, theory courses will require conditions of stability in the general equilibrium analysis, and the difference and differential equations in dynamic models in macroeconomics.

  1. Overall First year program and Second year fields of specialization.

In addition to micro and macro theories and mathematics required for these theory courses, students should be asked to learn minimum of statistics and econometrics. The level of statistics and econometrics should be maintained at the level of text books such as Frazer, Brunk, or Mood plus Johnston.

The implication of the above statement is that the course schedule for typical first year Ph.D. students should look as follows:

First term:

Microeconomics I (Partial equilibrium analysis)
Macroeconomics I (Static Keynesian analysis, including some monetary considerations).
Mathematics I (Elementary calculus)*
Mathematics II (Elementary Linear Algebra)*
Economic History (For those with Adequate mathematical training)

*For the suggested content of mathematics courses, see recommendations of Mathematics Committee.

Second Term:

Microeconomics II (General equilibrium analysis and welfare economics).
Macroeconomics II (Dynamics, business cycles and growth)
Econometrics (6 hour course)

This schedule, of course, would be subject to variations depending on the background and preparations of students. For instance, students who already have sufficient mathematical training might be encouraged to take a course in economic history and a course in somewhat more advanced mathematics, such as mathematical theory of probability or a course in topology in the first term in place of Mathematics I and II.

_______________________________

Lists of Topics for Mathematics for Economists
[Recommendations of Ando and Dhrymes submitted to the Mathematics Committee]

(Mr. Balinski is to suggest some alternative text books)

  1. Calculus
    1. Sets and Functions.
      1. Definitions
      2. Operations on Sets and Subsets.
      3. Relations, Functions.
        K.M.S.T. Chapter 2, Sections 1 through 6, possibly Sections 10 through 13.
    2. Functions, Limits, and Continuity.
    3. Differentiation and Integration of Functions of one variable.
      1. Concepts and Mechanics.
      2. Infinite series and Taylor’s Theories.
      3. Extremum Problems.
    4. Differentiation and Integration of Functions of many variables.
      1. Concepts and mechanics.
      2. Extremum problems, nonconstrained and constrained.
      3. Implicit Function Theorem.
        Any elementary text book in Calculus (e.g. Thomas; Sherwood and Taylor), Supplemented by some sections of a slightly more advanced text on Implicit Function Theorem and La Grange multipliers.
  2. Linear Algebra and others.
    1. Vector Spaces and Matrices.
      1. Vector Spaces and Matrices, Definitions, and Motivations.
        Perlis, Chapters 1 and 2.
      2. Linear Transformations.
        K.M.S.T., Chapter 4, Sections 7 through 12.
      3. Equivalence, Rank, and Inverse.
        Perlis, Chapter 3.
        Perlis, Chapter 4.
      4. Quadratic Forms, Positive Definite and semi-definite Matrices.
        Perlis, Chapter 5, Sections 1, 2, and 5
      5. Characteristic Vectors and Roots.
        Perlis, Chapter 8, Sections 1 and w[?], Chapter 9, Sections 1, 2, 5, and 6.
      6. Difference and Differential Equations; Linear with Constant Coefficients.
        Goldberg, Chapters 1, w, e, and Chapter 4, Sections 1 and 5; Perlis, Chapter 7, Section 10. Some reference to two dimensional phase diagram analysis of non-linear differential equations with 2 variables. Lotke?
      7. Convex Sets.
        K.M.S.T., Chapter 5.

_______________________________

MEMORANDUM
January 14, 1965

To: Curriculum Committee
From: Phoebus J. Dhrymes
Subject: Mathematics, Microeconomics, Statistics and Econometrics in the Economics Graduate Training Program

  1. Mathematics

It has become quite apparent to me during the course of the last term that our students are woefully equipped to handle instruction involving even very modest and elementary mathematics.

I think it is quite generally accepted that a student specializing in Theory, Econometrics and to a lesser extent International Trade and Industrial Organization would find it increasingly difficult to operate as a professional economist, and indeed seriously handicapped in satisfactorily carrying on a graduate study progress, without adequate mathematical training. With this in mind Albert Ando and I have prepared a tentative list of topics that graduate students ought be minimally familiar with and which has been presented to the Mathematics Committee.

This could form a remedial (and a bit beyond) course to extend over a year and to be taken (by requirement or suggestion) by students intending to specialize in the fields mentioned above during their first year of residence.

  1. Microeconomics

It has been my experience in teaching Econ. 620 that one semester is a rather brief period for covering the range of microeconomic theory a graduate student in Pennsylvania ought to be exposed to. As it is the case at both Harvard and MIT, I would propose that the course Econ. 620 be extended to a year course. Roughly speaking, the topics to be covered might be:

  1. Theory of Consumer Behavior
    1. the Hicksian version
    2. the von Neumann-Morgenstern version, including the Friedman-Savage paper
  2. Demand functions, elasticities, etc.
  3. Theory of the firm; output and price determination
    1. Production functions
    2. Cost functions and their relations to i.
    3. Revenue and profit functions and the profit maximizing hypothesis
    4. The perfectly competitive firm and industry, and their equilibrium; comparative statics; supply functions
    5. The monopolistic firm
    6. Monopolistic competition
    7. Duopoly and oligopoly
  4. Factor employment equilibrium
    1. Factor demand functions
    2. Factor employment equilibrium under various market institutional arrangements
    3. Some income distribution theory
    4. Factor supply.
  5. General Equilibrium Analysis; Input-Output models
  6. Welfare Economics (Samuelson; Graaf)
  7. Capital Theory (Fisher, Wicksell, recent contributions)
  8. (Marginally) Some revealed preference theory; or neoclassical growth models; or alternative theories of the firm (e.g., Cyert and Marsh)

It would be desirable if students were sufficiently well-equipped mathematically to handle these topics at some level intermediate between Friedman’s Price Theory Text and Henderson and Quandt; however, since this is not the case at present some other alternative must be found, such as in the manner in which the propose mathematics course is taught, and the order in which topics above are covered. The split of the subjects could be a) through c) or d) for the first semester and the remainder for the second semester. Clearly, neither the topics proposed nor the split represent my immutable opinion and there is considerable room for discussion.

  1. Statistics

At present the statistical training of our students suffers from their inadequate mathematical preparations.

It is my opinion that minimally we should require of our students that they be familiar with the elementary notions of statistical inference, estimation, testing of hypotheses and regression analysis at the level of, say, Hoel, or Mood and Graybill, or any other similar text, (a semester course). For students intending to specialize in Econometrics or other heavily quantitative fields, then it should be highly desirable that a year course be available, say at the level of Mood and Graybill, Graybill, or Fraser, Hogg and Craig, Brunk, etc., with suitable supplementary material. Since, we do have access to a statistics department it might be desirable for our students to take a suitable course there.

Again, due to the problems posed by the mathematics deficiency of incoming students, some accommodation must be reached on this score as well.

  1. Econometrics

Econometrics should not be a required subject; rather the requirement—minimal requisite—should be confined to the one semester course indicated under III. It would be desirable to offer a year course to be taken after the statistics sequence and which would cover at the level of, say, Klein, Goldberger, or my readings showing applications and problems connected thereto.

Topics, could start by reviewing the general linear model, Aitken estimators and similar related topics; simultaneous equation and identification problems, k-class estimators, 3SLS, maximum likelihood estimation, full and limited information, Monte Carlo methods.

Also selected topics from Multivariate Analysis; specification analysis, error in variable problems; elements of stochastic processes theory and spectral and cross spectra analysis.

It might be desirable to teach these subjects in the order cited above, although it would appear preferable to have multivariate analysis precede the review of the general linear model.

