Tag: Stigler

Columbia. Average Salaries by Rank 1913/14-1932/33.

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2017-01-17

The following page comes from a folder holding miscellaneous items from George Stigler’s days at Columbia. One presumes it comes from a report, presumably before his time there, giving reference average salaries by rank for three budget years. Since salaries within a department are set with an eye to the university pay policy as well as the salaries paid elsewhere, this is interesting information for the immediate pre-WWI period, the peak before the Great Depression, and the Great Depression’s trough.

____________________________

SALARIES IN NON-PROFESSIONAL GRADUATE SCHOOLS
AND COLUMBIA COLLEGE (BUDGET YEARS)

	Total number in grade	Minimum salary in grade	Total of all salary payments in grade	Salary Average
Instructors:
1913-14	63	$1,000	$91,000	$1,444
1929-30	125	2,400	341,000	2,728
1932-33	132	2,400	357,000	2,704

Assistant Professors:
1913-14	45	2,000	105,300	2,340
1929-30	76	3,500	293,400	3,860
1932-33	73	3,600	285,400	3,909

Associate Professors:
1913-14	17	3,000	58,700	3,453
1929-30	45	5,000	236,500	5,255
1932-33	53	5,000 ($4,500 [for] 1)	281,500	5,311

PROFESSORS:					corrected
1913-14	67	3,500 (3,000 [for] 2)	320,775	~~4,787~~	4757
1929-30	114	7,500	955,500	8,381
1932-33	119	7,500 (6,000 [for]1)	1,009,500	8,484

Grand totals of above:					corrected
1913-14	192		$575,775	~~$2,998~~	$2,390
1929-30	360		1,826,400	~~5,074~~	5,080
1932-33	377		1,933,400	~~5,128~~	5,120

Source: University of Chicago Archives. George Stigler Papers. Addenda, Box 33; Folder “Papers from Columbia University 1947-58”.

Source Image: 1913 Columbia University, Library. New York Public Library, Digital Collections .

Tags Stigler

Chicago Fields Regulations

Chicago. Doctoral Field Exams Schedule for the Friedmans, Stigler, Wallis. 1935

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2016-11-30

Milton Friedman, Rose Friedman née Director, George Stigler, and W. Allen Wallis all took some of their doctoral field examinations at the University of Chicago in the Spring Quarter of 1935. The names of the examiners and the other examinees can be seen from the mimeographed page I found in George Stigler’s papers at the University of Chicago Archives. I have included in this post the field examination requirements for doctoral students in economics from the annual Announcements published for the 1934-35 academic year.

______________________

Three Field Examinations for Doctorate

“The candidate is expected to have general training in the important fields listed below and to specialize in three fields, one of which must be Economic Theory, including Monetary and Cycle Theory, and another must be the field of his thesis. The fields to be chosen (in addition to Economic Theory) may be taken from (1) Statistics; (2) Accounting; (3) Economic History; (4) Finance and Financial Administration; (5) Government Finance; (6) Labor and Personnel Administration; (7) Trusts and Public Utilities; (8) International Economic Relations; (9) some other field proposed by the candidate. A field proposed by the candidate may be in Economics or in another social science, the arrangement in either case being made with the Department of Economics. It is desired to develop that program of work which best meets the needs of the individual student. This usually involves the election of some courses in other departments and possibly the development of a field in another social science as a substitute for one of the fields in economics.

“The candidate’s grasp of his three fields of specialization is tested by preliminary written examinations which must be passed to the satisfaction of the Department before admission to candidacy. The final oral examination is on the field of concentration and on the thesis. The written examinations can be taken in one quarter or they can be divided between two quarters, not necessarily consecutive quarters, at the option of the candidate. The written examinations are given in the sixth, seventh, and eighth weeks of the Autumn, Spring, and Summer quarters. The written examination in general economic theory, including monetary and cycle theory, is in two parts and will require five hours in all. The written examination in each of the other fields requires from three to four hours. Notice of intention to take any written examination must be filed with the Department at least three weeks before the examinations begin. In written examinations for the doctorate the questions cover both the theoretical and administrative aspects of the field.”

Source: Announcements. The University of Chicago. The College and the Divisions for the Sessions of 1934-35, pp. 283-4.

______________________

DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

SCHEDULE FOR PRELIMINARY EXAMINATIONS FOR THE DOCTORATE

Spring Quarter, 1935

The schedule below shows the preliminary examinations requested for the current quarter. Will the Chairman of each Committee please be responsible for turning in the complete examination by at least one week before the date on which it is to be given?

Dates	Examinations	Committees	Students Enrolled
Saturday, May 11 8:30, S.S.R. 417	Economic Theory (New Plan)	Viner, Chairman Schultz Yntema Knight	Friedman, M. Shohan, C.J. Stigler, G.J. (Brookings) Wallis, W.A.
1:30, S.S.R. 417	Monetary and Cycle Theory	Mints Cox
Saturday, May 18 8:30, S.S.R. 417	Financial System and Financial Administration	Mints, Chairman Cox Meech Gideonse	Curtis, C.H. Shohan, C.J.
Saturday, May 18 8:30, S.S.R. 417	Government Finance	Leland, Chairman Simons	Stigler, G.J. (Brookings)
Saturday, May 18 8:30, S.S.R. 417	Statistics	Schultz, Chairman Cover Yntema	Director, R. Friedman, M. Jacoby, N.H. (Springfield)
Saturday, May 25 8:30, S.S.R. 417	Economic History	Wright, Chairman Nef Knight	Ostrander, F.T. (Williams) Shohan, C.J.

Source: University of Chicago Archives, George Stigler Papers Addenda, Box 33, Folder “1935 Univ. of Chicago, Class Notes (Gray binder)”.

Image Source: Rose and Milton Friedman. From The Prodos Blog.

Tags Cover, Cox, Curtis, Director, Friedman, Gideonse, Jacoby, Knight, Leland, Meech, Mints, Nef, Ostrander, SchultzH, Shohan, Simons, Stigler, Viner, Wallis, Wright, Yntema

Agricultural Economics Economists Harvard

Harvard. Economics Ph.D. William H. Nicholls, 1941

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2016-11-05

___________________

In his file at the President’s Office of the University of Chicago one finds a carbon copy of William H. Nicholls’ section 18 “Education, Employment, Publications” from what looks to be his U.S. Federal Civil Service application, perhaps required for his consultancy for the Office of Price Administration, Meats Section Washington in 1941-42. We have here a very complete accounting of his activities covering his graduate school years 1934-1940, both coursework and employment.

This post also includes a biographical sketch at his Kentucky alma mater’s Hall of Fame together with a memorial piece in his honor at the department of economics of Vanderbilt University where he was on the faculty for thirty years.

___________________

[Carbon Copy from Federal Civil Service Application(?) ca. January 1941]

18. EDUCATION, EMPLOYMENT, PUBLICATIONS, ETC.

18(a). Chronological Record.

Education

1930-34 (School-years)	University of Kentucky	A.B., 1934	Graduated “with high distinction”, Phi Beta Kappa.
1934-37 (School-years)	Harvard University	A.M. in Economics, 1937	Also part-time assistantships (see “Employment” below[)].
Feb., 1941	Harvard University	Ph.D. in Economics, 1941	Thesis completed in absentia.

Foreign Travel

Summer, 1931 Travel in 12 countries of Europe.

Employment (Part-time= *)

Place of Employment	Dates	Institution	Immediate Employer	Title	Salary
Washington, D.C.	June-Sep. 1934	Tobacco Section, AAA	Dr. J. B. Hutson Chief	Statistical Clerk	$1800.
Cambridge, Mass.	Sep.1934-June 1935	Harvard Univ.	Dr.John D. Black	Research Assistant	$600.*
Harrodsburg, Ky.	June-Sep. 1935	Farm	H.F. Parker	Farm hand	Room & board
Cambridge, Mass.	Sep.1935-June, 1936	Harvard Univ.	Dr. John D. Black	Research Assistant	$720.*
New England (Boston)	June-Sep.1936	Bureau of Agri. Econ., U.S.Dept. of Agriculture	Mr. R.L. Mighell	Field Agent	$2000.
Cambridge, Mass.	Sep.1936-June 1937	Harvard Univ.	Dr.John D. Black	Research Assistant	$500.*
New England (Boston)	June-Oct., 1937	Bureau of Agri. Econ., U.S. Dept. of Agriculture	Mr. R.L. Mighell	Field Agent	$2000.
Cambridge, Mass.	Oct.1937-Jan.1938	(Independent Research at Harvard University)
Ames, Iowa	Feb. 1938-July 1939	Iowa State College	Dr. T.W. Schultz	Research Assistant & Instructor	$2430.
Ames, Iowa	July, 1939-July, 1940	Iowa State College	Dr. T.W. Schultz	Research Assistant & Instructor	$3000.
Ames, Iowa		Iowa State College	Dr. T.W. Schultz	Assistant Professor	$3300.

18(b). Graduate Courses at Harvard University and Research

Graduate Courses at Harvard University

Professor	Title of Course	Grade
F. W. Taussig	Economic Theory	A-
Joseph Schumpeter	Economic Theory
W. L. Crum	Theory of Statistics	B, A
C. J. Bullock	History of Economic Thought	Audit
John H. Williams	Theory of Money and Banking	A-
E. F. Gay	Economic History	B plus
John D. Black	Economics of Agriculture	A-
O. H. Taylor	Scope and Method of Economics	A
John D. Black	Interregional Competition	A
John D. Black	Commodity Prices and Distribution	A-

Bureau of Agricultural Economics, Field Agent, June-September, 1936.

Supervisors– Ronald L. Mighell, Senior Agricultural Economist, and Dr. John D. Black, Harvard University.

Nature of Work– The project concerned Interregional Competition in Dairying, and was a cooperative endeavor of the Bureau of Agricultural Economics and Harvard University. The work consisted of taking farm-survey records on dairy farms in Vermont and Connecticut. The applicant was also responsible for collecting background material on milk marketing problems, including local hauling, operation of milk plants, milk prices and price plans, rail and truck transportation, governmental programs, and cooperative organization.

Bureau of Agricultural Economics, Field Agent, June-October, 1937.

Supervisors– Ronald L. Mighell Dr. John D. Black, Harvard University.

Nature of Work– This was a continuation of the project outline above. The applicant was in charge of the marketing phases of the study in New England. This work consisted primarily of a study of milk distribution and milk control problems in Hartford, Worcester, and Boston, involving contacts with distributors, cooperative officials, administrators of milk control boards, and health officials in those milk markets, as well as research workers in milk marketing at the state colleges of Vermont, Massachusetts, and Connecticut. A manuscript of 189 pages was prepared, bringing together and analyzing the data gathered. Although this was to be used primarily as service material to the larger study of which it was only a part, it will later be published in some form.

Research Assistant to Dr. John D. Black, Harvard University, September 1934-June, 1935: September, 1935-June, 1936; September, 1936-June, 1937.

Supervisors– Dr. John D. Black, Dr. John M. Cassels, and Dr. J. K. Galbraith, all of Harvard University.

Nature of Work- The duties of these part-time assistantships required some 20-27 hours a week, while the applicant carried a ¾ time graduate study program concurrently.

During the school-year 1934-35, he was responsible for a considerable part of the statistical work on Dr. Black’s book, “The Dairy Industry and the AAA”, as well as two articles in the Quarterly Journal of Economics by J. K. Galbraith and John M. Cassels, respectively.

During the school-year 1935-36 he assisted Dr. Black in the construction of index numbers and the study of farmers’ supply response to price, and made a brief study of tobacco marketing for use in Dr. Black’s course in Prices and Distribution.

