Categories
Exam Questions Harvard

Harvard. Exams from Principles of Economics. Day, Davis, Burbank et al., 1917-18

 

 

For most students who go on to concentrate in economics, the principles of economics course is the first contact with the discipline. Like they say, you have only one try to make a first impression. We’ll see in a coming post that Taussig’s textbook Principles of Economics still served as the backbone of the Harvard principles course twenty years later.

________________________

Course Description

INTRODUCTORY COURSES
Primarily for Undergraduates

[Economics] A. Principles of Economics. , Th., Sat., at 11. Asst. Professor Day and Dr. Davis, Dr. Burbank and Messrs. P. G. Wright, Monroe, Lincoln, and Van Sickle.

Course A gives a general introduction to economic study, and a general view of Economics for those who have not further time to give to the subject. It undertakes an analysis of the present organization of industry, the mechanism of exchange, the determination of value, and the distribution of wealth.

The course is conducted partly by lectures, more largely by oral discussion in sections. Taussig’s Principles of Economics is used as the basis of discussion.

Course A may not be taken by Freshmen without the consent of the instructor.

 

Source: Division of History, Government, and Economics. 1917-18. Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. XIV, No. 25 (May 18, 1917) p. 58.

________________________

Course Enrollment

[Economics] A. Asst. Professor Day and Asst. Professor J. S. Davis, Dr. Burbank, Mr. Monroe, and Dr. E. E. Lincoln.—Principles of Economics.

Total 258: 1 Graduate, 8 Seniors, 73 Juniors, 150 Sophomores, 3 Freshmen, 23 Other.

 

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1917-18, p. 53.

________________________

1917-18
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS A
Mid-year Final Examination

Plan your answers carefully before writing. Write concisely. Arrange your answers strictly in the order of the questions, beginning each on a new page.

  1. What is labor? To what extent is it irksome? How, if at all, is the irksomeness of labor to be minimized?
  2. Explain “producers’ surplus.” Under what conditions of cost does it arise? How is monopoly profit to be distinguished from producers’ surplus? Illustrate throughout by diagram.
  3. “Before the war started the bullion value of the U.S. silver dollar, measured in gold, was about 42c. At this rate it took 37 ounces of silver to equal one of gold. Today [October, 1917], with silver bullion at about $1.00 an ounce, the value of a silver dollar is 77c., a ratio of about 20 to 1. It would only take another advance such as occurred within the last month for silver to reach the U.S. coinage ratio of ‘16 to 1.’”
    In this case what would happen, and why? Would the consequences be objectionable? If so, on what grounds? If not, why not?
  4. Explain briefly: (a) commercial banking; (b) “deposits as currency”; (c) bank reserves; (d) Federal Reserve notes; (e) Gold Settlement Fund.
  5. Analyze the factors contributing to the present “high cost of living.”
  6. “The nations of the world should adopt a uniform system of currency with a common standard. This would do away with all this bother about ‘par of exchange,’ ‘gold points,’ ‘rate of exchange,’ etc.”
    To what extent is this conclusion warranted? Explain.
  7. To what extent does the following offer a solution of the tariff problem?
    “In all tariff legislation the true principle of protection is best maintained by the imposition of such duties as will equal the difference between the cost of production at home and abroad.”
  8. Comment briefly upon the following:
    “During the days and weeks and months ahead there must be no cessation or lessening of effort on the part on any one of us—man or woman—to keep business healthy and normal.
    “Industries of every kind must be maintained to their fullest capacity. Money must be kept in circulation. There must be no hysterical, misguided retrenchment, masquerading under the cloak of economy.
    “The nation calls for every encouragement and support that the commercial and industrial forces can supply—and that means everybody doing his bit to keep business booming.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Department of Economics, Course reading lists, syllabi, and exams 1913-1992 (UA V 349.295.6). Box 1, Folder “Economics I, Final Exams 1913-1939”.

________________________

 1917-18
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS A
Year-end Final Examination

Plan your answers carefully before writing. Write concisely. Arrange your answers strictly in the order of the questions, beginning each on a new page.

  1. What factors tend to limit the extension of (a) large-scale production in agriculture? (b) large-scale production in manufacture? (c) large-scale management, or industrial combination?
  2. Explain briefly: (a) demand; (b) decreasing cost; (c) internal economies; (d) “dumping.”
  3. State carefully: (a) Gresham’s law; (b) the law of diminishing returns; (c) the law of monopoly price; (d) Malthus’s law of population.
  4. To what extent and for what reasons should taxes be employed in financing the present war?
  5. In what respects are business profits like, in what unlike, (a) wages? (b) rent?
  6. What practical expedients would you suggest for raising the wages of workers in the lowest social group?
  7. Discuss the following contention: “One objection to having the state pay people when they are ill or old or out of work is that it saps that personal initiative and prudence and foresight which lie at the basis of an orderly civilization.”
  8. What grounds are there for saying that under a socialistic régime the efficiency of the rank and file of workers would be (a) greater? (b) less?

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Department of Economics, Course reading lists, syllabi, and exams 1913-1992 (UA V 349.295.6). Box 1, Folder “Economics I, Final Exams 1913-1939”.

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard

Harvard. Introductory Economics. Mid-Year and Final Exams, 1938-39

 

A supplementary bibliography for Harvard’s introductory economics course along with the enrollment data were transcribed for the previous post. The final exams for both semesters of this two semester course are transcribed below. A transcription of the first multiple-choice exam for introductory economics at Harvard (1948!) has also been posted.