  1. General Comments:

I generally agree with Albert Ando’s memorandum on proposed curriculum revision in so far as they pertain to Mathematics requirements, Macro-economics and Monetary Theory.

I think that at present we require our students to take too many courses. I would favor only the following requirements; the basic Micro and Macro year courses. At least a semester of statistics, as indicated under III, and one semester in either economic history or history of economic thought—although I do not feel too strongly on the latter. I presume, in all of this that students in our program are only those ultimately aiming at specialization in Theory, Econometrics, International Trade, Industrial Organization, and possibly Comparative Systems, or Soviet Economics. It is my understanding that our curriculum will not cover those concentrating in Labor Relations, Regional Science or Economic History.

Thus, through their first year our students would be taking more or less required courses, with the second year essentially left open for their special fields of concentration.

Thus, the course program of a typical first year student will look more or less as shown in Albert Ando’s memorandum, p. 4, although I would be somewhat uneasy about requiring 6 hours of mathematics in the first term and 6 hours of statistics (econometrics) in the second term of the first year. Nonetheless I do not object strongly to this, and indeed in this past term many of the students taking 620 and 621 had in effect taken a six-hour course in Mathematics, 611 as taught by Dorothy Brady and approximately 3 hours as taught by Albert Ando and myself.

Quite clearly the above are merely proposals intended to serve as a basis for discussion an ultimately for guidance of entering students in planning their program of study rather than rigid requirements.

 

Source: Duke University, David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive, Lawrence Klein Papers, Box 19, Folder “Curriculum”.

Images: Left, Albert Ando; Right, Phoebus Dhrymes. From the respective obituaries above.

Categories
Economics Programs Fields M.I.T.

M.I.T. Graduate Economics Program Brochure, 1961

 

 

 

Robert Solow served as the graduate registration officer of the Department of Economics and Social Science at M.I.T. perhaps even as late as when the graduate program brochure (transcribed below) was printed in 1961. Since Solow went down to Washington to serve as a senior staff economist on the Council of Economic Advisers in 1961, it seems likely that the brochure would have been drafted sometime before John F. Kennedy’s inauguration. This brochure is striking in many ways, e.g. its 100% informational content, presumably reflecting significant authorship/editor responsibilities of Robert Solow.

Five cherry-picked quotes from the brochure I found particularly sweet:

“The M.I.T. program does not concentrate on mathematical economics”
[It’s not what you say, it’s what they hear.]

“The department welcomes applications from qualified women”
[Apparently in the DNA of the department since World War II nearly emptied the pool of qualified male applicants.]

“The purpose of the minor program is to broaden the interests or capacities of the student in other areas than those of his major intellectual objective. While some latitude is allowed in particular cases, the spirit of this purpose is always held in view.”
[As opposed to the commandment “Thou shalt stay in thy lane”.]

“Students who are prepared for graduate work in economics are almost never deficient in humanities. Similarly, deficiencies in science are infrequent; but candidates are frequently admitted without preparation in calculus.”
[You go to war with the army you have.]

“In judging promise, special weight is naturally given to letters of recommendation from economists known to members of the department. The difficulty of evaluating records in foreign institutions and of judging foreign references constitutes a serious but no impassable barrier for foreign applicants.”
[Signal extraction problem vs. the problem of old boy networks]

Incidentally, neither “microeconomics” nor “macroeconomics” appear in the document at all. The preferred terms seen here in the brochure are “price and allocation theory” and “income analysis”.

____________________________________

The Graduate Program in Economics

School of Humanities and Social Science
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
[1961]

This brochure has been prepared especially for students who may enter the graduate program in economics at M.I.T. Its purpose is to answer a number of questions which have been recurrently raised about the program and to add to the information which is given in the M.I.T. catalogue.

 

Highlights of the M.I.T. Graduate Program in Economics

  1. The program is almost entirely for doctoral candidates. The master’s degree at M.I.T. is given in either economics and engineering or economics and science; it requires the equivalent of the M.I.T. undergraduate content in engineering or science.
  2. The M.I.T. program does not concentrate on mathematical economics. All students are required to have and use a minimum of mathematics. Students who enter without calculus may make up their deficiency in the first term with a one-semester subject (Mathematics for Economists—14.101), given in our own department. Most of the work in most fields, however, is nonmathematical.
  3. The program is limited in size. Approximately twenty-five students are admitted in any year; sixty or so students are in residence at one time. The department has more than thirty faculty members, twenty of whom have a major responsibility in the graduate program.
  4. The department welcomes applications from qualified women.
  5. All applicants are urged to take the Graduate Record Examination no later than during 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 (Write to the Graduate Record Examinations, educational Testing service, 20 Nassau Street, Princeton, New Jersey, for information on these examinations. Students in western states should write to 4640 Hollywood Boulevard, Los Angeles 27, California.)
  6. Visits to the M.I.T. Campus are helpful both to the candidate and to the departmental admissions committee. Appointments are desirable but are not generally essential, since members of the committee are likely to be available.
  7. The department would like each applicant to submit a statement (one or two pages) explaining his interest in economics. An informal questionnaire is provided for general guidance.
  8. Admission in February is granted only on an exceptional basis, because many subjects given in the spring are continuations of work given in the fall. In any event, fellowship assistance is given only as a consequence of the annual March competition, for students entering in the following September.
  9. Fellowships and scholarships in amounts up to $3250 are available for entering graduate students.
  10. Winners of outside fellowships are welcome to use them at M.I.T. It is entirely appropriate to apply for a Woodrow Wilson, G.E., A.A.U.W., National Science Foundation, or other outside fellowship at the same time that one applies to M.I.T. As a rule, M.I.T. learns of the outside award prior to making its own announcements.
  11. Liberal second-year fellowships are available both to students entering with fellowships and to those who enter without financial assistance. Awards are made on the basis of first-year performance.
  12. Teaching assistantships are ordinarily available for third-year students only, although some second-year students may do a small amount of teaching. Assistantships are not available to entering students unless they have had prior graduate study and teaching experience elsewhere.
  13. I.T. these are written in residence. Following an Institute rule, theses are prepared in residence except where the special requirements of the subject, such as field work, dictate otherwise. All theses are written in residence.
  14. For further information, write the Graduate Registration Office of the Department of Economic and Social Science, Professor Robert M. Solow.

 

S.M. in Economics and Engineering or Economics and Science

The department offers a Master of Science degree only in the combined fields of economics and engineering or economics and science. This degree is available primarily to students whose undergraduate work was in either engineering or science. Its purpose is to enable scientists and engineers, and in particular graduates of the undergraduate Courses in Economics and Engineering or Science (Course XIV) at M.I.T., to carry their economics training to the graduate level in order to equip them more fully for work in industry or government.

 

Ph.D. Degree

Ph.D. degrees are awarded in economics (including industrial relations) and in political science. In addition, candidates occasionally work for a doctorate in two or more fields—for example, economics and mathematics, economics and operations research, or economics and regional planning. These candidates are examined by special committees, on which members of the Department of Economics and Social Science serve jointly with members of the other departments concerned. Most of the graduate work in the department is directed towards the doctor’s degree. This pamphlet deals exclusively with the Ph.D. in economics; a separate bulletin describing graduate work in political science is available on request.

There are four departmental requirements for the Ph.D. degree: the passing of a general examination in a number of approved fields within the area of economics and social science; the satisfactory completion of a “minor” program in another department; demonstration of ability to read two foreign languages of significance in economics; and preparation and defense of a dissertation.

 

Major Program and General Examinations

Work taken in the Department of Economics and Social Science for the doctorate in economics is divided—broadly speaking—into two separate options: economics and industrial relations. But there is considerable overlap between the two.