During the school-year 1936-37 the applicant made an intensive study and analysis of the dairy-farm records and marketing data collected during the summer of 1936 on the Bureau of Agricultural Economics project. This work was supervised by Dr. Black.

Independent Research, Cambridge, Mass., Oct. 1937-Jan. 1938.

Advisors– Dr. John D. Black and Dr. John M. Cassels of Harvard University.

Nature of Work-During this period, the applicant was working independently on a proposed Ph.D. thesis tracing the historical development of the marketing of manufactured dairy products. This period was one of an extremely intensive survey of the literature on dairy marketing since 1870 in libraries at Harvard and Washington, D. C. It also included several weeks of consulting with the staff of the Dairy Section of the Agricultural Adjustment Administration. This project was dropped as a thesis subject in January, 1938, in order that the applicant might accept a position at Iowa State College. This work served as the foundation for several Iowa Experiment Station research publications at a later date (see next item).

Member of Staff, Department of Economics, Iowa State College, Feb. 1938 to date.

In February, 1938, the applicant became a member of the staff of the Department of Economics, Iowa State College, of which Dr. T. W. Schultz is department head. His initial rank was “Research Assistant” at a salary of $2430. His duties involved full responsibility for initiating and carrying out a aresearch study of the price and production policies in the meat-packing industry. During the following year, largely outside of office hours, the applicant produced manuscripts on the butter and cheese industries, based on data collected just previous to his employment at Iowa State College, which were deemed worthy of publication as research bulletins (see “list of publications”).

The objective of the study of the eat-packing industry was to make a comprehensive survey of the industry, with intensive study of those phases which would shed light on the nature of competition and monopoly elements in the industry.

The procedure was divided into four parts:

(1) Conditions in the livestock and meat markets.

The purpose of this phase of the work was to compile background descriptive material such as was necessary as a foundation for the later, more important phases of the project. This general survey was completed, covering such things as the nature of supply of livestock, demand for meats, the marketing mechanism for livestock and for meats, the composition and degree of concentration in the industry, accounting methods in the industry, and the economics of large-scale plant and firm in the industry.

(2) Price and production policies followed in the meat-packing industry.

The procedure here was to survey past attempts at control of monopoly in the industry, covering a period of some 50 years. The status of individual packers was examined, as well as the effects on competition of such policies as market sharing, price leadership, price discrimination, advertising and branding, handling of by-products and produce, storage, and trade associations. This program necessitated two important steps: (a) the examination of leading agricultural processing-distributing industries better to determine the true nature of competition in such industries, and the applicability to problems faced by the worker in agricultural marketing research of recent developments in the economic theory of monopolistic competition. The studies of the butter and cheese industries contributed a great deal in this direction, in addition to a full year’s empirical work on the packing industry. (b) the adaptation and extension of the existing theory of monopolistic competition to the somewhat peculiar requirements of the agricultural processing-distributing industries as opposed to the strictly “manufacturing” industries, which have been the main interest of the general economist. It should be realized that the applicant is working in an entirely new field—imperfect competition in agricultural processing and distribution and has, therefore, constantly had to develop or adapt new research techniques and tools.

As a result, under the encouragement of Dr. T. W. Schultz and Dr. John D. Black, the applicant devoted the year 1939-40 primarily to developing the pure theory of imperfect competition, with special application to the agricultural processing-distributing industries. In order to make this theory of as general application as possible, not only were problems of immediate concern in the meat-packing project covered, but the theoretical considerations were broadened to include the theoretical aspects of competition in fluid milk among local country-buying units, and under short-run dynamic conditions as well. Particular emphasis was given to the theory of market-sharing, price leadership, and price discrimination, with major attention to the markets between the farm and the processing-distributing “bottleneck”.

A 460-page manuscript, “A Theoretical Analysis of Imperfect Competition, with Special Application to the Agricultural Industries” resulted. This manuscript represented four times redrafting after critical reading by Professors Black and Mason of Harvard; Professor Stigler of Minnesota; Professors Schultz, Hart, Shepherd, Reid, Lynch and Tintner of Iowa State College; Dr. Frederick V. Waugh and Dr. A. C. Hoffman of the Bureau of Agricultural Economics; and Dr. Harold B. Howe, of the Brookings Institution. All of these critics are highly qualified general or agricultural economists, and their reactions have been generally favorable.

In September, 1940, the manuscript was submitted as a Ph.D. thesis at Harvard University, and has since been accepted by Professors Black and Chamberlin. Professor Chamberlin, the leader in this phase of economic theory, states in a letter of December 23, 1940, that it is “a very fine piece of analysis and a very much worthwhile one…….an chievement of first order ……I can honestly say that I have spent more time in going over and working through some of the complex arguments that I have ever spent on any preceding doctor’s theses. This was partly because I was naturally interested in the subject and also because the thesis itself merited. it.” The plan is to push the manuscript toward publication during the next few months. The applicant expects formally to receive his Ph.D. degree before February 15, 1941.

Beginning July 1, 1939, the applicant’s salary was advanced to $3000 per annum. During the school-year 1939-40, he taught elementary Principles of Economics one-quarter time. On July 1, 1940, he was promoted to the rank of Assistant Professor at a salary of $3300, continuing to teach one-quarter time and pursue research three-quarters time. In the spring of 1941, he is scheduled to initiate a course for graduate students on Imperfect Competition in Agricultural Processing and Distribution.

Concurrently with other work previously outlined, the applicant prepared and presented a paper (unpublished) before a round-table of the American Farm Economic Association on December 28, 1938, entitled “A Suggested Approach to a Research Study in Price and Production Policies of an Agricultural Processing Industry”. Through the combination of theoretical hypotheses and empirical support, as based on the previously described work, he presented a second paper before the American Farm Economic Association in December, 1939. This paper, “Market-Sharing in the Packing industry”, presents statistical data for 1931-37 showing that the four dominant packers still buy relatively fixed proportions of hogs and cattle on the terminal markets as they did in 1913-17. It indicates how this may be evidence of oligopsonistic behavior in buying, the possible limitations of “market-sharing” as a monopolistic device, and how it may affect producer and consumer. This paper, the first published results of the meat-packing project, represents that balanced combination of empirical and theoretical analysis which the applicant considers the ideal research method.

In the December, 1940, issue of the Journal of Political Economy, another article (“Price Flexibility and Concentration in the Agricultural Processing Industries”, pp. 883-88) was published, growing out of previous empirical and theoretical work. This paper discusses the terminology concerning price “Flexibility” and alleged relationships between price flexibility and concentration of control in a given industry. It is argues that, in the agricultural processing industries (where short-run control of the supply of the food product is impossible), unlike the manufacturing industries, flexibility of margins is the important consideration, not flexibility of prices. Previous work of Means, Backman, and others in this field have failed to recognize the necessity for making this important distinction.

The great bulk of the descriptive phases of the price and production policies in the meat-packing industry has been completed. The basis no exists, in the applicant’s opinion, for a much clearer understanding of the nature of competition in the industry. Two important steps yet remain, however:

(3) The RESULTS of these policies.

This will involve the financial analysis of the leading firms (partially completed), the examination of the relationship of such monopolistic practices as do exist to market price differentials, costs and margins, the method of buying of livestock, and the results in terms of the effects on farmer and consumer. In other words, how far do actual results as to prices, profits, employment, and investment—depart from “ideal” results under more nearly perfect competitive conditions?

(4) Practicable solutions to eliminate any ill-effects on farmer and consumer which are found to exist.

This will involve the consideration as to whether or not reform is necessary. If it is, such alternatives as government regulation, distribution as a public utility, dissolution of large firms, cooperation, government competition, etc., will have to be considered.

18(c). List of Publications

“Marketing Phases of Interregional Competition in Dairying”, 189-page manuscript, 1937, to be published.

*Post-War Developments in the Marketing of Butter, Iowa Agr. Exp. Sta., Res. Bul. 250, Feb. 1939, 64 pages.

*”Some Economic Aspects of University Patents”, Journal of Farm Economics, May, 1939, pp. 494-98.

“Short-Circuiting the Butter Middlemen”, Iowa Farm Economist, Jan., 1939, pp. 13-14.

*Post-War Developments in the Marketing of Cheese, Iowa Agr. Exp. Sta., Res. Bul. 261, July, 1939, 100 pages.

“Concentration in Cheese Marketing”, Iowa Farm Econmist, April, 1939, pp. 5[?]-6.

*”Post-War Concentration in the Cheese Industry”, Journal of Political Economy, Dec. 1939, pp. 823-45.

“Suggested Approach to a Research Study in the Price and Production Policies of an Agricultural Processing Industry”, paper read at Round-table on Marketing Research, American Farm Economic Association, Detroit, Dec., 1938, 14 pages, to be published.

*”Market-Sharing in the Packing Industry”, paper read at Annual Meeting, American Farm Economic Association, Philadelphia, Dec., 1939. Published in Proceedings, Journal of Farm Economics, Feb., 1940, pp. 225-40.

Review of Malott and Martin, “The Agricultural Industries”, in American Economic Review, March 1940, pp. 147-48.

*”Price Flexibility and Concentration in the Agricultural Processing Industries2, Journal of Political Economy, Dec., 1940, pp. 883-88.

** A Theoretical Analysis of Imperfect Competition, with Special Application to the Agricultural Industries, Ph.D. Thesis, Harvard University, accepted in December, 1940; 460 pages. To be published on Iowa State College Press by summer of 1941.

* Copy available for submission upon request.
**Topical table of contents or summary available upon request.

Source: University of Chicago Archives. Office of the President. Hutchins Administration. Records. Box 284. Folder “Economics 1943-47”.

___________________

Hall of Distinguished Alumni
[University of Kentucky]

William Hord Nicholls

Born in Lexington, Ky., on July 19, 1914. Died, August 3, 1978. University Professor and Administrator. University of Kentucky, A.B., magna cum laude, 1934.

Serving as President of the Southern Economic Association (1958-59) and the American Farm Economic Association (1960-61), his expertise in the area of farm economics has been recognized also by governmental agencies and by a number of professional journals and societies.

After graduating magna cum laude (A.B., 1934) from the University, he then earned an M.A. degree at Harvard University (1938), the Ph.D., (1941) also at Harvard, and did post-doctoral work as a Fellow at University of Chicago (1941-42).

He was instructor, assistant professor and associate professor of economics, Iowa State College, 1938-44; assistant professor of economics, University of Chicago, 1945-48, and went to Vanderbilt University as a professor of economics in 1948. He became Chairman of the Department of Economics and Business Administration there in 1958, serving until 1961, serving the following year as visiting professor of economics at Harvard University. From 1965-77, he was Director of the Graduate Center for Latin American Studies at Vanderbilt, and was Harvie Branscomb Distinguished Professor at Vanderbilt, 1973-74.

He served briefly in 1934 as a statistical clerk for the Agricultural Adjustment Administration, Tobacco Section, Washington, D.C. During the summers of 1936 and 1937, he was field agent for the Bureau of Agricultural Economics, New England. He was research fellow and research assistant to Prof. John D. Black at Harvard, 1934-37, and a consultant, Office of Price Administration, Meats Section Washington, 1941-42. He was managing editor of “Journal of Political Economy,” 1946-48, and a visiting lecturer in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, summer of 1947.