_______________________

1938-39
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS A
Mid-year Final Examination

Choose and SIX questions

  1. “Large-scale production and the modern corporation have rendered obsolete such concepts as private property, free enterprise and individual initiative.” Do you agree?
  2. “The only thing which has kept large business units from crowding out small units in every part of the economic system has been the willingness of the small operators to stand continual losses in order to retain their independence.” Discuss.
  3. “The principal function of commercial bank credit is to make unnecessary the physical transfer of metallic and paper money. Commercial banks merely hold balances in the form of these types of money for a depositor and enable him to transfer claims to this money to other depositors.” Do you agree? Explain fully.
  4. “Assume that Congress had voted that the ‘Federal Reserve Board be commissioned to stabilize the price level.’” How, would you suggest, should the Federal Reserve Board go about it?
  5. Because of unsettled political conditions abroad, the pickup of general business conditions here, and the undervaluation of the dollar relative to other currencies, there has been lately a steady influx of gold into this country.
    1. Discuss the adjustments you would expect to take place if the so-called automatic gold standard were in effect.
    2. Discuss the adjustments possible under a managed gold standard.
  6. What would be the effect on prices and output of a lowering of the price of the raw materials used in a purely competitive industry? Discuss from the short and long run point of view.
  7. “A single department store carries 19 toothpastes and 15 toothpowders, which are only a fraction of the total varieties of these articles. That this is wasteful and uneconomical is beyond argument, but it would not be so easy to prove it keeps up the price of toothpaste in general. The very competition in these items of which we see evidence in all national advertising probably tends in the other direction.” Discuss.

 

 

1938-39
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS A
Year-End Final Examination

I

(One hour and one-half.)

Write on BOTH of the following in this section. Choose either ONE as a subject for an hour essay, marking it as such.

  1. “Defenders of the competitive system rest their case upon the operation of a price system which secures the optimum utilization of the factors of production. This point of view, however, completely ignores the realities of the situation.” Discuss.
  2. “Business spending depends upon business prospects; business prospects depend upon consumer expenditures; but consumer expenditures depend upon business spending. Thus we face a dilemma from which there is no escape.”

 

II

Write on any THREE of the following:

  1. “The fact that there are ten million unemployed is sufficient evidence that our population is too large. A gradually declining population is to be welcomed rather than feared, since it would in time eliminate the unemployed surplus.” Discuss.
  2. “The rate of wages in a particular plant depends mainly on the bargaining strength of the workers and the employer. The workers can therefore always raise their wages by organizing into a trade union.” Discuss.
  3. “The free traders would have us turn the whole earth into one free market, with the result that the standard of living in every nation would in time become approximately equal. Thus although the ‘have-not’ nations would be better off, this would be because of a corresponding sacrifice on the part of the ‘have’ nations. The protective tariff protects our standard of living.” Discuss.
  4. “Of one thing we can be sure, any tax on land cannot be shifted.” Discuss.
  5. “It is a truism that demand and supply determine the rate of interest. The important thing is to know what factors affect the demand for and supply of capital.” Discuss.

 

Source: Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Lloyd Appleton Metzler Papers, Box 9, Folder “Econ A”. Also in Harvard University Archives. Department of Economics, Course reading lists, syllabi, and exams 1913-1992, Box 1, Folder “Economics I: 1939-1962”.

 

 

 

Categories
Courses Harvard Suggested Reading

Harvard. Introductory Economics. Supplementary Readings, 1938-39

 

 

__________________________

…Economics A is required for admittance into every advanced course, although there are a few which allow it to be taken at the same time. It is by no means too difficult for Freshmen, may be taken by them with the consent of the instructor, and concentrators urge all Freshmen who think they may go into the field to take this course during their first year. This will enable them to begin taking advanced courses their Sophomore year, as History and Government concentrators do, and thereby allow a much wider range of study during their last two years, both in courses and in tutorial. History 1 and Government 1 are both required for concentration in Economics. The former should be taken Freshman year….

Source: Articles on Fields of Concentration Harvard Crimson, May 31, 1938.

__________________________

SUPPLEMENTARY READINGS FOR ECONOMICS A
Harvard University
1938-39

This bibliography has been prepared by members of the Economics A staff to supplement the assigned reading on the subject matter of the course. A division has been made in the reading: Part A listings are works and selections of a more general character, while those of Part B include more specialized or more advanced material. Students will also find the Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences a valuable source of information on the various topics.

Introduction and Historical Background.

A

Johnson, E. A. J., Some Origins of the Modern Economic World.

Kaempfert, W., A Popular History of American Inventions (2 vols.).

Kirkland, E. C., A History of American Life, pp. 246-339.

Lipson, E., The Economic History of England, Vol. I, pp. 347-390.

Lynd, R. and H., Middletown; and Middletown in Transition.

Mantoux, P. The Industrial Revolution in the Eighteenth Century, pp. 193-346.

Myers, G., History of Great American Fortunes.

See, Henri, Modern Capitalism.

Usher, A. P., The Industrial History of England, pp. 314-366.

Warshow, H. T., Representative Industries in the United States.

B

Bober, M. M., Karl Marx’s Interpretation of History.

Cole, A. H., The American Wool Manufacture, pp. 86-136, 219-244.

Fraser, C.E., and Doriot, G. F., Analyzing Our Industries.

Kautsky, Karl, The Class Struggle, pp. 7-87.

Usher, A. P. History of Mechanical Inventions, pp. 1-31.

 

II. Institutions.

A

Adams, C. F., Chapters on the Erie.

Arnold, T., Folklore of Capitalism.

Berle, A., and Means, G. C., The Modern Corporation and Private Property.

Hunt, B., History of Joint-Stock Corporation in England.

Laski, H. J., Rise of Liberalism.

National Resources Committee, Recent Technical Changes.

Robinson, E. A. G., Structure of Competitive Industry.

Strachey, John, The Coming Struggle for Power.

B

Dewing, A. S., Corporation Finance.

Hammond, J. L., and B., Rise of Modern Industry.

Fortune Magazine, Nov. 1936, “The United States Steel Corporation.”

Steffens, L., Autobiography.

Tarbell, Ida, History of the Standard Oil Company.

Twentieth Century Fund, Big Business, Its Growth and Its Place.

 

III. Money, Banking and International Finance.

A

Bradford, F. A., Money and Banking.