All students in both options are examined five fields. Among the fields presently available are the following: economic theory, advanced economic theory, monetary and fiscal economics, industrial organization, economic development, international economics, economics of innovation, labor economics and labor relations, personnel administration, human relations in industry, statistical theory and method, and economic history. Each student selects one field as having primary importance for this professional career; ordinarily this is the field in which he writes his dissertation, though exceptions may be made. The remaining four fields are designated secondary fields. One of the five fields must be economic theory.

Students are also required to have at least a minimum knowledge of statistics and economic history. This minimum is presently interpreted to mean one semester of work in each at the graduate level. Candidates who present statistics or economic history as a primary or secondary field normally take two or three semester subjects in the field and automatically satisfy the requirements in that area.

Students may qualify in one of the secondary fields through course work only, provided that they receive a mark of B or better in two subjects. Students are examined in writing in the remaining four fields during an eight-day period (Monday, Wednesday, Friday, and Monday). The theory examination is four hours long (divided roughly between microeconomics and macroeconomics), while the other three are each three hours long.

Following these written examinations, the student takes a two-hour oral examination which covers theory, his primary field, and one secondary field.

 

Foreign Languages

Doctoral candidates must show reading knowledge of two foreign languages; the standard set is the ability to read works of scientific interest at a relatively slow pace. Acceptable languages are German, French, Russian, or any other language which has a literature in economics or which will advance the educational program planned by the individual student. Students are examined by the Department of Modern Languages.

Students whose language preparation has been limited may take subjects which prepare specifically for the language examinations. Students with no previous training in a language frequently are able to attain the necessary minimum proficiency during a single semester of fairly intensive study. Others, who have already had some introduction to a language, often pass the requirement at some time before the end of the semester.

 

Minor Program

Every candidate for the doctor’s degree at M.I.T. must complete a program in a minor field in another department of the Institute. This program consists of a minimum of 24 units, which ordinarily implies three one-semester subjects. The choice of the minor field is made by the student, with the approval of the Department of Economics and Social Science. The content of the program within the other department is a matter for that department’s determination. Satisfactory completion of a minor is ordinarily contingent upon an average rating of 3.5 (in effect, a minimum of two B’s and a C). The normal standard is that the minor work shall be beyond the level required of M.I.T. undergraduates. Students who have done advanced undergraduate work in some field other than economics may often use it to meet part of the minor requirement.

Students in economics have met the minor requirement in such fields as mathematics, industrial management, history, international relations, other social sciences, literature, city planning, chemistry, and electrical engineering. Subjects taken in the minor program must not duplicate work which may be offered for one of the five fields in economics. A minor program in history may include only one term of economic history, since two terms would qualify the student to offer it as a field in economics. Similarly, students minoring in industrial management may not concentrate in such areas as personnel administration. The purpose of the minor program is to broaden the interests or capacities of the student in other areas than those of his major intellectual objective. While some latitude is allowed in particular cases, the spirit of this purpose is always held in view.

 

Courses at Harvard

Students regularly enrolled at M.I.T. are permitted to take a limited number of subjects at Harvard University—about two miles distant in Cambridge—on an exchange basis, without paying extra tuition. Such subjects may be taken as a part of the minor program. Fields for the major program other than those described above may sometimes be offered on the basis of work at Harvard.

 

Residence Requirements

The minimum residence requirement for the Ph.D. degree, including thesis, is the equivalent of one and one-half full-time academic years. No specific number of subjects is required for the general examinations. In general, however, it is recommended that students have at least the equivalent of three semesters of work at the graduate level for the primary field; four semesters in economic theory; and two semesters in each of the other fields. Work on the graduate level at other institutions is considered in meeting these broad approximations of the requisite preparation. Since there are no formal course requirements, there is no occasion to have graduate credits from other schools transferred.

A full-time student is expect to take the equivalent of five subjects each semester for credit; this may include one “reading subject,” in which the student will broaden his reading in his regular subjects. A half-time student is permitted to take approximately three subjects, and a third-time student two subjects. Auditing of additional subjects is permitted as an overload.

 

Dissertation and Special Examination

The Institute requires that all dissertations be prepared in residence, during which period tuition must be paid. Field work may be necessary to gather material; but the analysis of this material must take place at the Institute, under supervision of the instructor in charge of the dissertation. In some cases the writing of the final, polished version of the thesis may be completed elsewhere.

As in other institutions, the dissertation is expected to make a contribution to knowledge in the subject. Shortly after each candidate has submitted his thesis, he is examined on its subject. This examination is oral, conducted by a committee generally consisting of three faculty members, and usually is one hour in length.

 

Total Program of Course Work

The typical student comes to the Institute directly from college with no previous graduate study, having a deficiency in one subject and the ability to pass the reading examination in one language. He can usually prepare for the general examinations in four semesters (two academic years) taking five subjects in each, divided as follows:

 

In the Department of Economics Economic theory—four subjects
One primary field—three subjects
Three secondary fields—six subjects
Statistics—one subject
In other departments Deficiency—one subject
Language—one subject
Minor—three subjects
Total: Twenty subjects
[sic, total of the above is nineteen]

This program is only illustrative, of course, and a wide number of variations are to be expected. Additional work may be required because of additional deficiencies or lack of language preparation. The number of subjects may be reduced by absence of deficiencies, by better preparation in languages, by postponing one or more requirements (such as a part of the minor) until after the general examinations, or by incorporating economic history and/or statistics as primary or secondary fields.

 

Time Required for the Ph.D. Degree

A student entering the program with only a bachelor’s degree may expect to receive the Ph.D. degree in three years under optimum conditions. This will entail taking the general examination in May of the second year and completing a satisfactory dissertation in two semesters of full-time work thereafter. Normally, however, somewhat more time is needed, either in summer work or in some part of a fourth year. Students may need this additional time for more extensive preparation before the general examination, for the thesis, or (in the ordinary case) because teaching duties prevent full-time progress as a student. Many students who plan to enter the teaching profession take advantage of the opportunity to teach part-time at M.I.T. Teaching assistantships are available for students who have passed their general examinations, and occasionally for second-year students.

General examinations are given in the department at the beginning of each semester—in September and February—an again in May. Defense of the dissertation is arranged individually at any time.

Students enrolling in the Ph.D. program with a master’s degree from another institution, based on one or more years of residence at that institution, are urged to take their general examinations earlier than May of their second year at M.I.T. It is not usual, however, for a student to be able to transfer between institutions without some loss of time.

 

Summer School

The department does not offer any subjects at the graduate level during the summer session. However, students may enroll during the summer for thesis credits, for which tuition must be paid. Scholarships are only rarely available for payment of summer school tuition.

 

Admission

To be admitted into the program, a student must hold a bachelor’s degree from an accredited college or university. To be admitted without deficiencies, he must have taken one year of college mathematics, including at least one semester of calculus; one year of college science; and a minimum of three years of college work in the humanities and social sciences. While an undergraduate degree in economics is not indispensable, students are expected to have done a considerable amount of undergraduate work in this field. Students who are prepared for graduate work in economics are almost never deficient in humanities. Similarly, deficiencies in science are infrequent; but candidates are frequently admitted without preparation in calculus.

 

Special Students

Special students, taking from one to five subjects, may be admitted to the Institute and to the department from time to time under special circumstances. Admission of special students automatically lapses each semester; application for re-admission, in the case of students wishing to continue course work, must have the approval of the instructor concerned and the department.

 

Deficiencies

Students who, upon admission, are deficient in mathematics may make up this deficiency by taking a special one-semester subject offered by the Department of Economics—Mathematics for economists (14.101.) Since calculus is required for some of the work in economic theory and statistics, students entering with a deficiency in this area are required to make it up as soon as possible. Though this is not specifically recommended, some students may be able to make up a deficiency in calculus by studying at a summer school prior to fall enrollment at the Institute.