He also was a member of the faculty, Salsburg (Austria) Seminar in American Studies, summer of 1949; economist and co-editor of “Mission Report,” “Turkish Mission,” “International Bank of Reconstruction and Development,” Turkey and Washington, in 1950; economist, Executive Office of the President, Council of Economic Advisers, Washington, 1953-54; technical director, Seventh American Assembly on U.S. Agriculture, Columbia University, 1954-56; consultant on Latin America,, Ford Foundation, Brazil and New York, 1960-64; agricultural economist, Fundacao Getulio Vargas, Rio de Janeiro, during the summers of 1965, 1968 and 1970, and for a period in 1963 and early 1964, and guest consultant, Instituto de Planejamento Economics e Social, Ministry of Planning, Rio de Janeiro, 1972-73.

He has served on the board of editors of three professional journals, on a number of national committees and advisory boards, and has won a number of additional honors given by agencies he served in various ways.

His book, “Imperfect Competition Within Agricultural Industries,” (1941) went into a second printing in 1947. He also wrote numerous articles for professional publications, as chapters to books, as papers to be delivered at various professional meetings and as policy reports to various agencies.

William Hord Nicholls was named to the Hall of Distinguished Alumni in February 1965.

Source: Hall of Distinguished Alumni, University of Kentucky website.

___________________

Vanderbilt University Memorial

William H. Nicholls was born in Lexington, Kentucky on July 19, 1914, and died in Nashville on August 4, 1978. Professor Nicholls did his undergraduate work at the University of Kentucky and his graduate work at Harvard University, where he received the Ph.D. in 1941. His doctoral dissertation, published that same year, on Imperfect Competition Within Agricultural Industries, established his reputation as one of the country’s leading agricultural economists. He began his teaching career at Iowa State University in 1938 and moved to the University of Chicago in 1945. While serving as assistant professor at the University of Chicago, he edited one of the major professional journals in economics, the Journal of Political Economy. Nicholls came to Vanderbilt as a full professor in 1948, where he continued his prodigious output of books and articles. He was president of the Southern Economic Association in 1958-59 and presidentof the American Farm Economic Association in 1960-61. He received the Centennial Distinguished Alumnus Award of the University of Kentucky in 1966 and was Harvie Branscomb Distinguished Professor at Vanderbilt in 1973. He chaired the Department of Economics and Business Administration from 1958 to 1961 and directed the Graduate Center for Latin American Studies at Vanderbilt from 1965 to 1977.

Distinguished Professor Nicholas Gerogescu-Roegen, writing in support of Professor Nicholls’ nomination for the Harvie Branscomb Distinguished Professorship, said of him, “He is the originator of the field of regional development. One would be justified in speaking of a Nicholls’ school, which has attracted numerous doctoral students to our Economics Department, and has enhanced the prestige of the University. His works in the area of agricultural economics have no equal. They reflect a unique combination of theoretical power with a keen insight of the relevant aspects of actuality. The best example is supplied by his (now a classic) volume Imperfect Competition Within Agricultural Industries, in which Bill has created some new and efficient tools for the analysis of monopolistic structure.

“His scholarly interest in agricultural economics and its relation to economic development brought him in contact with the problems of Latin America, with Brazil in particular. Here, again, Bill showed his imaginative approach and his scholarly grip of difficult problems. The excellent name our own department (and implicitly the University) has in Latin America and among the specialists on Latin American Economics, is due in the greatest part to Bill’s contributions”.

Source: Department of Economics, Vanderbilt University, full biography link from the In Memorium webpage.

Image Source: Department of Economics, Vanderbilt University, in Memorium webpage.

Tags BlackJD, Bullock, Chamberlin, Cruz, Gay, Mason, Nicholls, SchultzTW, Schumpeter, Stigler, Taussig, TaylorOH, Williams

Courses Harvard Suggested Reading

Harvard. History of Economics Reading List. Schumpeter, 1949

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2016-10-23

Joseph Schumpeter offered his graduate course “History and Literature of Economics since 1776” nine times during the period 1940-1949. The core readings were basically unchanged. In an earlier post I provided the reading list and examinations from the 1939-40 academic year. This post provides the much stripped down reading list for the last time Schumpeter offered the course. The only addition to the reading list was George Stigler’s 1941 book, Production and Distribution Theories.

Below you will find the course enrollment figures and the reading list for the Spring semester of 1949.

___________________________

Course Enrollment Statistics:

	Graduates	Seniors	Juniors	Radcliffe	Other	Total
1939-40	9	3	1	0	3	16
1940-41	11	2	0	3	1	17
1941-42	5	1	0	4	1	12
1942-43	10	3	0	6	3	22
1943-44	2	1	0	3	3	9
1944-45	Not offered
1945-46	18			2	5	25
1946-47	21	1	0	6	7	35
1947-48	17	4	0	2	7	30
1948-49	2	1	0	0	1	4

Note: course number was Economics 113b until the academic year 1947-48, then Economics 213b thereafter. Joseph Schumpeter died in January 1950.

Source: Harvard/Radcliffe Online Historical Reference Shelf. Harvard President’s Reports.

___________________________

Economics 213b
Spring 1949

Reading List

This course will cover the period between and including A. Smith and A. Marshall. Particular emphasis will be placed upon the Ricardian system of economic theory. The new edition of Gide and Rist, History of Economic Doctrines, Heath & Company, 1948, is recommended for survey purposes.

Richard Cantillon, Essai sur la nature du commerce en général (1755), English translation by Higgs (1931).
David Hume, Political Discourses (edition by Green and Grose, 1875), Vol. I. [Miller edition]
Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations, Cannan’s (Modern Library) edition.
David Ricardo, Principles of Political Economy. (Everyman’s Library).
Thomas R. Malthus, Essay on the Principle of Population (1798). [1803 edition, enlarged]
William N. Senior [sic: should be “Senior, Nassau William”], Outline of the Science of Political Economy (1836).
John Stuart Mill, Principles of Political Economy, also read introduction to Ashley’s edition.
Karl Marx, first volume of Das Kapital (English translation, Modern Library).
Augustin Cournot, Principles of the Theory of Wealth (Fisher’s edition, 1927).
Knut Wicksell, Lectures on Political Economy (Robbins’ edition, 1934) [Vol. I; Vol. II].
Alfred Marshall, Principles of Economics, particularly Book V.

Further suggestions:

E. Böhm-Bawerk, Capital and Interest, Vol. I.
E. Cannan, Theories of Production and Distribution (1924). [2^nd ed., 1903]
F. W. Taussig, Wages and Capital (1896).
G. Stigler, Production and Distribution Theories (1941).
J. Bonar, Malthus and his Work (1924). [1885 ed.]
M. Bowley, Nassau Senior and Classical Economics (1937).
J. R. Hicks, “Leon Walras,” (Econometrica, 1934).
J. M. Keynes, Essays in Biography (mainly the essays on Malthus and Marshall).
J. Viner, Studies in the Theory of International Trade (1937).

Source: Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003. Harvard University Archives, HUC 8522.2.1. Box 4, Folder “Economics, 1948-1949 (2 of 2)”.

Image Source: Harvard Album, 1947.

Tags Schumpeter, Stigler

Columbia Computing

Columbia. Statistical Lab Equipment for Economics Faculty Request, 1948

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2016-10-19
1 Comment on Columbia. Statistical Lab Equipment for Economics Faculty Request, 1948

__________________________

One detects George Stigler’s style in the justification below for the purchase of two pieces of calculating equipment for the use of economics faculty at Columbia in 1948: “…the economist requires more than a library, a pen, a desk, and possibly a crystal-ball to prosecute his studies. He requires empirical material, lots of it, and this material is often numerical.” In the same budget request we also find a list (with current costs) of mundane faculty office furniture items, classroom accessories, and a dictionary for the department administrator.

Cf. An earlier posting for the purchase of a calculator by Henry Schultz at the University of Chicago in 1928.

__________________________

Columbia University
in the City of New York
[New York 27, N.Y.]

FACULTY OF POLITICAL SCIENCE

January 13, 1948

Dr. Frank D. Fackenthal, Acting President,
213 Low Memorial Library.

Dear Mr. President:

I beg to submit the requests of the Department of Economics for fixed equipment and physical changes for the fiscal year 1948-49. The greater part of the sum asked is for non-recurring items. The total request is for $1,465, divided as follows:

1) New furniture necessitated by recent alterations in Fayerweather and Hamilton Halls

$270.00

2) Ordinary needs for 1948-49

$195.00

3) Statistical equipment for Economics Faculty

$1000.00

Item 1) represents furniture equipment urgently needed as a result of the alterations in the two halls. The details are given on the following page. A part of this equipment has already been asked for during the present fiscal year and all of it should, if possible, be provided at once and paid for on the present budget.

Item 2) is explained on the second page following.

Item 3) represents a request for technical equipment which would be of great service in the work of members of the Department. This request is explained and justified in detail in the appended statement prepared by a Departmental committee consisting of Professor Stigler, chairman, and Professors Haig and Harriss.

Respectfully yours,
[signed] Carter Goodrich

__________________________

1) [New furniture]

Item	For	Cost
Book shelves	A. R. Burns	$30.00
Clothing tree	A. R. Burns	$ 5.00
Club chair	R. Nurkse	$75.00
Legal size filing cabinet	R. Nurkse	$75.00
6 straight chairs	H. Taylor	$30.00
Swivel chair	C. L. Harriss	$15.00
4 coat racks	H. Taylor	$20.00
Small table	O. Hoeffding	$20.00
		[Total] $270.00

2) Ordinary needs for 1949-49

Item	For	Cost
Wall map of Europe	R. Nurkse	$ 20.00
Grid-panel blackboard in classroom	W. S. Vickrey	$ 20.00
Dictionary	G. D. Stewart	$ 5.00
Other needs		$150.00
		[Total] $195.00

3) Proposal of a Statistical Laboratory for Faculty in Economics

$1,000.00

The need

Contrary to a widely held opinion, the economist requires more than a library, a pen, a desk, and possibly a crystal-ball to prosecute his studies. He requires empirical material, lots of it, and this material is often numerical. Statistical analysis, broadly defined, is the social scientist’s laboratory, and in principle the social scientist must spend more time in his laboratory than the natural scientist in his because the social scientist’s findings become obsolete even in the absence of improved techniques and doctrines. The statistical method is important in all branches of economics; it is noteworthy that the present proposal is energetically supported by five teachers of economic theory.

Granting the necessity for quantitative work, and noting the frequency with which such work leads to fairly extensive computations, the faculty requires access to computational equipment (and, one is tempted to say, assistance). At present this access is small and fortuitous. The available computational equipment is being used extensively by students, and it is common to be unsuccessful for several days before obtaining use of a machine. Since the department of economics has no such equipment, a protracted use of the machines (that is, more than say 6 hours a week) is properly objected to by the administrator of the laboratory, but usually this is an unattainable limit.

The detailed proposal

1. Equipment. We propose to purchase two machines:

Underwood Sundstrand, tape adding machine, Model 1014p
Marchant Calculator, Model ACT – 10M

2. Cost. The purchase price of these machines would be:

Sundstrand: $330 less 10 percent plus 6 percent = $316.80
Marchant: $750 less 15 percent plus 6 percent = $682.50,

a total of $999.30. The annual cost of servicing the machines would be (1) nothing the first year, (2) $18 for the Sundstrand and $36 for the Marchant thereafter. In addition there would be the cost of the tapes for the Sundstrand, electricity, and space.

These machines will last, at a very conservative minimum, 10 years. Hence, the pro-rate annual cost of the laboratory would be on the order of $170 (of which $100 is depreciation), or $10 per member of the department.

Administration. The machines would be most generally useful if they were placed in some small room to which the faculty had access. A much less efficient alternative would be to keep them in the departmental office when not in use.

Source: Columbia University Archives, Central Files 1890- (UA#001). Box 406. Folder “1.1.313 (1/4); Goodrich, Carter; 7/1946 – 6/1948”.