Burgess, W. R., The Reserve Banks and the Money Market (1936 ed.).

Ely, R. T., Outlines of Economics.

Feaveryear, A. E., The Pound Sterling.

King, W. T. C., History of the London Discount Market.

Meade, J. E., An Introduction to Economic Analysis and Policy, Parts I and V.

Meyers, M. G., The New York Money Market.

Moulton, H. G., The Financial Organization of Society.

Robertson, D. H., Money.

White, H., Money and Banking (Historical Sections)

B

Catterall, R. C. H., The Second Bank of the United States.

Currie, L., The Supply and Control of Money in the United States.

Federal Reserve Bulletins and Annual Reports.

Gayer, Arthur, Monetary Policy and Economic Stabilisation;  Lessons in Monetary Experience.

Hawtrey, R. G., The Art of Central Banking.

Keynes, J. M., A Treatise on Money, Vol. I, Chs. 2, 9-14.

 

IV. Value Theory.

A

Burns, A. R., The Decline of Competition, Chs. I, III, V, VIII.

Gray, Alexander, Development of Economic Doctrine.

Henderson, H. D., Supply and Demand, Chs. I-V.

Marshall, A., Principles of Economics, Book I, Chs. I, II, III; Book IV, Chs. III, XIII; Book V, Chs. III, V.

Meade, J. E., Introduction to Economic Analysis and Policy, Part II, Chs. I-IV.

B

Cassels, John, “Law of Variable Proportions,” Explorations in Economics, pp. 223-236.

Chamberlin, E., Theory of Monopolistic Competition.

Crum, Leonard, Rudimentary Mathematics for Economists and Statisticians (Quarterly Journal of Economics Supplement, May, 1938).

Keynes, J. M., “Alfred Marshall 1842-1924, “ Memorial of Alfred Marshall, A. C. Pigou editor, pp. 1-66.

Mill, J. S., Autobiography.

Robbins, Lionel, The Nature and Significance of Economic Science.

Robinson, Joan. Economics of Imperfect Competition, pp. 1-92.

Smith, Adam, Wealth of Nations, Book I, Chs. I-III.

 

V. Price Policy and Public Authority.

A

Black, J. D., Agricultural Reform in the United States.

Dennison, H. S., and Galbraith, J. K., Modern Competition and Business Policy.

Ezekiel, M., and Bean, L. H., Economic Bases for the A.A.A.

Hamilton, Walton H., and Others, Price and Price Policies.

Jones, Eliot, Trust Problem in the United States.

Jones, Eliot, and Bigham, T. C., Principles of Public Utilities.

Locklin, D. P., Economics of Transportation.

Mosher, W. E., and Crawford, F. G., Public Utility Regulation.

Lyons, L. S., and Others, The National Recovery Administration.

Nourse, E. G., Davis, J. S., and Black, J. D., Three Years of the A.A.A.

President’s Committee on Industrial Analysis, Report on the N.R.A.

Ripley, W. Z., Main Street and Wall Street.

Seager, H. R., and Gulick, C. A., Jr., Trust and Corporation Problems.

Watkins, M. W., Industrial Combinations and Public Policy.

B

Bauer, J., and Gold, N., Public Utility Valuation.

Cabinet Committee on Cotton Textile Industry, Report, Senate Document 126, 74th Congress, 1st

Daugherty, C. R., de Chazeau, M. G., and Stratton, S. S., Economics of the Iron and Steel Industry.

Wallace, Donald, Market Control in the Aluminum Industry.

Watkins, M. W., Oil: Stabilization or Conservation.

 

VI. Wages and Population.

A

Adamic, Louis, Dynamite.

Brooks, R., When Labor Organizes.

Carver, T. N., Distribution of Wealth, Ch. IV.

Henderson, H. D., Supply and Demand, Ch. IX.

Hicks, J. R., Theory of Wages, Ch. I-V.

Malthus, Thomas, Principles of Population (2nd).

Marshall, Alfred, Principles of Economics.

Taussig, F. W., Principles of Economics, Vol. II, Chs. 47, 48.

Walsh, J. R., I.O., Industrial Unionism in Action.

Wright, H., Population.

B

Millis, H. A., and Montgomery, R. E., Labor Progress and Some Basic Labor Problems (3 vols.).

National Resources Board, Problems of a Changing Population.

Perlman, S., History of Trade Unionism in the United States, Part I.

Perlman, S., and Taft, P., History of Labor in the United States 1896-1932, especially Section 4.

Robertson, D. H., Economic Fragments, “Wage Grumbles.”

Webb, S., and B., History of Trade Unionism, Chs. 1, 2, 7, 8.

Witte, E. E., The Government in Labor Disputes, Chs. 1, 2, 5, 6, 9, 13.

 

VII. Interest.

A

Fisher, Irving, Capital and Income, Chs. 1-6; Theory of Interest.

Henderson, H. D., Supply and Demand, Ch. VIII.

Taussig, F. W., Principles of Economics, Vol. II, Chs. 38-40.

B

Böhm-Bawerk, Eugen v., Positive Theory of Capital, Books 1, 2, 5, 6, 7.

Hansen, A. H., Full Recovery or Stagnation, Ch. 1 “Review of J. M. Kenyes’s General Theory etc.”

Keynes, J. M., General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money, 13-17.

Schumpeter, J. A., The Theory of Economic Development.

Wicksell, Knut, Lectures on Political Economy, pp. 101-218.

 

VIII. Rent.

A

Carver, T. N., The Distribution of Wealth, Ch. V.

Fetter, F. A., Economic Principles, Vol. I, Part II, pp. 89-158.

George, Henry, Progress and Poverty.

Henderson, H. D., Supply and Demand, Ch. VI.

B

Marshall, Alfred, Principles of Economics, Book IV, Chs. 2, 3; Book V, Chs. 8-11; Book VI, Chs. 9, 10.

Monroe, A. E., Value and Income, Chs. V, VI, VII.