 

Fellowships, Scholarships, and Financial Assistance

Fellowships and scholarships are awarded on a competitive basis only. First-year awards are made on April 1 for the academic year beginning in the following September. Second-year and subsequent departmental awards are made in June. No academic assistance is available for students applying after April 1, or (until the following September) for those entering in February.

Fellowships cover the tuition fee of $1500 and some cash payment toward living expenses. A fellowship of $3200 will thus include $1500 tuition and $1700 cash. The cash award is paid in two equal installments, at the beginning of each semester.

The total of fellowship assistance varies from year to year. There are several name fellowships: the Goodyear, varying from $3000 to $3500; the United States Steel, at about $3100 for each of two years (awarded every other year); the RAND Corporation Fellowship in Mathematical Economics, varying from $3000 to $3500; the Hicks, for students of industrial relations, ranging from $2000 to $3000; and the Center for International Studies Fellowship in Economic Development, ranging from $3000 to $3500; In addition to these, the Institute awards Whitney Fellowships ($3000 in 1961), open only to first-year graduate students coming from outside M.I.T., upon recommendation of the department; and the department has limited funds with which it makes scholarship and fellowship awards varying from $1500 to $3000.

In offering scholarships and fellowships, the department takes into account a variety of factors; academic achievement, career promise, and need. In judging promise, special weight is naturally given to letters of recommendation from economists known to members of the department. The difficulty of evaluating records in foreign institutions and of judging foreign references constitutes a serious but no impassable barrier for foreign applicants.

In general, outside fellowships are financially better than all but a few of the department’s awards. Applicants are therefore urged to seek Woodrow Wilson, Danforth, National Science Foundation, and similar fellowships for use at M.I.T., if they think they stand a good chance of success in the national competition.

Students who perform effectively in their first year are assured of financial support needed to finish the degree. Part of this takes the form of fellowships, in amounts somewhat lower than first-year awards; the rest consists of teaching and research assistantships and instructorships. The half-time teaching assistantship covers the half-time tuition fee of $1000 and pays $180 a month for nine months—a total of $2620. The half-time instructorship, which is reserved for students who have demonstrated effective teaching as an assistant, pays the same tuition and $235 monthly–$3115 for the academic year. The few research assistants appointed each year receive a higher rate of pay than teaching assistants but pay their own tuition. They have the advantage, however, of working on a subject related to their thesis. The department is occasionally able to obtain assistantships for applicants in other parts of the Institute, such as the School of Industrial Management or the Operations Research Group.

Third-year students are also encouraged to compete for outside assistance in supporting their thesis research, such as the Ford Foundation Doctoral Dissertation Awards, the Social Science Research Council Fellowships, and Fulbright Awards.

 

The Faculty in Economics and Industrial Relations

Morris A. Adelman, Professor of Economics
Ph.D. Harvard 1948
Industrial organization, government regulation

Albert K. Ando, Assistant Professor of Economics
Ph.D. Carnegie Institute of Technology 1959
Statistics and econometrics, economic fluctuations

Francis M. Bator, Associate Professor of Economics
Ph.D. M.I.T. 1956
Price and allocation theory, income analysis, economic growth

Robert L. Bishop, Professor of Economics, in charge of the department
Ph.D. Harvard 1949
Price and distribution theory, industrial organization, history of economic thought

E. Cary Brown, Professor of Economics
Ph.D. Harvard 1948
Public finance, income analysis, fiscal economics

Evsey D. Domar, Professor of Economics
Ph.D. Harvard 1947
Income analysis, economic growth, Soviet economics, fiscal economics

Robert Evans, Jr., Assistant Professor of Industrial Relations
Ph.D. Chicago 1959
Labor economics, industrial relations

Franklin M. Fisher, Assistant Professor of Economics
Ph.D. Harvard 1960
Econometrics, price and allocation theory

Harold A. Freeman, Professor of Statistics
S.B. M.I.T. 1931
Statistical theory, experimental design probability methods

Ralph E. Freeman, Professor of Economics, Emeritus; Lecturer
A.M. McMaster 1914, B. Litt. Oxford 1919
Monetary economics

Everett E. Hagen, Professor of Economics
Ph.D. Wisconsin 1941
Economic development, income analysis

Ralph C. James, Jr., Assistant Professor of Insutrial Relations
Ph.D. Cornell 1957
Labor economics, industrial relations

Charles P. Kindleberger, Professor of Economics
Ph.D. Columbia 1937
International economics, monetary theory and policy

Edwin Kuh, Associate Professor of Economics
Ph.D. Harvard 1955
Econometrics, income analysis

Max F. Millikan, Professor of Economics
Ph.D. Yale 1941
Economic development, income analysis

Charles A. Myers, Professor of Industrial Relations
Ph.D. Chicago 1939
Labor economics, industrial relations

Paul Pigors, Professor of Industrial Relations
Ph.D. Harvard 1927
Personnel administration, industrial relations

Paul N. Rosenstein-Rodan, Professor of Economics
Dr.Rer.Pol. Vienna 1925
Economic development

Walt W. Rostow, Professor of Economic History
Ph.D. Yale 1940
Economic history, economic growth

Paul A. Samuelson, Professor of Economics
Ph.D. Harvard 1941
Price and allocation theory, income analysis, monetary theory and policy

Abraham J. Siegel, Associate Professor of Industrial Relations
M.A. Columbia 1949
Labor economics, industrial relations

Robert M. Solow, Professor of Economics
Ph.D. Harvard 1951
Price and allocation theory, income analysis, econometrics

 

Graduate Subjects

Price and allocation theory

14.121, 122 Economic Analysis
14.123 Advanced Economic Theory
14.132 Schools of Economic Thought
14.151 Mathematical Approach to Economics

 

Income analysis

14.451 Theory of Income and Employment
14.452 Economic Growth and Fluctuations

 

Economic history and economic development

14.161,162 Economic History
14.171 Theory of Economic Growth
14.172 Research Seminar in Economic Development
14.182 Capitalism, Socialism, and Growth

 

Economics of industry

14.271 Problems in Industrial Economics
14.272 Government Regulation of Industry

 

Statistics and econometrics

14.371,372 Statistical Theory
14.374 Design and Analysis of Scientific Experiments
14.381 Statistical Method
14.382 Economic Statistics
14.391 Research Seminar in Economics
15.032 Sampling of Human Populations1

 

Monetary and fiscal economics

14.461,462 Monetary Economics
14.471 Fiscal Economics
14.472 Seminar in Fiscal and Monetary Policy

 

International economics

14.581,582 International Economics
14.584 Seminar in International Economic Theory

 

Industrial relations

14.671 Problems in Labor Economics
14.672 Public Policy on Labor Relations
14.674 The Labor Movement: Theories and Histories
14.681,14.682 Seminar in Personnel Administration
14.691,692 Research Seminar in Industrial Relations
14.693 Collective Bargaining and Union-Management Cooperation
14.694 Seminar in Union-Management Cooperation

1School of Industrial Management

 

[Production Credits]

Editorial service by the M.I.T. Office of Publications. Design by Brigitte Hanf. Typesetting by the Lew A. Cummings Company, Inc., Manchester, New Hampshire, and The Composing Room, Inc., New York. Production by the Lew A. Cummings Company, Inc. January, 1961.

 

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

Image Source: MIT beaver mascot, Tim,  from Technology Review in 1914.

Categories
Chicago Funny Business M.I.T.