Image Source: Marchant Calculator, Model ACT-10M. Smithsonian. The National Museum of American History.

Tags BurnsAR, Goodrich, Haig, Harriss, Hoeffding, Nurkse, Stigler, TaylorH, Vickrey

Chicago Economists

Chicago. Talent-Scouting for New Faculty, Joint Appointments and Visiting Faculty, 1945

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2016-10-09

__________________________

On April 10, 1945, the chairman of the University of Chicago’s economics department, Professor Simeon E. Leland, submitted a 77 page (!) memorandum to President Robert M. Hutchins entitled “Postwar Plans of the Department of Economics–A Wide Variety of Observations and Suggestions All Intended To Be Helpful in Improving the State of the University”.

In his cover letter Leland wrote “…in the preparation of the memorandum, I learned much that was new about the past history of the Department. Some of this, incorporated in the memorandum, looks like filler stuck in, but I thought it ought to be included for historical reasons and to furnish some background for a few of the suggestions.”

In recent posts I have provided a list of visiting professors who taught economics at the University of Chicago up through 1944 (excluding those visitors who were to receive permanent appointments) and supporting tables with enrollment trends and faculty data (ages and educational backgrounds).

In this post we have three lists of names for economists who in 1945 could be taken into consideration for either permanent economics, joint appointments with other department or visiting appointments at the University of Chicago. Many names are immediately recognisable, others less so, and other known names left unnamed. Instead of observing the actual choices of the department, we have, so to speak, an observation of the “choice set” as perceived by the department.

______________________________

The following list of possible additions to the staff of the Department of Economics represents an enumeration of suggestions made by various members of the Department. It, of course, does not include all of those whom the Department would like to invite as permanent members of the University staff. Many of those whom we would most like to have, it is well-known, are not available; nor can the Department be sure that those listed below would favorably consider an invitation to join our staff. Likewise, this list must not be construed as nominations for membership in the Department. Some members of the staff are known to object to the inclusion of some of the names listed below. But if unanimous consent were required before suggestions could be made, little progress in building a Department would be possible. In its present state, the list is only an enumeration of suggestions warranting further inquiry. The fields of interest of many of the potential candidates overlap and the appointment of some individuals would make it undesirable, or at least uneconomic, to appoint others. Nevertheless, the list does given an idea of some persons who might be considered for future appointments. This list, like any other enumeration, is subject to constant revision, both in the addition or subtraction of names.

Name	Present Location	Field of Interest or Specialization
Abraham (sic) Bergson	University of Texas	Wages and Wage Theory
Robert Bryce	Ottawa, Canada
Norman Buchanan	University of California	Public Utilities, Corporation Finance, Business Cycles (also possible interest in United States Economic History)
Earl Hamilton	Northwestern University	Economic History
Albert G. Hart	C.E.D., Chicago	Theory, Finance, etc.
J. R. Hicks	University of Manchester, England	Economic Theory
Harold A. Innis	University of Toronto	Economic History
Maurice Kelso	University of Wisconsin	Land Economics
Tjalling Koopmans	Cowles Commission	Statistics; Mathematical Economics; Business Cycles; Shipping
Simon Kuznets	University of Pennsylvania	National Income; Historical Statistics
Sanford Mosk	University of California	Economic History
Charles A. Myers	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	Labor; Industrial Relations
Walter Rostow	Columbia University	Economic History (XIX Century)
Leonard Salter	University of Wisconsin	Land Economics
T. Scitovszky	London School of Economics; U.S. Army	Theory of Capital and Interest; Theory of Tariffs
Arthur Smithies	University of Michigan; Bureau of the Budget, Washington, D. C.	Fiscal Policy; Theory; Money and Banking
Eugene Staley	School of Advanced International Studies (Washington, D.C.)	International Economics; Foreign Trade
George Stigler	University of Minnesota	Theory and Foreign Trade
R. H. Tawney	London School of Economics	Economic History
Allen Wallis	Stanford University	Statistics

______________________________

Joint Appointments

The Department of Economics shares an interest in many fields with other departments, schools and divisions of the University. It recognizes that most problems of the Social Sciences have economic aspects, and other aspects as well. Many of the fields embraced within particular disciplines are explained by accident or tradition, not always by logic. No one department can, therefore, assert a valid claim for the exclusive staffing of fields of interest held in common with other branches of knowledge. It seems wisest to develop these common grounds through joint appointments. Not only does this enable us to attract to the University more outstanding scholars than the fellowship of one department might provide, but it should also place at the disposition of those interested in promoting joint fields, perhaps, larger resources than either acting alone could command.

Joint appointments, too, will tend to integrate the Social Sciences with the other schools and departments affected, as well as contribute to the unity of the University as a whole. The Department of Economics, therefore, ventures to suggest joint appointments in the following fields:

Fields	Units Affected
Trusts and Monopolies	Business, Law, Economics
Railroads and Transportation	Business, Economics
Public Utilities	Economics, Political Science, Law
Social Control of Business	Business, Law, Political Science, Economics
Advanced Applied Mathematics and Statistics	Economics, Mathematics, Business, Institute of Statistics, other departments interested in statistics
Urban Planning (or the Utilization of Land)	Geography, Political Science, Economics, Law, Business, Sociology
Social Legislation, particularly affecting Labor	Business, Sociology, Social Service Administration, Law, Political Science, Economics

[…]

Among those who might be proposed for joint appointments are the following:

Name	Present Location	Field of Interest	Appropriate Appointment
Charles L. Dearing	Brookings Institution and U.S. Government	Transportation	Economics, Business
Corwin D. Edwards	Northwestern University	Trusts, Monopolies, Control of Business	Political Science, Law, Economics
Milton Friedman	Columbia University	Economic Theory, Public Finance, Monetary Policy	Economics, Institute of Statistics
Homer Hoyt	Regional Plan Association, Inc., New York, N.Y.	Land Planning	Economic Geography, Political Science
David E. Lilienthal	T. V. A.	Public Utilities	Political Science, Law, Economics
Abraham Wald	Columbia University	Applied Mathematics, Statistics	Mathematics, Economics
Allen Wallis	Columbia University	Applied Mathematics, Statistics	Mathematics, Economics
Samuel S. Wilks	Princeton University	Applied Mathematics, Statistics	Mathematics, Economics

Visiting Professorships

Each department needs to diversify its courses. Too frequently the attempt at diversification is made by adding permanent members to the regular staff. The need can best be met by the appointment of visiting professors.

[…]

A list of some who might be invited to the University as Visiting Professors is as follows:

Name	Present Location	Fields of Interest
John D. Black	Harvard	Agricultural Economics
(J.) Roy Blough	U. S. Treasury	Public Finance
Kenneth Boulding	Iowa State College	Economic Analysis; Theory of Capital
Karl Brandt	Food Institute, Stanford U.	Agricultural Economics
Harry G. Brown	University of Missouri	Economic Theory, Public Finance
J. Douglas Brown	Princeton University	Industrial Relations
Edward H. Chamberlain(sic)	Harvard	Economic Theory; Monopolistic Competition
J. M. Clark	Columbia University	Economic theory
J. B. Condliffe	California	International Trade; International Commercial Policy
Joseph S. Davis	Food Institute, Stanford U.	Agricultural Economics
Milton Gilbert	Office of Price Administration, Washington, D.C.	Economic Theory; Price Control
T. Haavelmo	Norwegian Shipping Administration, New York, N.Y.	Econometrics
Alvin Hansen	Harvard	Economic Theory; Fiscal Policy
F. A. Hayek	London School of Economics and Political Science	History of Social Thought; Economic Theory; Monetary Policy
J. R. Hicks	University of Manchester	Economic Theory
George Jaszy	U. S. Dept. of Commerce	National Income; Business Analysis
O. B. Jesness	University of Minnesota	Agricultural Economics
Nicholas Kaldor	London School of Economics	Theory of the Firm; Imperfect Competition; Money; Business Cycles
M. Kalecki	Institute of Statistics of University of Oxford, England	Economic Fluctuations; Expenditure Rationing
M. Slade Kendrick	Cornell University	Public Finance; Farm Taxation
Arthur Kent	San Francisco Attorney-at-Law	Taxation
J. M. Keynes	Cambridge University	Fiscal and Monetary Policy
Simon S. Kuznets	National Bureau of Economic Research; University of Pennsylvania	Statistics; National Income and Its Problem
A. P. Lerner	New School for Social Research	Economic Theory; Fiscal Policy; Public Finance
Edward S. Mason	Harvard University	Economic Theory; International Trade and Trade Practices
Wesley C. Mitchell	Columbia University	Money and Prices
Jacob Mosak	Office of Price Administration, Washington, D.C.	Economic Theory; Statistics; Control of Prices
R. A. Musgrave	Federal Reserve Board, Washington, D. C.	Public Finance
Randolph Paul	Lord, Day and Lord, Attorneys-at-Law	Taxation
Paul A. Samuelson	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	Economic Theory; Money and Banking; Fiscal Policy
Lawrence H. Seltzer	Wayne University	Money and Banking; Public Debts; Fiscal Policy
Carl S. Shoup	Columbia University	Public Finance
Sumner H. Slichter	Harvard University	Business Economics
Richard Stone	England	Statistics; National Income
R. H. Tawney	London School of Economics	Economic History
Abraham Wald	Columbia University	Mathematics and Statistics
John H. Williams	Harvard University	Money and Banking

In the past, the Department has supplemented its staff by the appointment of visiting professors, but the invitations have ordinarily been restricted to the Summer Quarter in order (1) to relieve the regular staff from summer teaching and (2) to provide “window-dressing” to make the Summer Quarters more attractive to new students. The potentialities of the visiting professorship can hardly be realized when the practice is applied only to the Summer Quarter. That it has made that Quarter more attractive would seem to be indicated by the outstanding economists who have been guests of the University of Chicago.

[…]

The practice of inviting outstanding men to the University of Chicago seems to have been more prevalent in the early years of the University than it is today. Visiting appointments also declined with the strained finances of the University during the late depression. The Department is anxious to develop a program of instruction and research based upon the policy of the regular employment of visitors. A sum, equal to the stipend of a full professor, if used to finance a program of regular visitors, would add greater content and prestige to the Department than could be secured in any other way.

Source: University of Chicago Library, Department of Special Collections. Office of the President. Hutchins Administration Records. Box 73, Folder “Economics Dept., “Post-War Plans” Simeon E. Leland, 1945″.

Tags Bergson, BlackJD, Blough, Boulding, BrandtK, BrownHG, BrownJD, Bryce, Buchanan, Chamberlin, ClarkJM, Condliffe, DavisJS, Dearing, EdwardsCD, Friedman, GilbertM, Haavelmo, Hamilton, Hansen, HartAB, Hayek, Hicks, Hoyt, Innis, Jaszy, Jesness, Kaldor, Kalecki, Kelso, KendrickMS, Kent, Keynes, Koopmans, Kuznets, Leland, Lerner, Lilienthal, Mosaic, Mosk, Myers, PaulR, Rostow, Salter, Samuelson, Scitovszky, Seltzer, Shoup, Slichter, Smithies, Staley, Stigler, Stone, Tawney, Wald, Wallis, Wilks, Williams

Chicago Economists

Chicago. Visiting Economics Professors, 1896-1943.

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2016-10-07

__________________________

The memorandum deserves reproduction in its entirety sometime (and will probably be done by somebody else), but I intend to serve at least several blogpost-sized portions from Leland’s memo. So look forward for more tables/excerpts to come.