Ricardo, David, Principles of Political Economy, Chs. 2, 3; “Influence of a Low Price of Corn on the Profits of Stock,” E. C. K. Gonner, Economic Essays by David Ricardo.

 

IX. Profits.

A

Berle, A., and Means, G. C., Modern Corporation and Private Property, Book IV.

Carver, T. N., Distribution of Wealth, Ch. 7.

Henderson, H. D., Supply and Demand, Ch. VII.

Marshall, Alfred, Principles of Economics (8th), Book VI, Ch. 8.

B

Gordon, R. A., “Enterprise, Profits, and the Modern Corporation,” Explorations in Economics.

Knight, Frank, Risk, Uncertainty and Profits, Chs. 2, 9, 10.

Schumpeter, J. A., Theory of Economic Development, Chs. I-IV.

Veblen, Thorstein, Theory of Business Enterprise.

 

X. International Trade and Tariff.

A

Beveridge, Sir Wm., Tariffs: The Case Examined.

Ellsworth, P., International Economics.

Hansen, Alvin H., Commission of Inquiry on Naitonal Policy in International Economic Relations.

Harrod, R. F., International Economics.

Killough, U. B., International Trade.

Salter, Sir Arthur, Recovery, the Second Effort.

Smith, A., Wealth of Nations, Book IV.

Taussig, F. W., Tariff History of the United States; Readings in International Trade and Tariff Problems; Some Aspects of the Tariff Question.

Wallace, Henry, America Must Choose.

Whale, B., International Trade.

B

Delle Donne, O., European Tariff Policies.

Haberler, Gottfried, The Theory of International Trade.

Macmillan Report, Addendum III (Keynes)

Ohlin, Bertil, Interregional and International Trade.

Page, T. W., Making the Tariff in the United States.

Ricardo, David, Principles of Political Economy, Chs. VII, XIX, XXII.

 

XI. Public Finance

A

Clark, J. M., The Economics of Planning Public Works.

Gayer, Arthur, Public Works in Prosperity and Depression.

Gayer, Hansen et al, “Recent Depression and Public Works and Taxation,” New Republic Supplement, Feb. 1938.

Keynes, J. M., Means to Prosperity.

Robinson, M. E., Public Finance.

B

Bullock, C. J., Readings in Public Finance.

Colwyn Report, Great Britain: Report of the Committee on National Debt and Taxation, 1927.

Fagan, Elmer, and Macy, C. W., Public Finance: Selected Readings.

Lutz, H. L., Public Finance (third edition)

National Industrial Conference Board, Cost of Government in the United States 1935-37.

Silverman, H. A., Its Incidence and Effects.

Stamp, Sir J., Fundamental Principles of Taxation (second edition)

Twentieth Century Fund, Facing the Tax Problem.

 

XII. Business Cycles and Social Reform.

A

Cole, G. D. H., Principles of Economic Planning.

Ely, R. T., Outlines of Economics, Ch. 17.

Fisher, Allan, Clash between Progress and Security.

Hansen, Alvin H., Economic Stabilization in an Unbalanced World.

Meade, J. E., Introduction to Economic Analysis and Policy, Part I.

Mitchell, W. C., “Description of Cycle,” in Moulton, H. G., Financial Organization of Society.

Pigou, A. C., Socialism vs. Capitalism.

Robbins, L., The Great Depression.

Simons, H., Positive Program for Laissez-faire.

Wooton, B., Plan or No Plan.

B

Clark, J. M., Strategic Factors in the Business Cycle.

Haberler, G., Prosperity and Depression.

Hansen, Alvin H., Full Recovery or Stagnation; Business Cycles.

Keynes, J. M., General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money.

Pigou, A. C., Economics in Practice; Economics of Welfare.

Robinson, Joan, Introduction to the Theory of Employment.

 

Source: Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Lloyd Appleton Metzler Papers, Box 9, Folder “Econ. A”.

 

 

Categories
Harvard Radical Seminar Speakers Suggested Reading

Harvard. Critical Spirit in Economics, Grad student symposium, 1968

 

Fished out of miscellaneous items filed chronologically under the label “Harvard University Department of Economics” in John Kenneth Galbraith’s papers is the following early outline for a symposium organized by the Graduate Economics Club for the month of May, 1968. Faculty were invited to join in the discussions by the president of the Graduate Economics Club, David M. Gordon (New York Times obituary: March 19, 1996). I have yet to confirm whether any or all of the four Friday afternoon sessions actually took place. John Kenneth Galbraith sent his regrets less than a week before a session that was to consider the reception of the New Industrial State. Samuel Bowles and Herbert Gintis were on the program that also included Hilary Putnam, a philosopher of science.

_______________________

Dear faculty member,

The Graduate Economics Club is sponsoring a series of discussion during the month of May, emphasizing certain broad questions of critical perspective in economic theory.

It is our hope that these discussions will initiate and promote an open discussion and exchange of ideas among students and faculty.

Enclosed you will find an outline of the first few of these round-table discussion. Central to the success of these discussions is the participation of the faculty. We cordially invite your attendance.

All meetings will be held in Littauer, the room to be announced.

Sincerely,

Graduate Economics Club,
Dave Gordon, Pres.