M.I.T. Christmas skit “God and Keynes at M.I.T.”, 1951

 

The title of the Christmas skit presented by the Graduate Economic Association players at MI.T. in December 1951 , “God and Keynes at M.I.T”, is a clear reference to the political screed, God and Man at Yale (1951), by the young and future conservative pundit, William F. Buckley, Jr. This is one of many MIT skits found in the papers of Robert M. Solow and has been graciously shared for ERVM transcription by Roger E. Backhouse of, most recently, Becoming Samuelson, 1915-1948 fame.

One of the signs you are dealing with truly academic humor is the use of footnotes to provide proper attribution. In particular we find here seven items borrowed (and sometimes modified) from the University of Chicago Political Economy Club repertoire. Thus we see not only were some of the Greatest-Hits of Chicago skit humor “remastered” in the Windy City but also that the G.E.A. of M.I.T. was not above performing “covers” of Freshwater Hits. ERVM has already transcribed a few of these and for the sake of completeness will soon complete this list with the Chicago originals:

There is still plenty of original material in the following skit, and the few modifications worth noting include a key substitution of Keynes (MIT) for Marshall (Chicago)  and another substitution of “psychology and sociology” (MIT) for “Macroeconomics and Probability” (Chicago).

________________________

THE GRADUATE ECONOMICS ASSOCIATION
present
The G. E. A. Players
in
GOD AND KEYNES AT M. I. T.
15 December 1951

*Items so marked are modified versions borrowed from the University of Chicago, Political Economy Club.

 

 

PROLOGUE

(the scene is set to reveal the young college graduate relaxing in his home. He has made application to M.I.T. for entry to Course XIV. We hear the door-bell ring, and the letter arrives. He reads:)

An economics department great in dignity
In fairest Cambridge, where we lay our scene
Offers to disturb you, from present peace
To come to our proximity.

From forth of this great and new transition
A host of new subjects will take their position;
Econometrics, propensities, and laboristic relations;
Matrices, consumption, and similar sensations.

And if you will survive the economic pains
We’ll make of you another John Maynard Keynes.
So won’t you please say that you will come and stay;
Let me know real soon, signed sincerely, C. P. K.

(the student arrives at Tech, finds the library, and enters the elevator. On the way up to the third floor he hears:)

 

FIRST EPISTLE UNTO NEW STUDENTS*

  1. To all who enter through the Gate of Admissions unto the sanctity of the Department, heed ye well one who is wiser and older than thou. For verily I have dwelt in the land of Keynes for many years, and have felt the curse of Generals on my brain.
  2. Beware the courses called 121 and 122, for they will tax thee sorely. They have been devised that the supply may be known from the demand.
  3. Present thyself upon the appointed hour, lest the social cost exceed the private gain and the wrath of the Master fall upon thee mightily.
  4. Shun thou the geometer, for he seeks to seduce thee with curves. His siren song is pleasant but he lacketh rigor.
  5. Shun thou also the temple of the twin gods, psychology and sociology, for therein dwell the Philistines who worship not the calculus. There wilt thou be set upon with all manner of strange things and thou shalt feel the lash of the complex verbage, and thy head shall whirl with cultural patterns and institutional mores.
  6. Treasure thy Keynes, for verily all manner of mysteries are set down therein. Read it well and carefully, but say not that thou hast understood.
  7. Take to thine own bosom the demand curve lest it desert thee in thine hour of need.
  8. Attend well the lectures called innovation, for there if thou learnest nothing else, shalt thou learn at least one thing and it shall be a contribution to thy general education.
  9. Shun thou the industrial economist when he is at his data, for he loveth them dearly and will defend them as a lioness her cubs.
  10. Beware also the statistician who will leave the witless with a pair of dice.
  11. Shun the welfare economist, for he loveth mightily to stick out his neck and will teach thee his evil ways.
  12. Shun thou the coffee hour, but study diligently in Dewey lest thou and thy end thy days in Course XV.
  13. There is a time to speak and a time to be silent. Be thou silent in the presence of the Master, for he shall reveal to thee the secrets of Keynes and there shalt thou solve the riddle of the Sphinx.

 

(the student steps out of the elevator into the third floor hall. He sees before him many doors, all with different names on them. He decides to investigate each one. First, he comes to:)

“John Maynard Keynes”

(he knocks. The door opens, and out steps an angel, wings, white sheet, and all. The angel says:)

‘He ain’t here; but you’ll meet him in the long run!’

(on to the next door:)

“Paul A. Samuelson”

(the door opens, and the chorus sings:)

THE KEYNESIAN SONG*
(to the tune “They Call me Little Buttercup”)

They call me a Keynesian, a Keynesian economist
That I can never deny
For I am a heretic, a classicist critic—
Bold little Keynesian, I.

I’ve equations and functions, and marginal assumptions
All here in my little kit bag.
I’ve tricky proposals for income disposals
All lest the economy sag.

To deficit spending and government lending
I give a hearty “Huzzah”.
I distrust automaticity despite its simplicity—
I doubt it would work at all.

For I am a Keynesian, a Keynesian economist
That I can never deny
For I’m a heretic, a classical critic—
Bold little Keynesian, I.

When faced with deflation or misallocation
I feel that the former is worse
I abominate waste with Ricardian distaste
But first things always come first.

And yet they deplore me, criticize and abhor me
For I am the standard straw man
But blows I don’t heed—Oh, I’ll stick to my credo
That a plan is a plan is a plan.

For I am a Keynesian, a Keynesian economist
That I can never deny
For I’m a heretic, a classical critic—
Bold little Keynesian, I.

 

“Robert Solow”

(scene, his classroom, where the students are singing:)

 

WE MUST BE RIGOROUS*
(to the tune of “The American Patrol”)

We must be rigorous,
We must be rigorous,
We must fulfill our role;
If we hesitate
Or equivocate,
We won’t achieve our goal.
We must investigate
Our system, complicated
To make our models whole;
Econometrics brings about
Statistical control.

Our esoteric seminars
Bring statisticians by the score.
But try to find economists
Who don’t think algebra a chore.
O, we must urge them all emphatically
To become inclined mathematically
So that all that we’ve developed, may
Someday be applied.

(repeat first 11 lines)

 

 

“Charles P. Kindleberger”

(the door opens, and we hear a voice say:)

Intuition is the basis
on which decisions should be made;
These are really the foundations
On which economics has been laid.

All that’s mathematical
Definitely is tabled;
Even the little diagrams
Never have been labeled.

Be careful, however
That you never neglect
The varied use
Of the Kindleberger effect.

Art or skill
or merely a quirk
This man’s intuition
Does the work.

 

 

“Robert L. Bishop”

(the door opens, and we find snow falling. The chorus is on a toboggan, singing:)

(to the tune of Jingle Bells)*

Maximize, maximize, that’s the crucial key;
Allocate resources by their productivity.
Equalize V.M.P.’s with their prices, and
Your production function is the finest in the land.

 

(voice) In the course of industrialization men have observed the alternating rises and falls of economic activity. And, lo, see what befell us:

“Walt W. Rostow”

(the voice continues:)

To shoot, or overshoot, ah, there’s the cycle;
Whether ‘tis nobler from underinvestment to suffer
Than to prolong the period of gestation
And, by consumption end it?

To history! No more of economics; and by the use of it
To end the confusion and million little theories
That economics left us;
That’s the solution we plan to introduce.

 

“E. Cary Brown”
(to the tune of “Deep in the Heart of Texas”)

(chorus)

To fill the gap
On the Keynesian map
We must again raise taxes;
The prices rise
If we don’t equalize
Savings, investment and taxes.

(solo)

Income grows
In ever rising flows
We must again raise taxes;
In government spends
There seem no ends
Up must go the taxes.