Today we have (1) a list compiled by Leland of visiting professors to the department of economics who had not been absorbed into the faculty as of 1945 (e.g. George Stigler was still at Minnesota at the time of the memo was written. Later posts include (2) data on economics faculty 1944/45 and the trend of enrolments and (3) talent-scouting lists for possible permanent, visiting and joint appointments.

__________________________

List of visiting professors
(excluding faculty members who frequently were visitors before joining the University)

[An asterisk (*) for deceased colleagues]

Visiting Professor	Year	Institution	Present Location
G. W. S. Adams	1902
Henry C. Adams*	1902	Michigan
Clarence E. Ayers	1923	Amherst	Texas
Stephan Bauer	1899	Chamber of Commerce, Brünn, Austria
Spurgeon Bell	1920	Texas	National Resources Planning Board
E. L. Bogart	1910	Princeton	Illinois (Emeritus)
Arthur J. Boynton*	1914	Kansas
Harry G. Brown	1917	Missouri	Missouri
J. B. Canning	1924	Stanford	Stanford
T. N. Carver	1908	Harvard	Harvard (Emeritus)
Paul T. Cherington	1914	Harvard	McKinsey & Co., Management Consultants, 60 East 42nd St., N.Y.C.
F. E. Clark	1921	Northwestern	Northwestern
F. R. Clow*	1904	State Normal, Oshkosh, Wisconsin
J. B. Condliffe	1941	California	California
Frederick E. Croxton	1926	Ohio State	Columbia
E. E. Day	1910	Harvard	Cornell
F. S. Deibler	1917	Northwestern	Northwestern (Emeritus)
J. C. Duncan	1913	Illinois
J. F. Ebersole	1914	Minnesota	Harvard
Donald English	1916	Cornell	Cornell
Frank A. Fetter	1926	Princeton	Princeton (Emeritus)
Martin G. Glaeser	1930	Wisconsin	Wisconsin
John Paul Good	1899	Eastern Ill. State Normal, Charleston
Frank D. Graham	1930	Princeton	Princeton
Waldo E. Grimes	1939	Kansas State College	Kansas State College
Lawrence H. Grinstead	1926	Ohio State
Walton H. Hamilton	1917	Amherst	Yale
Matthew B. Hammond*	1921	Ohio State
Max S. Handman*	1928	Texas
Lewis H. Haney	1914	Texas	New York
Charles O. Hardy	1923 1925) 1929) 1933)	State Univ. of Iowa Brookings Institution	Federal Reserve Bank, Kansas City, Missouri
Ernest L. Harris	1904
Grover G. Heubner	1926	Pennsylvania	Pennsylvania
Jens P. Jensen*	1920) 1930)	Kansas
Alvin S. Johnson	1909	Texas	New School for Social Research
Eliot Jones	1925	Stanford	Stanford
Albert S. Keister	1926) 1927)	North Carolina Woman’s College	North Carolina Woman’s College
William S. Krebs	1921	Washington University	Washington University
Robert R. Kuczynski	1923	Statistical Office, Berlin	12 Lawn Rd., London, N.W. 3, England
Ben W. Lewis	1931) 1937)	Oberlin	Oberlin
H. L. Lutz	1915	Oberlin	Princeton
Leverett S. Lyon	1926) 1927	Brookings Institution	Chicago Association of Commerce
James D. Magee	1916	Cincinnati	New York
T. W. Mitchell	1911	Minnesota
Bernard Moses*	1898	California
Edwin G. Nourse	1931	Brookings Institution	Brookings Institution
T. W. Page*	1898	Randolph-Macon
Maffeo Pantaleoni*	1896	Naples
C. A. Phillips	1931	State Univ. of Iowa	State Univ. of Iowa
H. H. Preston	1924	Univ. of Washington	Univ. of Washington
Benjamin M. Rastall	1910	Wisconsin
H. L. Reed	1923	Washington University	Cornell
R. R. Renne	1940	Montana State	Montana State
Edward V. Robinson*	1908	Minnesota
Clyde O. Ruggles	1916) 1920)	Ohio State	Harvard
William J. Shultz	1926	College of the City of New York	College of the City of New York
Guy E. Snider	1915	College of the City of New York	College of the City of New York
A. E. Staley	1941	Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy	School of Advanced International Studies, Washington, D.C.
George J. Stigler	1943	Minnesota	Minnesota
Walter W. Stewart	1915	Missouri	Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, N.J.
R. H. Tawney	1939	London	London
George O. Virtue*	1915	Nebraska
Norman J. Ware	1942	Wesleyan	Wesleyan
G. S. Wehrwein*	1940	Wisconsin
Louis Weld	1916	Yale	McCann-Erikson Co., New York
Albert C. Whitaker	1912) 1913)	Stanford	Stanford (Emeritus)
Nathaniel R. Whitney	1921	Cincinnati	Proctor and Gamble, Cincinnati
Murray S. Wildman*	1909	Missouri
John H. Williams	1921	Northwestern	Harvard
Milburn L. Wilson	1923	Montana	Chief, Nutrition Programs Branch, Office of Distribution, War Food Administration
Ambrose P. Winston	1913	Pekin
A. B. Wolfe	1915	Texas	Ohio State
Holbrook Working	1928	Stanford	Stanford
Bruce Wyman*	1903	Harvard
Allyn A. Young*	1912	Washington University
Ernest C. Young	1939	Purdue	Purdue

Image Source: Detail of Simeon E. Leland photograph. University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf1-03717, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.

Tags AdamsHenryC, Carver, Day, FetterFA, GrahamFD, JohnsonA, Leland, Nourse, Stigler, Williams, WorkingH, Young

Columbia Courses Exam Questions Suggested Reading Syllabus

Columbia. Core Economic Theory. Hart, 1946-47

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2015-12-07

Up through the academic year 1945-46, Arthur F. Burns offered the first core economic theory course, Economic Analysis (Economics 153-154), in the Columbia graduate program. The following year, 1946-47, the course was taught by the visiting professor of economics (who would be offered and accepted a regular appointment that same year), Albert G. Hart. In 1947-48 Economic Analysis was given a new course number, Economics 103-104, and taught in three sections by Hart, Stigler, Vickrey.
From Hart’s materials for Economic Analysis (1946-1947), I provide below transcriptions of “Introductory Notes” along with the “Prospectus and Background” and the “Outline of Economics 153—154” that includes reading assignments from a 92 page set of typed course notes. Midterms and final semester exams have been appended to this posting.

Introductory Notes

Prospectus and Background

Outline of Economics 153-154

Midterm exam, ca. late November 1946

First term final examination, January 21, 1947

Midterm exam, April 14, 1947

Final examination, May 22, 1947

_____________________________

*Economics 153-154—Economic Analysis. 3 points each session. Professor Hart.

M. and W. at 10. 301 Fayerweather.

Character, uses, and limitations of received economic theory. “Equilibrium” of economic units, markets, and clusters of markets; “process analysis.” Translation of policy problems into questions of theory, and of theory problems into questions of fact.

*Designed primarily for candidates for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Economics.

Economics 159—160—Economic Theory. 3 points each session. Mr. Vickrey.

Tu. and Th. at 9. 301 Fayerweather.

A systematic course in neoclassical economics, designed to prepare students for more advanced studies. Emphasis is placed on economic theory as a tool for analyzing economic changes.

[Note that Vickrey was listed in the Bulletin of Information that announced the courses for 1946-47. From the January 1947 examination below it is clear that Stigler taught either an additional section of Economics 153 or he taught Economics 159 instead of Vickrey in the autumn 1946 term. In any event the next year found all three (Hart, Stigler and Vickrey) teaching separate sections of the new core theory course, Economics 103-104.]

Source. Columbia University Bulletin of Information, 46^th Series, No. 37 (August 10, 1946). History, Economics, Public Law, Sociology, and Anthropology: Courses offered by the Faculty of Political Science (Winter and Spring Sessions, 1946-1947),p. 40-41.

_____________________________

Economics 153-154
“ECONOMIC ANALYSIS”
Outline

A. G. Hart, October 15, 1946

Economics 153—i
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

Introductory Notes

The attached outline is aimed to clarify the general structure of the 153-143 course. Note that the topical outline becomes increasingly vague as to reading assignments toward the latter part of the course; this will be filled in later, as I get the feel of the class’s effective reading pace and as I improve my forecast of the time-table.

Arrangement of Outline

By way of orientation, the topical outline has been carried clear through to May. The detailed sentence outline, however, is brought only up to the current date; “to be continued”.

The sentence outline is intended to serve as at least a partial substitute for classroom notes. It is based on the notes from which I speak in class, and aims to carry the main thread of the argument. My own experience as a graduate student was that trying to get detailed notes interfered with thinking things through in classes; and I want to put the class in a position where class notes can be somewhat sketchy. If facilities can be managed, I hope at least part of the time to be able to give out installments of the sentence outline in advance, to maximize the extent to which I can accept interruptions in class without losing the thread.

From time to time there will be written exercises, supplementary reading suggestions, etc.

Why This Sequence of Topics?

The organization of the material is intended to minimize the chief normal learning-difficulty of economic theory, which arises from having to carry seemingly unrelated pieces of analysis some time in separate packages before they fit together. I am trying by my first and second “approximations” to keep the various special topics continuously in perspective; to fit in each piece almost as soon as it is developed; and to avoid carrying forward excess baggage in the way of gadgets which later prove useless.

The “first and second approximations” should not be identified with either “statics and dynamics” or “perfect and imperfect competition”. In my view, the best stopping-place for a first approximation is a good way short of a full account of “statics”; in particular, it leaves out a good many institutional insights which can be handled after a fashion in “static” terms. The “second approximation”, needless to say, will stop a good deal short of a well-rounded account of “economic dynamics”—for the very good reason that a satisfactory “dynamics” is not yet worked out. As to imperfect competition, some elements of the subject go into the first approximation; and a good many, to my taste, classify as useless gadgets and go out altogether.

Acquaintance with Authors

It is not a primary objective of the course to acquaint students with authors. But part of the process of learning theoretical analysis is to observe the theoretical frameworks set up by a few of the masters. The reading list will give the elements of the point of view of Marshall, Keynes, Hicks, Stigler or Boulding, and one aspect of the thinking of Lange; Fisher, Knight, Pigou and J. M. Clark will be represented only by fragments, and many other important writers not at all. The foregoing constitutes a minimum list of theorists whose mark should be represented in an economist’s bookshelf.

____________________________________

PROSPECTUS AND BACKGROUND

I. Conceptions of the Course. I propose to treat economic theory not as an auxiliary to the economist’s work (like statistical method), but as the core of economics.

A. It is tempting to think of economics as composed of two classes of sub-fields: subject-matter fields (money, international trade, labor, etc.) relating to particular sets of institutions and their working: tools (theory, statistics, history, perhaps law).
B. Theory has a claim to be the distinctive feature by which economics can be identified.
C. In essence, theory is a systematic check list of questions: an economist is one who knows the questions.
D. The course aims at coverage (an “advanced principles”) rather than at maximum proficiency on a small number of topics.
E. I refuse to accept the view that theoretical and institutional approaches are competitive:

1. Neither type of knowledge of economics makes the other dispensable.
2. Each type of knowledge contributes to the applicability of the other.

II. Content of Economic Theory. Economic theory is a way of dealing with economic quantities; but it deals also with people and social groups.

A. Considering that economics purports to be a social science, it is astounding how far it turns out to operate by manipulation of abstract quantitative symbols.
B. The human side of economics comes in through the choice of hypotheses; but the central questions economics asks about people are quantitative.
C. In general, economic theory deals with choice among alternatives; with substitution of one means to an end for others; and with compromises among partially conflicting goals by maximizing something. It has to criticize goals themselves, with an eye on the degree to which goals are set to make the game interesting.
D. The quantities with which economics deals are in the first instance events (final services, productive services, transactions). “Goods” turn out to be “bundles of services”: wealth has the dimensions rate-of-service X time.