_______________________

THE CRITICAL SPIRIT IN ECONOMICS

  1. The Myth of an Objective Economics: The Separation of Positive and Normative Thought.
    Friday, May 3, 2:00 – 4:00.

    1. The Ideological Element in Conceptualization and Model-Building: Professor Hilary Putnam.
      Professor Putnam, a philosopher of science and logician at Harvard, will speak on the contributions of T. S. Kuhn and Karl Popper, after which the discussion will be opened to the group.
      Readings are (starred items are most important):

      1. *T. S. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, esp. chap. 2, 4, 10, 12, 13. (72 pages)
      2. *Karl Popper, The Logic of Scientific Discovery, I, II; esp. pp. 27-30, 32-34, 40-42.
      3. *Karl Marx, A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, Author’s Preface (Xerox, pp. 9-15).
      4. *Milton Friedman, “The Methodology of Positive Economics,” in Essays in Positive Economics.
      5. Stephen Toulman, The Philosophy of Science, chap. 2, pp. 17-56.
      6. Michael Polanyi, Personal Knowledge, chap. 2, pp. 18-32.
      7. Pratt, Raiffa and Schlaiffer, Introduction to Statistical Decision Theory, Appendix A3, esp. A3.4.
    2. Examples from Economic Literature: These readings are meant to illustrate points made in the above readings:
      1. *Roy Harrod, “Scope and Method in Economics”, Economic Journal, Sept., 1938.
      2. *Oscar Lange, “Marxian Economics and Modern Economic Thought”, Review of Economic Studies, June, 1935.
      3. *Robert Solow, “Son of Affluence”, The Public Interest, Fall, 1967.
      4. *Robin Marris, review of Galbraith’s New Industrial State, Am. Econ Review, March, 1968, pp. 240-247.
  2. Paradigms in Development Economics
    Friday, May 10, 2:00 – 4:00

    1. Tensions, Preferences and Economic Development: Sherman Robinson.
      1. *Sherman Robinson, “Tensions, Preferences and Development”, Xerox in Littauer Library.
      2. *Gunnar Myrdal, Prologue to Vol. I of Asian Drama.
    2. Development paradigms
      1. *H. Chenery, “Comparative Advantage and Development Policy”, AER, March, 1961. Reprinted in Surveys of Economic Theory, AEA
      2. *Paul Baran, “On the Political Economy of Backwardness”, in Agarwala and Singh
      3. Gunnar Myrdal, Economic Theory and Underdeveloped Regions, chap. 2, “The Principle of Circular and Cumulative Causation,” and chap. 6, “National State Policies in Under-Developed Countries.”
    3. The Relevance of Economic Theory to Economic Development: Prof. Samuel Bowles.
      1. *Gunnar Myrdal, op. cit., chap. 4, “The Role of the State” and chap. 5 “International Inequalities”
      2. *Hla Myint, “Classical Theory of International Trade and the Underdeveloped Countries”, Economic Journal, June 1958, reprinted in Readings in Economic Development, T. Morgan, 1963.
      3. Hla Myint, “The Gains from International Trade and the Backward Countries”, REStud., 1954-55, pp. 29-42.
      4. Mason, Economic Planning in Underdeveloped Areas, chap. 2, sections 2, 5.
      5. Lenin, Imperialism.
      6. *Hobson, The Evolution of Modern Capitalism, chap. X, sections 9, 10.
      7. *Aron, Peace and War, Part II, chap. IX, “On Resources”, pp. 243-278.
  1. Welfare Economics and the Value of Efficiency Criteria: Herb Gintis.
    May 17, Friday, 2:00 – 4:00
    Professor A. Bergson has kindly agreed to participate.
    Readings to be Announced.
  1. The Role of the State in Economic Theory
    Friday, May 24, 2:00 – 4:00.
    Speakers and readings to be announced.

_______________________

Carbon Copy of Galbraith’s response

April 29, 1968

Mr. Dave Gordon
Graduate Economics Club
Littauer Center M-8

Dear Mr. Gordon:

Unhappily I will be in Italy on May 3rd, so I will not be able to attend the round-table discussion on that day. I am sorry.

Yours faithfully,

John Kenneth Galbraith

 

Source: John F. Kennedy Presidential Library. Papers of John Kenneth Galbraith, Series 5. Harvard University File, 1949-1990. Box 526, Folder “Harvard University Department of Economics: General Correspondence, 1967-1974 (3 of 3)”.

Image Source: David M. Gordon in Harvard Class Album, 1964.

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard

Harvard. Graduate core economic theory exams and enrollments. Taussig, 1926-30

 

 

Examination questions spanning just over a half-century can be found in Frank Taussig’s personal scrapbook of cut-and-pasted semester examinations for his entire Harvard career. Up to the time when Schumpeter took over the core economic theory course from Taussig in 1935, Taussig’s course covering economic theory and its history was a part of almost every properly educated Harvard economist’s basic training. Taussig’s exam questions have been previously posted for the academic years 1886/87 through 1889/90 along with enrollment data for the course;  material for this course (including semesters when taught with/by other instructors) from 1890/91 through 1893/94; 1897-1900 ; 1904-1909 ; 1911-14 ; 1915-1917; 1918-1919 ; 1920-22 ; 1923-25 have been posted as well.  

This post begins with the printed course description from 1929-30 then adds the enrollment data and five years of semester final examinations for the years 1925-26 through 1929-30.

____________________________________

 Course Description
1929-30

11. Economic Theory.

Mon. , Wed., Fri., at 2. Professor Taussig

Course 11 is intended to acquaint the student with the development of economic thought since the beginning of the nineteenth century, and at the same time to train him in the critical consideration of economic principles. The exercises are conducted mainly by the discussion of selected passages from the leading writers; and in this discussion the students are expected to take an active part. A careful examination is made of the writings of Ricardo and J. S. Mill, and of representative modern economists.

 

Source:  Division of History, Government, and Economics, 1929-30. Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. XXVI, No. 36 (June 27, 1929), p. 71. Identical course description found in Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. XXV, No. 29 (May 26, 1928), p. 70.

____________________________________

1925-26

 

Course Enrollment: Economics 11
1925-26

[Economics] 11. Professor Taussig.—Economic Theory

Total 50: 36 Graduates, 5 Graduate Business, 2 Seniors, 6 Radcliffe, 1 Other.

 

Source: Harvard University. Reports of the President and Treasurer of Harvard College, 1925-26, p. 77.