(solo)

dC/dY
Is all awry
We must raise those taxes
The propensity
It’s a calamity
Up must go those taxes.

(chorus)

The interest rate
Is out of date
So we must raise those taxes;
Though bonds recede
We must proceed
To raise again those taxes.

(solo)

The crystal balls
In the third floor halls
Say raise those taxes;
Or you will fret
And long regret
If you don’t raise those taxes.

(solo: and how!)

Flexibility
Cries the C.E.D.
Boys, raise those taxes
Says the N.A.M.
It’s all a sham
Don’t raise those taxes

(chorus)

But God and Keynes
Have the true refrains
Up must go the taxes;
At M.I.T.
We all agree
More savings and more taxes.

(by now, our student has traveled one-half the length of the hall. He approaches the other half, where a voice speaks:)

 

Friend; first year man; lend me your ear.
I come to convince you that industrial relations
Occupies a so much higher station
That economics—while ’t is good and fine
Must of necessity bow under our sign.
The evil that me do lives after them;
The good is oft interred within their books;
So let it be with economics.

We offer to show you the extent of cooperation
Between management and labor in every relation,
And prove to you that what’er your belief
Our unique methods will give either side full relief.

Economists, you know, often speak of productivity;
But that’s a matter of total relativity
Since our writers—Shultz, Myers, Coleman and Brown
Are the most productive in a many a college town.

 

“Charlie Myers”

(the door opens, and we see Myers writing vigorously and adding stacks of manuscripts to already huge piles labeled “To Prentice Hall,” “To McGraw-Hill,” and “Rejects—to Technology Press.” Secretary enters:)

Secretary: “Prof. Myers, here’s that book you asked me to write for you.”

Myers: “Good; don’t forget to start on that other one for me.”

(enter George Shultz carrying a manuscript)

Myers: “Hello, George. I see we’ve written another book. Mind if I look at it?”

Shultz: “Not at all, Charlie. I’ve already begun on the other one for us. You know, though, I think we’re getting a bit too abstract. We ought to go down to a level where it’s good and dirty.”

Myers: “In that case, let’s call in Joe Scanlon. Hey, Joe. Come here.”

(the chorus enters, dressed as bums; they sing:)

THE JOE SCANLON SONG
(to the tune of “Union Maid”)

There once was a bright young man
Who thought he had a plan
He studied cost
And jobs he lost
His name is Joe Scanlan

He soon met a man named Phil
Whose work gave him a thrill
He organized and compromised
He always fought up-hill.

This made of him a wreck
And so he came to Tech.
He sells his plan
To all the clan;
You ought to see his check.

CHORUS:
O you can’t scare us, we’re sticking with Scanlon,
Sticking with Scanlon, sticking with Scanlon;
Oh you can’t scare us, we’re sticking with Scanlon,
Sticking with Scanlon, until we die.

 

When the bosses have no dough
They always call for Joe;
They shed their tears
And buy him beers
And up their profits go—

(repeat CHORUS)

 

(as the final chorus ends, the door opens, and we see a body on the table)

Bishop: “What’s the matter with him, Morrie Adelman?”

Adelman: “He’s just been brought in; he’s suffering from a severe case of elephantiasis.”

Bishop: “Oh, don’t worry; I’ve got a classical solution. It contains some of Euler’s serum.” (pull up a jug so labeled and apply to patient’s arm)

Adelman: “Well, what do you expect that to accomplish?”

Bishop: “It’ll create perfect competition among the disease germs. What could be better?”

Adelman: (pause) “Well, I don’t see him recovering.”

Bishop: “But it’s not a pure case. Perhaps we should call in Dr. D. V. Brown. He’s had medical experience. (enter D.V.B.)

Brown: “Hi-ja.” (looks at body, and shows surprise) “My goodness, Charlie! I always knew he’s work too hard.” (looks at body more closely) “Looks to me like an impure case of oligopoly.”

Adelman: “O-o-o-oh! Let me see!” (goes over to feel arm) “No, there’s no concentration here. But even if there were, there’s really no harm in it.”

Brown: “Well, I’d like to stay, but I have to dash off to a court case.”

 

COURT SCENE

Judge: “The court is now in session. Bring in the first case.”

Prosecutor: “Your honor, this man is accused of attempting to overthrow the neo-classical Chicago School.”

Judge: “What’s your name?”

Coleman: “Sir, my name is Jack Coleman.”

Judge: “Prosecutor, define more explicitly what the charge is against this man.”

Prosecutor: “This man is presently collaborating with a well-known group of collectivists.”

Judge: “What proof have you of this?”

Prosecutor: “I have here my star witness.”

Judge: “What is your name?”

Buckley: “Your honor, sir, my name is Ludwig von Buckley.”

Judge: “Speak.”

Buckley: “I have here a book written by Paul A. Samuelson, and it says here on page.–., Oh, well, let’s not bother with the page number now. It says: “…know…conclusively…that…Karl Marx…is…(turn pages back towards front)…correct.”

Judge: “Speak no more. Any man collaborating with the author of such a book must be guilty of attempting to overthrow the Chicago School. I hereby sentence you to six months of solitary confinement, with a copy of Hazlitt’s “Economics in One Lesson.” Next case.”

(Coleman leaves; enter Herb Shepard)

Prosecutor: “Your honor, this man is accused of playing marbles with the fabulous Alex Bavelas.”

Judge: “What is your name?” (say it aggressively)

Shepard: “Say, you’re unusually aggressive today. Has your wife stopped beating you? How’s your libido?”

Judge: “Now that you mention it, I have been feeling rather despondent.”

Shepard: “Judge, I’m a Freud…you’re tending toward a psycho-social orientation that no longer promotes an optimization of gratification.”

Judge: “Noooooo—I’m too JUNG to die!….But what am I saying! Herbert Shepard, for this circumlocutionist behavior, I hereby sentence you to the marble pits in ex-communication.”

 

(the student next comes to a door marked “reserved for Chicago U. delegates to the A.E.A. Convention.” He knocks, the door opens, and he hears:)

 

HIS RULES GO MARCHING ON*
(to the tune of the Battle Hymn of Republic)

If you want to pass your prelims
You must listen now to me;
You must learn your catechism
If you want to get your ‘B’
They have flunked the finest people
The department ever had
And they never said ‘too bad.’

CHORUS:

Stick, stick, stick with Henry Simons;
Henry is the man to see you through;
He’s the most consistent [man]
With an economic plan;
His rules go marching on.

 

He would nationalize the railroads,
He would atomize the firm,
He would then repeal the tariff
And the “E” bonds he would burn;
He would cleanse the banking system
Of the Federal Reserve;
His rules go marching on.

[Repeat] CHORUS:

He is the man who’d fix up
The progressive income tax;
He would fill in every item that
The present structure lacks;
He’d repeal the excise levies
And forget the margarine tax;
His rules go marching on.

[Repeat] CHORUS:

 

(by now the student will have reached the end of the hall; but questions linger in his mind. He wonders how the student takes all this. And as if in answer, he hears this song between students and faculty:* (to the tune of the ‘Sergeant’s Song’ from the Pirate[s] of Penzance)

Grad Students:

From nine around to nine—Tarantara! tarantara!
We remain in that salt mine—Tarantara!
-Our eyes are growing dim–Tarantara! tarantara!
Our hair is getting thin—Tarantara!
As we while away our youth—Tarantara! tarantara!
In sedate pursuit of Truth—Tarantara!!
Searching stacks and aching backs,
Third degree for a PhD—Tarantara! tarantara! tarantara!