III. Plan of the Course. The course is planned as a “spiral” progression across a wide range of topics:

A. Its first stage is an analysis of national income and product, following Hicks.
B. Beyond that stage, analysis will run in terms of:

1. The economic unit (firm or household)
2. Markets as inter-relations of units
3. Unemployment and fluctuations
4. “Welfare economics”

C. In the second stage, these four problems will be considered in “Statics”—i.e., they are carried up to the point at which anticipations and uncertainty take on importance, but not further. The idea is to postpone refinement of analysis till after looking at the theorist’s concept of a “system of economics”.
D. In the third stage, elements of uncertainty will be brought to the surface, and the more general theoretical consequences of institutionalist insights not recognized in the second stage will be drawn.
E. In view of numbers, class meetings cannot be conducted primarily as discussions; but I shall welcome questions and argument, and hope to provide much of the benefit of discussion via written assignments and conferences. Student reliance must be largely on learning cooperatively.

IV. Economics as a Field. The field of economics deserves the best of human intelligence; and the profession is one in which its members can take pride.

A. The critical importance of economics is visible in the policy field: whether or not our society cracks up depends largely on whether a minimum of wisdom (or good luck) guides our economic policy.
B. Waiving the question whether economics is “a science”, it is a field in which it takes a great deal of mental power, and a heroic effort to correct biases, to make major contributions.
C. Economics has its weaknesses and its record of failures (though nothing like as black a record as the public may think); but its professional standards deserve respect, and its prospects seem hopeful.

____________________________________

AGH—10/9/46

OUTLINE FOR ECONOMICS 153-154

[PART I]

I. Introduction. (Sept. 30-Oct. 2: 2 hours)

Required:

Hicks and Hart, Social Framework of American Economy, Chapter 1

Suggested Supplements:

Stigler, Economics of Price, Chapter 1

II. The Economic Process. (National Income and Output: Oct. 7, 9, 16: 3 hours)

Required:

Hicks and Hart, Parts I and IV; over II-III lightly.

Suggested Supplements:

F. H. Knight, teaching materials reproduced from Social Science II Syllabus (Univ. of Chicago Bookstore)

[PART II]

III. The Economic Unit: schematic view

A. The Firm and Costs (Oct. 18, 23, 25, perhaps 30: 3 to 1 hours hours)

Required:

Option:
Stigler, Chapters 7-9; 1^st Section of Chapter 10 or
Boulding, Economic Analysis, Chapters 22-23, followed by 21

B. The Household (perhaps October 30; Nov. 4, 6, 11, 13,18, perhaps 20: 5 to 7 hours)

Required:

Option:
Stigler, Chapter V, or Boulding, chapters 29-30,
Hicks, Value and Capital, Chapters I-II
Marshall, Book III
Hicks, Note to Chapter II; Chapter III

IV. Inter-Relations of Units: “Markets”, First Approximation

A. Introduction: Interplay of units; aggregation; clearing the market (Oct. 30: 1 hour)

B. Monopoly: One unit versus many. (Nov. 4, 6

Required: Cournot, Chapter V

C. Perfect Competition on inter-related markets: factor markets; “general equilibrium”. (Nov. 18, 20, 25, 27: 3-4 hours)

Required: Cournot, Chapter V

D. Monopoly: One unit versus many. (Nov. 4, 6

Required:

Stigler, Chapter 10
Cassel, Theory of Social Economy
Hicks, Value and Capital, Part II (Chapters IV-VIII)

E. Variations on a Classical Theme: monopolistic competition (Dec. 2, 4, 9, 11: 4 hours)

Required:

Stigler, Part III (Chapters 11-15) (or alternative to be assigned)

Reserve of time: December 16, 18: 2 hours.

F. Inter-temporal and inter-spacial markets. (Jan. 6, 8, 13: 3 hours)

Required:

I. Fisher, or alternative to be assigned.
[Assignment: Irving Fisher, Theory of Interest, pp. 99-149, 178-230 or Rate of Interest, pp. 117-177. If possible, also Theory of Interest,pp. 231-315 or Rate of Interest, pp. 374-415 Cf. Stigler, Ch. 17, and Boulding, Ch. 33.]

Reserve of time: January 15: 1 hour.

V. Welfare Economics—First Approximation: (Feb. 3, 5, 10, 12: about 4 hours)

Losses through unemployment and through inefficient use of employed resources; equalization of returns at the margin as welfare criterion; system-wide external economies; inequality and incentives; substantial identity of welfare economics for capitalist and socialist economies.

Readings: Lange on Socialism; Lerner; Robbins-Kaldor-Hicks journal discussion; Simons.

[Marshall, Principles, Book V, Ch. XIII (pp. 462-476
A.P. Lerner, Economics of Control, pp. 1-105
O. Lange, Economics of Socialism (with Lippincott and Taylor; Lange essay) or “On the Economic Theory of Socialism”, Rev. Ec. Studies, Oct. 1936, pp. 53-71, and Feb., 1937, pp. 123-142
H. C. Simons, Positive Program for Laissez-Faire
L. Robbins, “Interpersonal Comparisons”, Econ. Jour., Dec., 1938, pp. 635-641
N. Kaldor, “Welfare Propositions” Ibid., Sept., 1939, pp. 549-552
D. H. Robertson, “Wage Grumbles” in Readings in Theory of Income Distribution, pp. 221-236]

VI. Unemployment Fluctuations—First Approximation (Feb. 17, 19, 21, 26: about 4 hours)

Effects of general inadequacy of demand with limited price flexibility; “propensities” to save, invest, as influenced by government budgets, foreign trade, money, etc.; basis for expecting fluctuations in demand; the prescription of “Flexibility”.

Readings: Keynes, Lerner, NPA, A. F. Burns

[A. P. Lerner, Economics of Control, Chapters 22-23 (pp. 271-301)
Gardiner C. Means, Monetary Theory of Employment, Chapters V-VI (mimeographs; on reserve)
National Planning Association, National Budgets for Full Employment (pamphlet, Washington, 1945)

Additional stuff if time:
J. M. Keynes, General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money, Books III-IV (pp. 89-254)
A. F. Burns, Economic Research and the Keynesian Thinking of Our Times (New York, National Bureau of Economic Research, 1946) pp. 3-29
Oscar Lange, Price Flexibility and Employment, Bloomington, Indiana, 1944

(following mentioned with regard to use of numerical Keynesian models for forecasting)

Nicholas Kaldor in Beveridge’s Full Employment in a Free Society, Smithies and Mosak in Econometrica, for critical discussion cf., the 1945-1946 volumes of American Economic Review]

PART III: FIRST STEPS TOWARD REALISM

VII. The Unit—Second Approximation (March 3, 5, 10, 12, 17, 19: about 6 hours)

Imperfect access to markets; anticipations and planning; uncertainty, flexibility and liquidity; qualifications to first approximation arising from fact unit is social group; “just prices”, confederations of units and price rigidity.

Readings: Knight, Hart, Keynes, Hicks, Berle and Means;_______________]

[Assignment:
Hicks, Value and Capital, Chapters IX-X; XIV-XVIII (pp. 113-140, 171-236)
Hart, Anticipations, Uncertainty and Dynamic Planning (Chicago, 1940)
Means, Monetary Theory of Employment (mimeo) Chapter V.
Ad lib., A. A. Berle and G. C. Means, Modern Corporation and Private Property]

VIII. Markets—Second Approximation (March 24, 26; Apr. 7, 9: about 4 hours)

Gradations of price rigidity; imperfect clearing of markets; peculiarities of markets for productive services, perishables and durables; consistency, and inconsistency of expectations and locus of surprises; unintended saving and investment; differences of opinion and speculation.

Readings: Lindahl, Hicks, Keynes;_________________________

[Assignment:
Means, Monetary Theory of Employment (mimeo), Chapter VI.
E. Lindahl, Money and Capital, pp. 21-69
Mentioned with respect to “locus of surprises”: Hart, AER, Supplement, March 1938 and Rev. Econ. Stat., May, 1937 “of a sketch by Lindahl mimeographed in 1934).]

IX. Unemployment and Fluctuations—Second Approximation (April 16, 18, 23, 25: about 1 hour)

Uses and limitations of “modes”; uncertainty and interest; “stagnations”; inevitability of fluctuations in major comments; the policy issues.

Readings: To be worked out.

[For details and bibliography see National Planning Association, National Budgets for Full Employment and Hart and Mosak in AER, 1945-46.]

X. Welfare Economics—Second Approximation (May 5, 7, 12, 14: about 4 hours)

The economists’ struggle against proposals to enable groups to “earn” more by producing less; “social justice”; economic warfare within the nation and conditions of disarmament; adaptation of economic policy to social structure; role of reason in contemporary society.

Readings: To be worked out.

Reserve of time: Nil! Whence it becomes urgent to jam V into January if possible, pushing all of IV back before Christmas. By bet is that this can’t be done, however, and that in consequence Part III (especially VIII) must be skimped.

____________________________________

ECONOMICS 153

[Undated but would fit into syllabus between Sections III and IV in November 1946]

Answer 4 questions:

1) What is Marshall’s theory of demand? In what direction has this theory been extended by modern research? What problems in demand theory deserve, in your judgment, the greatest attention in the years ahead? Why?

2) What are indifference curves? What can they contribute to the understanding of consumers’ behavior? To the understanding of producers’ behavior? To pure economic theory?

3) What does a demand curve of unitary elasticity mean? What does an average cost curve of unitary elasticity mean? Is the Marshallian demand curve equivalent to an average revenue curve, an average cost curve, or a marginal revenue curve? Why? Assuming a linear demand curve, indicate the elasticity of demand at ‘critical points’ on this curve. Will farmers benefit more from a short crop than from a bumper crop? Is there any conflict in this respect between the interests of farmers as individuals and as a class?

4) (a) What, briefly, does the principle of diminishing return mean to Lucretius, Mill, Marshall, Stigler?

(b) Over what range of industry does ‘the’ principle of diminishing return apply? over what range of factors? over what range of output?

5) (a) Suppose that two factors of production are used in producing a certain commodity, one factor being fixed and the other variable. How much of the variable factor will a producer seeking the least-cost combination use, if the variable factor is free? If the fixed factor is free? if neither factor is free? if the price of both factors is doubled? if the price of the fixed factor is doubled while the price of the variable factor remains unchanged? Explain your answers.

(b) Suppose that both factors may be varied freely and that each costs money. How much of each factor will the producer use? Why?

____________________________________

ECONOMICS 153-159

Composite Final Examination
January 21, 1947
306 Mines
1:10—4:00

Answer enough questions to add up to 120 “minutes”. Students in Stigler’s section must include question 1. Do not answer both 1 and 6, nor both 1 and 9.

1. (60 minutes) There are 100 each of A and B farms in a competitive economy. The product schedules of one farm are

	Total Product
Number of Laborers	A Farm	B Farm
1	40	40
2	90	80
3	140	115
4	185	145
5	225	170
6	260	190
7	290	205
8	315	215

i. Determine wages and rents on both types of farms when there are 240 laborers.
ii. Determine wages and rents on both types of farms when there are 900 laborers.
iii. And 910 laborers, no laborer divisible.
iv. With 900 laborers, those on the A farms organize and succeed in setting a wage rate of 40.
v. And then they raise the standard rate to 47.
vi. Congress, dominated by radicals, levies a 20 per cent tax on wages. There are 900 laborers, and full competition.