 

 

 

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 11
Mid-year Final Exam
1925-26

Arrange your answers in the order of the questions

  1. “The ordinary bargain between labor and capital is that the wage-receiver gets command over commodities in a form ready for immediate consumption, and in exchange carries his employer’s goods a stage further towards being ready for immediate consumption. But while this is true of most employees, it is not true for those who finish the processes of production. For instance, those who put together and finish watches, give to their employers far more commodities in a form ready for immediate consumption, than they obtain as wages. And if we take one season of the year with another, so as to allow for seed and harvest time, we find that workmen as a whole hand over to their employers more finished commodities than they receive as wages.”
    Do you see anything to criticize in this?
  2. (a) “In estimating the exchangeable value of stockings, for example, we shall find that their value, comparatively with other things, depends on the total quantity of labour necessary to manufacture them and bring them to market. First, there is the labour necessary to cultivate the land on which the raw cotton is grown; secondly, the labour of conveying the cotton to the country where the stockings are to be manufactured, which includes a portion of the labour bestowed in building the ship in which it is conveyed, and which is charged in the freight of the goods; thirdly, the labour of the spinner and the weaver; fourthly, a portion of the labour of the engineer, smith, and carpenter, who erected the buildings and the machinery. . . . The aggregate sum of these various kinds of labour determines the quantity of other things for which these stockings will exchange.”
    (b) “Suppose one man employs one hundred men for a year in the construction of a machine, and another man employs the same number of men in cultivating corn. . . .
    Suppose that for the labour of each workman £50 per annum were paid, or that £5000 capital were employed and profits were 10 per cent, the value of the machine as well as of the corn, at the end of the first year, would be £5500. The second year the manufacturer and farmer will again employ £5000 each in the support of labour, and will therefore again sell their goods for £5500; but the man using the machine, to be on a par with the farmer, must not only obtain £5500 for the equal capital of £5000 employed on labour, but must obtain a further sum of £550 for the profit on £5500, which he has invested in machinery, and consequently his goods must sell for £6050. Here, then, are capitalists employing precisely the same quantity of labour annually on the production of their commodities, and yet the goods they produce differ in value on account of the different quantities of fixed capital, or accumulated labour, employed by each respectively.”Is Ricardo’s reasoning tenable, on his own premises, in both cases? Are the premises the same in both?
  3. “To popular apprehension it seems as if the profits of business depend on prices. A producer or dealer seems to obtain his profits by selling his commodity for more than it costs him. . . . Demand — customers — a market for the commodity, are the cause of the gain of the capitalist.” What would Mill say to this? Ricardo?
  4. The effective desire of accumulation; the rate of profits as dependent on the cost of labor; the tendency of profits to a minimum, — are the doctrines of Mill on these topics consistent with each other? With what Ricardo laid down?
  5. “The cost of production [of agricultural produce] on the margin of the profitable application of capital and labour is that to which the price of the whole produce tends, under the control of the general conditions of demand and supply; it does not govern price, but it focusses the causes which do govern price.” Explain what Marshall means. Does the doctrine differ from Mill’s on the same subject?
    Would Marshall’s conclusion be applicable to a manufactured commodity which is produced under the conditions usually indicated by cost-accountants’ data (a supply curve positively inclined)?
  6. Suppose a decrease in the demand for a commodity produced with much fixed capital: what consequences would you expect on the equilibrium of supply and demand, price, quasi-rent, cost. Consider both the short period and the long period effects.
  7. Wherein, if at all, is the conception of quasi-rent applicable to

“Capital sunk in the soil”;
Pullman, Saltaire, and the like cases;
The gains of pioneers settling in a new country.

  1. What is meant by a law of increasing return? Do you believe there is one as regards “external economies”? internal economies?

 

 

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 11
Year-end Final Exam
1925-26

Arrange your answers in the order of the questions

  1. Define, with the utmost brevity consistent with accuracy, producers’ surplus; consumers’ surplus; savers’ surplus. What writers do you associate with the concepts to which these terms refer?
  2. “When the artisan or professional man has once obtained the skill required for his work, a part of his earnings are for the future really a quasi-rent of the capital and labour invested in fitting him for his work, in obtaining his start in life, his business connections, and generally his opportunity for turning his faculties to good account; and only the remainder of his income is true earnings of effort. But this remainder is generally a large part of the whole. And here lies the contrast. For when a similar analysis is made of the profits of the business man, the proportions are found to be different: in his case the greater part is quasi-rent.”Is the greater part of the earnings of business men to be regarded as quasi-rent? Is only the remainder to be regarded as true earnings of effort? Are these propositions in accord with Walker’s doctrine concerning business profits?
  3. What sort of surplus, if any, arises from the operation of diminishing returns as regards (a) increasing output secured from land; (b) increasing output secured with the aid of additional instruments made by man?
  4. The resemblance or difference between Clark’s doctrine that “abstinence is confined to the genesis of new capital,” and the reasoning of later writers concerning the significance of the surplus accounts of corporations.
  5. “‘On the whole,’ says Marshall, ‘it happens that by far the greater number of the events with which economics deals affect in about equal proportions all the different classes of society; so that if the money measures of the happiness caused by two events are equal, there is not in general any very great difference between the amounts of the happiness in the two cases.’ This has been justly characterized as a cavalier dismissal of the effect of differences of wealth and differences in sensibility.”Why a cavalier dismissal? or why not? Consider whether the criticism holds good as regards Marshall’s reasoning on the effects of taxes and bounties.
  6. (a) “As the inquiry to which I wish to draw the reader’s attention relates to the effect of the variations in the relative value of commodities, and not in their absolute value, it will be of little importance to examine into the comparative degree of estimation in which the different kinds of human labour are held. We may fairly conclude that whatever inequality there might originally have been in them, whatever the ingenuity, skill, or time necessary for the acquirement of one species of manual dexterity more than another, it continues nearly the same from one generation to another; or at least that the variation is very inconsiderable from year to year, and therefore can have little effect, for short periods, on the relative value of commodities.”
    Is this a cavalier dismissal of the relation between differing rates of wages and the value of goods?(b) “Although general wages, whether high or low, do not affect values, yet if wages are higher in one employment than another, or if they rise and fall permanently in one employment without doing so in others, these inequalities do really operate upon values. . . . When the wages of an employment permanently exceed the average rate, the value of the thing produced will, in the same degree, exceed the standard determined by mere quantity of labour. Things, for example, which are made by skilled labour, exchange for the produce of a much greater quantity of unskilled labour; for no reason but because the labour is more highly paid.” Mill.What would Marshall say to this? Böhm-Bawerk? What is your own view?
  7. Is there essential difference between the doctrine that the general level of wages is determined by the discounted marginal product of labor, and Clark’s doctrine concerning the relation between wages and the product of labor?
  8. “It is not true that the spinning of yarn in a factory, after allowance has been made for the wear-and-tear of the machinery, is the product of the labour of the operatives. It is the product of their labour, together with that of the employer and subordinate managers, and of the capital employed; and that capital itself is the product of labour and waiting: and therefore the spinning is the product of labour of many kinds, and of waiting. If we admit that it is the product of labour alone, and not of labour and waiting, we can no doubt be compelled by inexorable logic to admit that there is no justification for Interest, the reward of waiting; for the conclusion is implied in the premiss.”(a) What would Böhm-Bawerk say to this? What is your own view?
    (b) What is the premiss which is implied in the conclusion?