 

Faculty: (to the tune of “Mabel’s Song” from the Pirate[s] of Penzance)

Go, you students, you’ll not be sorry.
You’ll contribute to MY great story.
You shall live in footnote glory.
Go to immortality!

Go to work and hold off suicide,
For if your work with our needs coincide,
Our reluctance to grant degrees we’ll override.
Go, you heroes, go and work!

 

(finally, as our student reaches the end of his journey, he meet the one ‘older and wiser than thou’, and listens as he tells of the ‘impending doom’.)

Twas the night before Orals
When all through the room
A feeling forecast
The impending doom.
The facts were placed
In each head with care
In hopes that when needed
They’d surely be there.
The victims then nestled
All snug in their beds
While visions of cost curves
Danced in their heads.
I soon fell asleep
And began to dream
I sat in a room
All filled with steam.
When out in the yard
There arose such a clatter
I sprang from the chair
To see what was the matter.
Over to the window
I flew like a flash
Tore open the shutters
And threw up the sash.
When what to my wondering
Eyes there appears
A miniature sleigh
And eight tiny examineers.
Instead of the four
They usually required
They sent me four more
If the others got tired.
As I drew in my head
And was turning around
In through the window
They came with a bound.
They were dressed all in black
From their head to the toe;
Whose funeral, I asked,
Someone I know?
A wink of their eyes,
A twist of each head
Soon gave me to know
I had plenty to dread.
They spoke not a word
But went straight to their work
Of filling the blackboards
Then turned to the jerk.
The questions commenced
Like machine gun fire;
I couldn’t keep straight
The seller from buyer.
Now sir, please listen
One of them said
Try to imagine
All this in your head.
Nansen and Johansen
Have only one sled;
They’re at the North pole
And have not bread.
Suddenly there appears
A giant Tartar
Coming from Siberia
Looking to barter.
They can bake some bread
At increasing cost
Yet without a compass
They’ll certainly be lost.
He has a compass
And they have bread
And without exchange
They all will be dead.
They started to bargain
Until he did tell you
That the Russians decided
The ruble to devalue.
Only Sterling is recognized,
So they start to bake
Instead of the bread
A large pound cake.
Then suddenly Nansen
Thought to remember
That neither of them
Was a union member.
Closed shops were enforceable
As a matter of fact
For this was before
The Taft-Hartley Act.
They went ahead anyway,
They didn’t give a hoot;
It was so cold
They needed a union suit.
Before they acted
Or did anything drastic
They examined their demand curve
To see if it was elastic.
Their cost curve was unknown–
It had never been seen;
How lucky they were
That Nansen was really Joel Dean.
Their consumption function told them
Just how to behave;
They knew what to consume
And how much to save.
Please consider the theories
of Tibor Scitovsky
And the two fisted cowboy
two-gun Baranowsky.
If you remember these facts
And keep them in mind,
The right answer, I know
You certainly should find.
I shivered and shook,
In the chair I did writhe;
Now the question, they said
Who was Adam Smythe?
The leader then yelled
For a decision it’s time;
This man has suffered,
He has paid for his crime.
And laying a finger
Aside of his nose
Out of the window
All eight of them goes.
It was the leader then
That I heard exclaim
As he shouted and whistled,
And called them by name:
Now Myers, now Bishop
Now Shultz and C.P.K.
On Coleman, on Solow,
Let’s now dash and dash away.
They sprang to their sleigh
And away they flew
Like they were speeding
To another rendezvous.
Although some details
Of this horrible nightmare
Still seem a bit hazy
I certainly would swear,
Before I awoke
I heard them say
Merry Christmas to all,
And to all a good day.

 

EPILOGUE

As disproved by classical economics
All good things much reach an end;
And so we must leave our attempt at comics,
Hoping we’ve pleased both foe and friend.

‘Tis true enough that our little parody
Has given economics unusual clarity,
And that our writers if circumstances permit it
Will prefer to have their names omitted.

So then, since ours must be the last say,
a real Merry Christmas from the G.E.A.

 

Source: Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book & Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Robert M. Solow Papers, Box 83, Folders “Economic Skit Parties”.

Image: Cover art from “God and Keynes at M.I.T.” December 15, 1951. Ibid.

 

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

M.I.T. Economic Growth and Fluctuations. Readings and Midterm Exam. Solow, 1966

 

The readings for the second term MIT graduate core course in macroeconomics “Economic Growth and Fluctuations” was taught by Robert Solow in 1966. The reading list and midterm questions transcribed for this posting come from his papers at the Duke Economists’ Papers Archive. Solow was indeed listed for this course in the internal report “Department of Economics, Teaching Responsibilities” dated March 4, 1966 in Box 3 of the Department of Economics Papers in the M.I.T. archives.

The first term course that academic year was taught by Evsey D. Domar. His 14-page reading list (!) together with the midterm and final examinations have been transcribed and posted as well.

________________________

Spring 1966

READING LIST          14.452

I. Economic Growth

  1. Stylized Facts

Kendrick and Sato, “Factor Prices, Productivity and Growth”, AER, December 1963.
Bureau of the Census, Long-Term Economic Trends (This is a compendium of data. Spend an hour or two leafing through it.)

  1. Aggregative Models

Hahn and Matthews, “The Theory of Economic Growth: A Survey”, Economic Journal, December 1964, Parts I, II, IV.
Modigliani, “Comment” in Behavior of Income Shares (NBER), pp. 39-50.
Tobin, “Money and Economic Growth”, Econometrica, October 1965.
Marty, “The Neoclassical Theorem”, AER, December 1964.
Diamond, “National Debt in a Neoclassical Growth Model”, AER, December 1965, pp. 1126-1135 only. Rest optional.
Findlay, “The Robinsonian Model…”, Economica, February 1963 and comments by Robinson and Findlay in Economica, November 1963.

  1. Sources of Potential Output

Nelson, “Aggregate Production Functions” AER, September 1964
Denison, Sources of Economic Growth in the U.S. (Don’t read every word, but try to grasp content.)
Abramovitz, “Review of Denison”, AER, September 1962.
Phelps, “The New View of Investment”, QJE, November 1962.
David and van de Kliendert, “Biased Efficiency Growth in the U.S.”, AER, June 1965.

II. Short-Run Macrodynamics

  1. Short-Run Movements in Productivity

Brechling: “The Relationship between Output and Employment…”, Review of Economic Studies, July 1965
Kuh, “Cyclical and Secular Labor Productivity…”, Review of Economics and Statistics, February 1965
Wilson and Eckstein, “Short-Run Productivity Behavior…”, Review of Economics and Statistics, February 1964.

  1. Measuring Potential Output and the Gap

Thurow & Taylor, “The Interaction between Actual and Potential Rates of Growth in the U.S. Economy”, Mimeo.
Kuh, “The Measurement of Potential Output”, mimeo.