2. (30 minutes) Explain as briefly as possible each of the following statements.

i. For a monopolist, marginal cost is greater than marginal revenue at any output at which the demand is inelastic.
ii. Demand has no influence on the price of the product of a competitive industry that uses no specialized resources.
iii. The elasticity of a straight line demand curve varies from point to point.
iv. The imposition of a license fee does not affect short-run normal price.

3. (30 minutes) Write a short essay on utility theory, in one of its variants, taking into account:

i. The need for “going behind” the demand curve to explain observable behavior.
ii. The empirical evidence that supports the utility theory.
iii. The uses, if any, to which the utility theory can be put.

4. (15 minutes) Define each of the following concepts and write a brief paragraph on its place in contemporary economic theory:

a) Opportunity cost
b) Economic rent
c) Net profit
d) Consumer’s surplus
e) Marshallian long-run
f) Quasi-rent
g) Factor of production

5. (15 minutes) Explain the difference between the “marginal utility” and “indifference curve” approaches to the theory of consumption, and evaluate the advantages attributed to the latter.

6. (30 minutes) Explain the meaning and implications of “constant returns to scale”, Under constant returns to scale, what is the relation between the amounts of the factors used, their respective marginal productivities, and the total product.
Illustrate the meaning of increasing, constant, diminishing and negative returns to one factor–amounts of other factor being held constant—within the framework of constant returns to scale. In a range where there are increasing returns to one factor, what is implied about returns to other factors?

7. (15 minutes) Give an exposition, illustrated as well as decorated by diagrams, of one of the standard special cases of monopolistic competition theory—such as (a) a price leader “holding up the umbrella” for a fringe of small “independents”; (b) product differentiation with free entry; (c) substitution of selling-cost competition for price competition; (d) cartel with enforceable output quotas but open membership; (e) spatial competition with free entry but tabu on price competition (gasoline stations with fixed per-gallon markup).

8. (15 minutes) Do the same for one other of these cases. DO NOT TREAT MORE THAN TWO ALTOGETHER.

9. (30 minutes) Suppose a perfectly competitive industry, with long-run constant costs, is in long-run equilibrium. Trace adjustment to a new short-run and long-run equilibrium when a tax per unit of output is put into effect unexpectedly but permanently.
What difference will it make if the tax is per unit of input instead (the input affected accounting for, say, ¼ the industry’s costs)?
Where the tax is per unit of output, what difference will it make if the industry is subject to long-run increasing costs?

10. (30 minutes) Suppose a household has its “income” given in kind—in a “commodity X” rather than in “money”. Draw up a diagram with “money” graphed vertically and “X” horizontally, and trace out the loci of accessible combinations of X and money (“opportunity paths” alias “budget lines”) for several different prices of X.
Assuming both X and money to be necessities (in the sense that the household will always prefer a some-of-each combination to any alternative comprising some of one and none of the other), is it possible to draw on this diagram a field of indifference curves so shaped that the points of maximum attainable satisfaction along these opportunity paths will show the household retaining more X (“supplying” less X) at higher prices than at lower prices of X? If so, draw such a field of curves; if not, show geometrically why it cannot be done.
Relate this analysis to the supply by households of agricultural commodities for which overhead costs overshadow variable costs (apples?). To the supply of labor (regarding X as leisure, of which less is retained as more time is devoted to work).

11. (15 minutes) Is the “law of diminishing returns”, construed in terms of variable proportions of inputs, a “law” of engineering, social relations, or individual psychology? (or is it strictly a parlor accomplishment for economists?) Justify your answer.

12. (30 minutes) (a) Economists generally accept a strong presumption that demand curves have a “negative slope”: i.e., that increasing a price reduces the amount demanded. What are the main pieces of evidence by which this presumption can be supported? Do you consider the evidence adequate?
(b) On the supply side, economists feel a much weaker presumption that increasing a price will increase the amount supplied, particularly where many of the suppliers have only one type of commodity (or service) to sell. What are the grounds for this difference in the strength of the presumption?

13. (30 minutes) Describe the Walrasian equations and discuss their significance in relation to the determinateness of the general equilibrium of a simple exchange economy.

14. (15 minutes) Discuss bilateral monopoly (monopolistic seller facing monopsonistic buyer) in relation to the efficiency of the bargaining and exchange process, the determinacy of the general equilibrium, and factors affecting the result.

15. (15 minutes) Distinguish between impatience and marginal time preference as a basis for interest. What other factors besides interest affect the supply of savings and capital?

16. (30 minutes) The following table shows the estimated yearly traffic over a proposed bridge at various rates of toll:

Toll	Cars per year
$2.00	None
1.50	1,000,000
1.00	2,000,000
.50	3,000,000
.00	4,000,000

If the bridge can be built at an annual cost of $3,500,000 for interest, depreciation, and repairs, would it be worth while, from the point of view of the community as a whole, (a) if no toll is to be charged; (b) if a toll of $1 is to be charged, the balance of the cost coming from taxes. Can such a bridge be undertaken privately? If so, how?

If the bridge costs only $2,000,000 and a private company undertakes it, charging $1 toll, what is the net social loss as compared with operating without a toll? If the cost is $1,500,000 and the necessary toll is 50 cents? Discuss the qualifications, if any, to be attached to your conclusions. Note: Consider the demand curve to be continuous, not a series of steps; i.e., at a toll of $.10, traffic is 3,800,000, at $.20, 3,600,000, etc. Ignore wear & tear on bridge.

____________________________________

Economics 154
Hour Examination
April 14, 1947

(30 minutes) Write a brief essay on “external economies and diseconomies of large scale production”, touching upon:

a) Economies external respectively to firm and to industry
b) Distinction between external economies operating via changes in production functions and via price changes
c) Effects analogous to external economies in the affairs of households
d) The Marshall-Pigou tax and subsidy proposal

(20 minutes) Comment on the sense and degree in which “welfare economics” is handicapped by limitations on the “interpersonal comparison of utilities”.

____________________________________

Final Examination
Economics 151 and 160
May 22, 1947

Answer one question in each group and four questions in all.

Group I

1. Explain the following propositions:

a. If the proportion in which two factors of production are used in producing a commodity in a certain industry is not alterable, the industry’s demand for factor A will be less elastic (1) the less elastic is the demand for the commodity, (2) the smaller the proportion of total costs that factor A accounts for, and (3) the less elastic is the supply of factor B.

b. If the proportions in which the two factors are used can be altered, the demand for A will be less elastic the less easily it can be substituted for factor B.

2. What reasons are advanced by Adam Smith and J. S. Mill to explain persistent differences between the wages of labor in different occupations? Under what conditions would demand be important?

3. What deviations from the “social optimum” of welfare economics result from monopolistic competition? Discuss (a) the use of existing resources; (b) investment; (c) income distribution.

Group II

4. Explain two of the following propositions and indicate how imperfections in the loan market affect their validity.

a. To maximize their satisfaction from income, individuals borrow or lend in a volume that equates their marginal rates of time preference with the market rate of interest.
b. It pays investors to undertake all ventures in which the rate of return over cost (internal rate) is as high as the market rate of interest.
c. Current rates of interest for loans of different maturity imply specifiable expectations of rates of interest to rule in the future.

5. “For the individual, the rate of interest will determine the choice among his optional income streams (investment opportunities), but, for society as a whole, the order of cause and effect is reversed. The rate of interest will be influenced by the range of options open to choice.”

6. Which of the following statements about interest have been supported by which of the economists listed below, and which of the statements have not been supported?

a. Interest equates the supply and demand for capital.
b. Interest reflects the superiority of roundabout methods of production.
c. Interest represents the rate at which the total stock of capital in the community increases.
d. The rate of interest corresponds to the rate of decline of the marginal productivity of capital.
e. Interest is the reward for the sacrifice of liquidity.
f. Savings tend towards the point at which interest equals the marginal propensity to consume.
g. Interest arises from the exploitation of labor by capital.
h. Interest is a monopoly profit exacted by bankers through the exercise of the sovereign power to coin money.

Böhm-Bawerk, J. B. Clark, Commons, Fisher, Keynes, Marx, Nobody, Soddy, Veblen.

Explain the reasoning behind one of the statements.

7. What are the relations between the spot price of a commodity (cotton), the spot price expected to rule six months from now, and the (“futures”) price at which a contract will be entered into now for execution six months from now? Explain with allowance for uncertainty.

Group III

8. “…it is not the rate of interest, but the level of incomes which ensures equality between saving and investment.” Explain.

9. Expound and criticize Means’s doctrine of price rigidity as cause of unemployment.

10. Comment on F. H. Knight’s view that “in the absence of uncertainty the velocity of circulation of money would be infinite.” How far and what sense does uncertainty explain the “transactions, precautionary and speculative motives” to hold money?

Source: Columbia University Libraries, Manuscript Collections. Albert Gailord Hart Collection, Box 62, Folder “Sec (4) Ec 153-154 Columbia = 103-104 Micro, grads”.

Image Source: Obituary in The Columbia Spectator, October 3, 1997.

Tags BurnsAF, HartAG, Stigler, Vickrey

Columbia Courses Economists Harvard Transcript

Columbia. Search Committee Report. 1950

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2015-07-15

This report is fascinating for a couple of reasons. The search committee understood its task to identify “the names of the most promising young economists, wherever trained and wherever located” from which a short list of three names for the replacement of Louis M. Hacker in Columbia College was selected. Organizationally, Columbia College is where undergraduate economics has been taught so that teaching excellence, including participation in Columbia College’s legendary Contemporary Civilization course sequence, was being sought as well as was potential for significant scholarship. Appendix C provides important information on James Tobin’s graduate economics education. In a later posting, I’ll provide information on others in the long-list of seventeen economists identified by the search committee.

___________________

January 9, 1950

Professor James W. Angell, Chairman
Department of Economics
Columbia University

Dear Mr. Chairman:

The Committee appointed by you to canvass possible candidates for the post in Columbia College that is made available by the designation of Professor Louis M. Hacker as Director of the School of General Studies submits herewith its report.

As originally constituted, this committee was made up of Professors Taylor, Barger, Hart and Haig (chairman). At an early stage the membership was expanded to include Professor Stigler and from the beginning the committee had the advantage of the constant assistance of the chairman of the department.

In accordance with the suggestions made at the budget meeting in November, the committee has conducted a broad inquiry, designed to raise for consideration the names of the most promising young economists, wherever trained and wherever located. In addition to the men known personally to the members of the committee, suggestions were solicited from the authorities at other institutions, including Harvard, Chicago, California and Leland Stanford. By mid December, scrutiny of the records and publications by the committee to the following seventeen:

Name	Suggested by
Alchian, Armen A.	Haley
Bronfenbrenner, Martin	Friedman
Brownlee, O. H.	Friedman
Christ, Carl L.	Angell
Dewey, D. J.	Friedman
Du[e]senberry, [James]	Stigler
Goodwin, Richard M.	Burbank
Harberger, J. H.	Friedman
Ho[s]elitz, Bert	Friedman
Lewis, H. Gregg	Hart
Machlup, Fritz	Stigler
Nicholls, William H.	Stigler
Nutter, J. W.	Friedman
Pancoast, Omar	Taylor
Schelling, Thomas	Burbank
Tobin, James	Burbank
Vandermeulen, D. C.	Ellis

[p. 2]

The meeting of the American Economic Association in New York during the Christmas holidays offered an opportunity to meet many of the men on the above list and to make inquiries regarding them. As a consequence, it has been possible for your committee to make rapid progress with its appraisals. Although the committee is continuing to gather information and data, it is prepared at this time to make a series of definite recommendations, with a high degree of confidence that these recommendations are not likely to be greatly disturbed by its further inquiries.