____________________________________

1926-27

 

Course Enrollment: Economics 11
1926-27

[Economics] 11. Professor Taussig.—Economic Theory

Total 44: 38 Graduates, 3 Graduate Business, 2 Seniors, 1 Radcliffe.

 

Source: Harvard University. Reports of the President and Treasurer of Harvard College, 1926-27, p. 75.

 

 

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 11
Mid-year Examination
1926-27

[Arrange your questions in the order of the answers]

  1. The merits and defects of Walker’s treatment of distribution.
  2. The merits and defects of Ricardo’s treatment of value.
  3. The merits and defects of Mill’s treatment of profits.
  4. What is meant by “increase of demand” in the following passages: —
    (a) “The democratization of society and the aping of the ways of the well-to-do by the lower classes have greatly increased the demand for silk fabrics.”
    (b) “ The lower price of sugar after 1890, when sugar was admitted free of duty, at once caused an increase of demand.”
    (c) “The cheapening of a commodity may mean an increase of demand such that the total sum spent on it will be as great as before, even greater than before.”
  5. Describe the supply curves indicated by accountants’ figures for the costs of agricultural and of manufactured products; and explain wherein they confirm or fail to confirm traditional “laws of value” applicable to the two classes of goods.
  6. (a) “Were it not for this tendency [to diminishing returns] every farmer could save nearly the whole of his rent by giving up all but a small piece of his land, and bestowing all his labor and capital on that. If all the labor and capital which he would in that case apply to it gave as good a return in proportion as that he now applies to it, he would get from that plot as large a produce as he now gets from his whole farm; and he would make a net gain of all his rent save that of the little plot that he retained.”
    (b) “The return to additional labour and capital [applied to land] diminishes sooner or later; the return is here measured by the quantity of the produce, not by its value.”
    (c) “Ricardo, and the economists of his time generally were too hasty in deducing this inference [tendency to increased pressure] from the law of diminishing return; and they did not allow enough for the increase of strength that comes from organization. But in fact every farmer is aided by the presence of neighbours, whether agriculturists or townspeople. . . . If the neighbouring market town expands into a large industrial centre, all his produce is worth more; some things which he used to throw away fetch a good price. He finds new openings in dairy farming and market gardening, and with a larger range of produce he makes use of rotations that keep his land always active without denuding it of any one of the elements that are necessary for its fertility.”
    Have you any criticisms or qualifications to suggest on these passages from Marshall?
  7. “For periods which are long in comparison with the time needed to make improvements of any kind, and bring them into full operation, the net incomes derived from them are but the price required to be paid for the efforts and sacrifices of those who make them; the expenses of making them thus directly enter into marginal expenses of production, and take a direct part in governing long-period supply price. But in short periods, that is, in periods short relatively to the time required to make and bring into full bearing improvements of the class in question, no such direct influence on supply price is exercised by the necessity that such improvements should in the long run yield net incomes sufficient to give normal profits on their cost. And therefore when we are dealing with such periods, these incomes may be regarded as quasi-rents which depend on the price of the produce.”
    Precisely what is meant by “these incomes”?

 

 

 

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 11
Year-end Final Examination
1926-27

Arrange your answers in the order of the questions

  1. What is the difference, if any, between

supply prices and expenses of production;
successive costs and contemporaneous costs;
demand curves and utility curves?

  1. Would you reckon economic rent among the expenses of production of a commodity? business profits?
    Would you reckon them among the costs of production?
  2. “‘Rent is not an element in price’ — such is the classical statement on the subject. . . . But if one defines rent as product imputable to a concrete agent, the impossibility of maintaining such a claim becomes apparent. Even if one were to restrict the term rent to the product created by land, the claim that it is not an element in adjusting market values would be absurd; for it would amount to saying that a certain part of the output of every kind of goods has no effect on their market value. The ‘price’ referred to in the formula is, of course, the market value expressed in units of currency.” What do you say?
  3. “That capital is productive has often been questioned, but no one would deny that tools and other materials of production are useful; yet these two propositions mean exactly the same when correctly understood. Capital consists primarily of tools and other materials of production, and such things are useful only in so far as they add something to the product of the community. Find out how much can be produced without any particular tool or machine, and then how much can be produced with it, and in the difference you have the measure of its productiveness.”
    What would Böhm-Bawerk say to this? J. B. Clark? What is your own view?
  4. Böhm-Bawerk remarks that the theory which he has put forward bears “a certain resemblance” to the wages fund theory of the older English School, but differs from it in various ways, one of which is “the most important.” What are the points of resemblance? and what is this “most important” difference?