  1. Cycles and Fluctuations

Samuelson, “Interaction between Multiplier Analysis and the Principle of Acceleration”, Review of Economics and Statistics, 1939, reprinted in AEA, Readings in Business Cycle Theory.
Metzler, “The Nature and Stability of Inventory Cycles”, Review of Economics and Statistics, 1941.
Kaldor, “A Model of the Trade Cycle”, EJ 1940, reprinted in Hansen and Clemence, Readings in Business Cycles and National Income.
DeLeeuw, “The Demand for Capital Goods by Manufacturers”, Econometrica, July 1962.
Eckstein, “Manufacturing Investment and Business Expectations”, Econometrica, April 1965.
Jorgenson, “Anticipations and Investment Behavior”, Ch. 2 in The Brookings Quarterly Econometric Model of the U.S., (optional).
Darling and Lovell, “Factors Influencing Investment in Inventories”, Ch. 4 in The Brookings Quarterly Econometric Model of the U.S.
Okun, Effects of the Tax Cut of 1964. To appear or else mimeo. [handwritten addition]

  1. Integration of Growth & Effective Demand [handwritten addition, no items listed]

________________________

First Examination     14.452           April 13, 1966

  1. Imagine a one-sector economy, satisfying all the standard simplifying assumptions, in a steady state with constant saving ratio, constant rate of population growth, and no technological change. Now let there be a sudden once-and-for-all shift in technology, with the property that output per man increases by 10% at each and every capital-per-man. There is no change in saving ratio or population growth.
    1. What happens along the full-employment path?
    2. In the new steady state, has capital per man increased by more or less than 10%? Has output per man increase by more or less than 10%?
    3. Describe roughly how the competitively imputed real wage, rate of interest, and relative distribution of income might differ between the new steady-state and the old. (You will not always be able to settle the direction of change.)
  2. In the same sort of economy, suppose that investment demand is such that businesses will quickly snap up all investment opportunities yielding at least some “target rate of return”, like 20%, but none yielding less. Discuss in terms of diagram or otherwise, whether the economy is likely to experience inadequate or excessive aggregate demand near the steady state. What effect would a sudden increase in the rate of population growth have (assuming that the saving ratio was not affected)?
  3. Denison has been described as a pessimist with respect to the possibility of raising the U.S. rate of growth through deliberate policy. Is that a fair description? If so, what are the main sources of his pessimism? What do you gather from Nelson, Abramovitz and Phelps on this subject?

 

Source: Duke University, David M. Rubenstein Library. Economists’ Papers Archives. Papers of Robert M. Solow, Box 67, Folder “Exams”.

Image Source: Robert M. Solow (undated). MIT Museum .

Categories
Economists M.I.T.

MIT. Three Kindleberger quips à la Solow, 1990

 

In an earlier post we encountered a second-order quote from the Columbia economic historian Vladimir G. Simkhovitch–Frank Fisher quoting Charles Kindleberger quoting Simkhovitch. Today we have some first-order hearsay of Charles Kindleberger from witness Robert M. Solow, his MIT colleague. Kindleberger wit with a Solow twist!  In the court of history hearsay evidence is of course admissible after being critically received. On behalf of former, present, and future graduate students of the world, I call the reader’s attention to the second of the three Kindlebergian remarks. 

____________________

TRAVELS WITH CHARLIE

That was actually the name of a book that John Steinbeck wrote, all about driving around the country with his dog. The P in CPK does not stand for Poodle. But I like the title, and so will Charlie. I just want to rummage around in my memory.

There should be some permanent record of the time that Charlie and I were part of a panel discussion before an audience. Some question about exchange rates came up, and I spoke my piece. I must have said something wrong, because Charlie broke in to say: “The audience should keep in mind that MIT does not pay Professor Solow to think about international economics.” Bad dog!

Here is another unforgettable shaft. I can not remember the occasion; I think that some of our graduate students were expressing discontent with their lot and suggesting improvements. Charlie summed up the situation by pointing out that fundamentally a graduate student was someone with a boy’s income and a man’s appetite. Of course they felt better immediately. (By the way, the gender-specificness of that remark was just the empirical truth of the time.)

Finally I want to preserve a conversation that took place about 10 years ago when the Kindlebergers, the Samuelsons, the Solows, and Ingo and Barbara Vogelsang were dinner guests of the McFaddens. German economists were mentioned and Ingo Vogelsang asked if anyone remembered George Halm. Ingo thought that must now be very old. Oh no, said Charlie, mature maybe but certainly not what you would describe as old. You’re right, said Paul. What’s old about 80? It seemed funnier to me then than it does now. Now it’s just a home truth: what’s so old about 80? Not a thing, not if you have been, as Charlie has been, devoted to his colleagues and his students, and full of ideas, always full of ideas.

Robert M. Solow

 

Source: Letter from Robert M. Solow included in Reminiscences of Charles P. Kindleberger on his Eightieth Birthday, October 12, 1990 in the Charles P. Kindleberger Papers, Box 24, MIT Libraries, Institute Archives and Special Collections.

Image Source: Charles Kindleberger in MIT Technique, 1950.

 

Categories
M.I.T. Suggested Reading Syllabus

MIT. Applied Price Theory Readings. Robert Solow, 1971 or 1972

 

In Robert Solow’s papers at Duke University I found the following “cut-and-paste” draft of a reading list for a course in applied price theory. That course, 14.144 (Applied Price Theory),  did not appear in the MIT course catalogue until the 1972/73 academic year, though it is conceivable and even likely that the topics course for 1971 was renamed and built up from elements of Solow’s 1970 syllabus for “14.123 Topics in Price Theory” plus additions for the new topic “pollution control” and an expansion of the “regulated firms” section.

_________________

SYLLABUS FOR 14.144 APPLIED PRICE THEORY

Fall 1971 [sic]

            This course is intended to show how positive and normative price theory can be applied to situations which are non-standard in some way. It will normally proceed by taking up a number of separate topics. The current list of topics includes: I. Congestion tolls on roads and airports; II. Use of taxes and charges to control pollution; III. Behavior of regulated firms limited to a “fair rate of return”. In all cases the subject is the theory and not the practical details of application.

 

I. Congestion tolls

A. Walters, “The Theory and Measurement of Private and Social Cost of Highway Congestion,” ECONOMETRICA, Vol. 29, 1961, pp. 676-699.

W. Vickrey, “Optimization of Traffic and Facilities,” JOURNAL OF TRANSPORT ECONOMICS AND POLICY, Vol. 1, N. 2, Ma 1967, pp. 123-136.

R.E. Park, “Congestion Tolls for Regulated Common Carriers,” ECONOMETRICA forthcoming (RAND paper, on reserve).

M. Marchand, “A Note on Optimal Tolls in an Imperfect Environment,” ECONOMETRICA, July-October 1968, pp. 575-581.

 

II. Control of Pollution

P. Bohm, “Pollution, Purification, and the Theory of External Effects”, SWEDISH JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, Vol. 72, no. 2, June 1970.

W. Baumol and W. Oates, “The Use of Standards and Prices for Environmental Protection,” SWEDISH JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, Vol. 73, no. 1, March 1971.

M. Kamien et al., “Asymmetry Between Bribes and Charges,” WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH, Vol. 2, No. 1, 1966, pp. 147-157.

C. Upton, “Optimal Taxing of Water Pollution,” WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH, Vol. 4, no. 5, October 1968, pp. 865-875.

 

III. Regulated Firms

H. Averch & L. Johnson, “Behavior of the Firm under Regulatory Constraint,” AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, Dec 1962, pp. 1053-1069.

A. Takayama, “Behavior of the Firm under Regulatory Constraint,” AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, June 1969, pp. 255-260.

E. Bailey & J. Malone, “Resource Allocation and the Regulated Firm” BELL JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, Vol. 1, No. 1, Spring 1970, pp. 129-142.

W. Baumol and A. Klevorick, “Input Choices and Rate-of-Return Regulation: An Overview””, BELL JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, Vol. 1, Fall 1970, pp. 162-90.

A. Klevorick, “The ‘Optimal’ Fair Rate of Return”, BELL JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, Vol. 2, no. 1, Spring 1971, pp. 122-153.

N. Edelson, “Resource Allocation and the Regulated Firm: a Reply to Bailey and Malone,” BELL JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, Vol. 2, no. 1, Spring 1971, pp. 374-378.

 

Source: Duke University, Rubenstein Library, Papers of Robert M. Solow, Box 68, Folder “University Notebook, 14.123”.

Image Source: Robert Solow images at the MIT Museum website.