It is the unanimous opinion of the members of your committee that the most eligible and promising candidate on our list is Martin Bronfenbrenner, associate professor of economics at the University of Wisconsin, at present on leave for special service in Tokyo.

Should Bronfenbrenner prove to be unavailable the committee urges consideration of D. J. Dewey, at present holding a special fellowship at the University of Chicago, on leave from his teaching post at Iowa. As a third name, the committee suggests James Tobin, at present studying at Cambridge, England, on a special fellowship from Harvard.

Detailed information regarding the records of these three men will be found in appendices to this report.

Bronfenbrenner, the first choice of the committee, is 35 years old. He received his undergraduate degree from Washington University at the age of 20 and his Ph.D. from Chicago at 25. During his war service, he acquired a good command of the Japanese language. He taught at Roosevelt College, Chicago, before going to Wisconsin and undergraduate reports of his teaching are as enthusiastic as those of the authorities at Chicago. He happens to be personally well known to two of the members of your committee (Hart and Stigler) and to at last two other member of the department (Shoup and Vickrey), all four of whom commend him in high terms.

The following statement from Hart, dated December 6, 1929, was prepared after a conference with Friedman of Chicago:

“Bronfenbrenner is undoubtedly one of the really powerful original thinkers in the age group between thirty and thirty-five. He has always very much enjoyed teaching; my impression is that his effectiveness has been with the upper half of the student body at Roosevelt College and at Wisconsin. He is primarily a theorist but has a wide range of interest and a great deal of adaptability so it would not be much of a problem to fit him in somewhere [p. 3] in terms of specialization. He would do a good deal to keep professional discussion stirring in the University. My impression is that he tends to be underrated by the market, and that a chance at Columbia College might well be his best opportunity for some time ahead. The difficulty is, of course, that there is no chance of arranging an interview; though Shoup and Vickrey, of course, both saw him last summer.”

In a letter dated December 15, Shoup wrote as follows:

“I have a high regard for Martin Bronfenbrenner’s intellectual capacities, and I think he would fit in well in the Columbia scene. He has an excellent mind and a great intellectual independence. In his writings he sometimes tends to sharp, almost extreme statements, but in my opinion, they almost always have a solid foundation, and in conversation he is always ready to explore all sides of the question. When we had to select someone to take over the tax program in Japan, after the report had been formulated, and oversee the implementation of the program by the Japanese government, it was upon my recommendation that Bronfenbrenner was selected. He arrived in Japan in the middle of August and his work there since that time has confirmed me in my expectations that he would be an excellent selection for the job, even though he did not have very much technical background in taxation. I rank him as one of the most promising economists in his age group in this country, and I should not be surprised if he made one or more major contributions of permanent value in the coming years.

“He has gone to Japan on a two year appointment, after having obtained a two year leave of absence from the University of Wisconsin. My understanding is that on such an appointment he could come back to the United States at the end of one year, provided he paid his own passage back. It might be possible that even this requirement would be waived, but I have no specific grounds for thinking so. I believe the major part of his work with respect to implementing the tax program will have been completed by next September. If the committee finds itself definitely interested in the possibility of Bronfenbrenner’s coming to Columbia, I should not let the two year appointment stand in the way of making inquiries.”

The breadth and rang of his interests recommend Bronfenbrenner as a person who would probably be highly [p.4] valuable in the general course in contemporary civilization and the quality of his written work suggests high promise as a productive scholar in one or more specialized fields.

Your committee considers that the appropriate rank would be that of associate professor.

Respectfully submitted,

[signed]

Robert M. Haig

______________________________

Appendix A – Martin Bronfenbrenner

The following data regarding Bronfenbrenner are taken chiefly from the 1948 Directory of the American Economic Assoication:

Born: 1914

Education and Degrees:

A.B. Washington University, 1934
Ph.D. University of Chicago 1939
1940-42, George Washington School of Law

Fields: Theory, mathematical economics, statistical methods, econometrics

Doctoral dissertation: Monetary theory and general equilibrium

Publications:

“Consumption function controversy”, Southern Economic Journal, January, 1948
“Price control under imperfect competition”, American Economic Review, March, 1947
“Dilemma of Liberal Economics,” Journal of Political Economy, August, 1946

Additional publications:

“Post-War Political Economy: The President’s Reports”, Journal of Political Economy, October, 1948
Various book reviews including one on W. I. King’s The Keys to Prosperity, Journal of Political Economy, December, 1948, and A. H. Hansen’s Monetary Theory and Fiscal Policy, Annals

Additions to list of publications circulated, January 9, 1950

“The Economics of Collective Bargaining”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, August, 1939.
(with Paul Douglas) “Cross-Section Studies in the Cobb-Douglas Function”, Journal of Political Economy, 1939.
“Applications of the Discontinuous Oligopoly Demand Curve”, Journal of Political Economy, 1940.
“Diminishing Returns in Federal Taxation” Journal of Political Economy, 1942.
“The Role of Money in Equilibrium Capital Theory”, Econometrica (1943).

______________________________

Appendix B – D. J. Dewey

On leave from Iowa.

In 1948 studied at Cambridge, England.
1949-50, at Chicago on special fellowship.

Bibliography:

Notes on the Analysis of Socialism as a Vocational Problem, Manchester School, September, 1948.
Occupational Choice in a Collectivist Economy, Journal of Political Economy, December, 1948.

Friedman and Schultz are highly enthusiastic.

Statement by Hart, dated December 6, 1949:

“Friedman regards Dewey as first rate and points to an article on ‘Proposal for Allocating the Labor Force in a Planned Economy’ (Journal of Political Economy, as far as I remember in July 1949) for which the J.P.E. gave a prize as the best article of the year. I read the article, rather too quickly, a few weeks ago and it is definitely an imaginative and powerful piece of work. How the conclusions would look after a thorough-going seminar discussion, I am not clear; but the layout of questions is fascinating.”

______________________________

Appendix [C] – James Tobin

Statement by Burbank of Harvard, dated December 14, 1949:

“We have known Tobin a good many years. He came to us as a National Scholar, completed his work for the A.B. before the war and had advanced his graduate work very well before he went into the service. He received his Ph.D. in 1947. Since 1947 he has been a Junior Fellow. He was a teaching fellow from 1945 to 1947. He is now in Cambridge, England, and will, I believe, begin his professional work by next fall. Since Tobin has been exposed to Harvard for a very long time I believe that he feels that for his own intellectual good he should go elsewhere. I doubt if we could make a stronger recommendation than Tobin nor one in which there will be greater unanimity of opinion. Certainly he is one of the top men we have had here in the last dozen years. He is now intellectually mature. He should become one of the handful of really outstanding scholars of his generation. His interests are mainly in the area of money but he is also interested in theory and is competent to teach at any level.”

Data supplied by Harvard:

Address: Department of Applied Economics, Cambridge University, England

Married: Yes, one child

Born: 1918, U.S.

Degrees:

A. B. Harvard, 1939 (Summa cum laude)
A.M. Harvard, 1940
Ph.D. Harvard, 1947

Fields of Study: Theory, Ec. History, Money and Banking, Political Theory: write-off, Statistics

Special Field: Business Cycles

Thesis Topic: A Theoretical and Statistical Analysis of Consumer Saving

Experience:

1942-45 U.S. Navy
1945-47 Teaching Fellow, Harvard University
1947- Junior Fellow, Society of Fellows

[p. 2 of Appendix C]

Courses: 1939-40

Ec. 21a (Stat.)                  A
Ec. 121b (Adv. St.)          A
Ec. 133 (Ec. Hist) A
Ec. 147a (M&B Sem)      A
Ec. 145b (Cycles) A
Ec. 113b (Hist. Ec.) Exc.
Gov. 121a (Pol.Th.)         A

1940-1941

Ec. 121a (Stat.)                A
Ec. 164 (Ind. Org.)          A
Ec. 20 (Thesis) A
Ec. 118b (App. St.)          A
Math 21 A
Ec. 104b (Math Ec.) A

1946-47 Library and Guidance

Generals: Passed May 22, 1940 with grade of Good Plus
Specials: Passed May 9, 1947 with grade of Excellent.

Data from 1948 Directory of American Economic Association:

Harvard University, Junior Fellow

Born: 1918

Degrees: A. B., Harvard, 1939; Ph.D., Harvard, 1947j

Fields: Business fluctuations, econometrics, economic theory, and mathematical economics

Dissertation: A theoretical and statistical analysis of consumer saving.

Publications:

“Note on Money Wage Problem”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1941.
“Money Wage Rates and Employment”, in New Economics (Knopf, 1947).
“Liquidity Preference and monetary Policy”, Review of Economics and Statistics, 1947.
[pencil addition] Article in Harris (ed.), The New Economics, 1947.

______________________________

Source: Columbia University Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Department of Economics Collection, Box 6, Folder “Columbia College”

Image Source: The beyondbrics blog of the Financial Times.

Tags Alchian, Angell, Barger, Bronfenbrenner, Brownlee, Burbank, Christ, DeweyDJ, Duesenberry, Ellis, Friedman, Goodwin, Haig, Haley, Harberger, HartAG, Hoselitz, LewisHG, Machlup, Nicholls, Nutter, Pancoast, Schelling, Shoup, Stigler, TaylorH, Tobin, Vandermeulen

SALARIES IN NON-PROFESSIONAL GRADUATE SCHOOLS AND COLUMBIA COLLEGE (BUDGET YEARS)

Three Field Examinations for Doctorate

DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

SCHEDULE FOR PRELIMINARY EXAMINATIONS FOR THE DOCTORATE

Spring Quarter, 1935

[Carbon Copy from Federal Civil Service Application(?) ca. January 1941]

18. EDUCATION, EMPLOYMENT, PUBLICATIONS, ETC.

18(a). Chronological Record.

18(b). Graduate Courses at Harvard University and Research

18(c). List of Publications

Hall of Distinguished Alumni [University of Kentucky]

William Hord Nicholls

Vanderbilt University Memorial

Course Enrollment Statistics:

Economics 213b Spring 1949

Reading List

Columbia University in the City of New York [New York 27, N.Y.]

1) [New furniture]

2) Ordinary needs for 1949-49

3) Proposal of a Statistical Laboratory for Faculty in Economics

Joint Appointments

Visiting Professorships

List of visiting professors (excluding faculty members who frequently were visitors before joining the University)

Economics 153-154 “ECONOMIC ANALYSIS” Outline

Introductory Notes

Arrangement of Outline

Why This Sequence of Topics?

Acquaintance with Authors

PROSPECTUS AND BACKGROUND

OUTLINE FOR ECONOMICS 153-154

[PART I]

[PART II]

PART III: FIRST STEPS TOWARD REALISM

ECONOMICS 153

ECONOMICS 153-159

Composite Final Examination January 21, 1947 306 Mines 1:10—4:00

Economics 154 Hour Examination April 14, 1947

Final Examination Economics 151 and 160 May 22, 1947

Group I

Group II

Group III

SALARIES IN NON-PROFESSIONAL GRADUATE SCHOOLS
AND COLUMBIA COLLEGE (BUDGET YEARS)

Hall of Distinguished Alumni
[University of Kentucky]

Economics 213b
Spring 1949

Columbia University
in the City of New York
[New York 27, N.Y.]

List of visiting professors
(excluding faculty members who frequently were visitors before joining the University)

Economics 153-154
“ECONOMIC ANALYSIS”
Outline

Composite Final Examination
January 21, 1947
306 Mines
1:10—4:00

Economics 154
Hour Examination
April 14, 1947

Final Examination
Economics 151 and 160
May 22, 1947