Questions 6 and 7 may be treated as one, if you prefer; and questions 8 and 9 may also be so treated.

  1. “It may well be asked whether a method [of measuring utility] that needs so much guarding and explaining is worth adopting at all. The answer is that the principle of the declining marginal significance is fundamental. The doctrine of surplus value in the thing bought, over and above the value of the price paid, is an inevitable deduction from it.” Do you agree?
  2. Adventitious utility, conspicuous waste, consumer’s surplus, organic welfare. How are these related? or not related?
  3. Ricardo’s theory of cost of production is so expressed as almost to invite misunderstanding. In consequence there is a widely spread belief that it has needed to be reconstructed by the present generation of economists. . . . On the contrary the foundations of the theory as they were left by Ricardo remain intact; much has been added to them and very much has been built upon them, but little has been taken from them. He knew that demand played an essential part in governing value, but he regarded its action as less obscure than that of cost of production, and therefore passed it lightly over in the notes which he made for the use of his friends, and himself; for he never essayed to write a formal treatise: he regarded cost of production as dependent — not, as Marx asserted him to have done, on the mere quantity of labor used up in production, but — on the quality as well as quantity of that labor; together with the amount of stored up capital needed to aid labor, and the length of time during which such aid was invoked.” Do you agree?
  4. “The incomes which are being earned by all agents of production, human as well as material, and those which appear likely to be earned by them in the future, exercise a ceaseless influence on those persons by whose action the future supplies of these agents are determined. There is a constant tendency towards a position of normal equilibrium, in which the supply of each of these agents shall stand in such a relation to the demand for its services, as to give to those who have provided the supply a sufficient reward for their efforts and sacrifices. If the economic conditions of the country remained stationary sufficiently long, this tendency would realize itself in such an adjustment of supply to demand, that both machines and human beings would earn generally an amount that corresponded fairly with their cost of rearing and training, conventional necessaries as well as those things which are strictly necessary being reckoned for.”
    Is this in accord with Ricardo’s view? with Mill’s view? with Cairnes’s? What is your own opinion?

____________________________________

1927-28

Course Enrollment: Economics 11
1927-28

[Economics] 11. Professor Taussig.—Economic Theory

Total 56: 43 Graduates, 2 Graduate Business, 6 Seniors, 1 Junior, 4 Radcliffe.

 

Source: Harvard University. Reports of the President and Treasurer of Harvard College, 1927-28, p. 75.

 

 

 

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 11
Mid-year Final Examination
1927-28

Arrange your answers strictly in the order of the questions

  1. Wherein is there resemblance, wherein difference, between Walker’s long-run theory of wages and Cairnes’s?
  2. “Ricardo’s theory of cost of production is so expressed as almost to invite misunderstanding. In consequence there is a widely spread belief that it has needed to be reconstructed by the present generation of economists….On the contrary the foundations of the theory as they were left by Ricardo remain intact; much has been added to them and very much has been built upon them, but little has been taken from them. He knew that demand played an essential part in governing value, but he regarded its action as less obscure than that of cost of production, and therefore passed it lightly over in the notes which he made for the use of his friends, and himself; for he never essayed to write a formal treatise: he regarded cost of production as dependent—not, as Marx asserted him to have done, on the mere quantity of labor used up in production, but—on the quality as well as quantity of that labor; together with the amount of stored up capital needed to aid labor, and the length of time during which such aid was invoked.”
    Do you agree?
  3. What is the short period view, what the long period view (1) of Mill as regards the level of wages; (2) of Marshall as regards differences of wages in different occupations?
  4. Does Marshall conclude that money costs of production measure real costs of production? that value is ultimately determined by a constant supply price?
  5. “An increase in the aggregate volume of production will generally increase the size, and therefore the internal economies possessed by a representative firm; it will always increase the external economies to which the firm has access; and then will enable it to manufacture at a less proportionate cost of labour and sacrifice than before.”
    Why? or why not?
  6. Explain the criticisms or objections to the notion of consumer’s surplus which have been urged on the ground of (a) inequalities of income, (b) “esteem value” or “adventitious value,” (c) identity in the yield of satisfaction from each constituent of a given stock. Which among these objections if any, tell strongly against Marshall’s suggestion regarding the use of taxes and bounties?
  7. “The extra income derived from rare natural abilities bears a closer analogy to the surplus produce from the holding of a settler who has made an exceptionally lucky selection, than to the rent of land in an old country.”
    Why? or why not?
  8. (a) “The deepest and most important line of cleavage in economic theory” is “the distinction between the quasi-rents which do not, and the profits which do, directly enter into the normal supply prices of produce for periods of moderate length.” Marshall.
    (b) A critic has remarked: “In that which is most characteristic, original and positive in his work, Professor Marshall has left the old concept of rent far behind. The logical consequence of his treatment is that all the division fences between the different sorts of material wealth have been leveled; and that rent is the income of an material agent….”
    What have you to say?

 

 

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 11
Year-end Final Examination
1927-28

 

  1. Explain in the briefest terms

Expenses of Production.
Opportunity Cost.
“Cost” as used by Cairnes.
“Cost” as used by Marshall.
“Cost” as used by Böhm-Bawerk.

  1. What do you conceive to be meant by “pure profits”? and what is the place of pure profits in the theory of cost and value?
  2. “‘Rent is not an element in price’ — such is the classical statement on the subject. It even expresses a view that is now prevalent. The expression itself however, is vague. It seems to mean that the fact of rent plays no part in the adjustment of values, and that things would exchange for one another in exactly the ratios in which they now do, if there were no such thing as rent. But if one defines rent as product imputable to a concrete agent, the impossibility of maintaining such a claim becomes apparent. Even if one were to restrict the term rent to the product created by land, the claim that it is not an element in adjusting market values would be absurd; for it would amount to saying that a certain part of the output of every kind of goods has no effect on their market value. The ‘price’ referred to in the formula is, of course, the market value expressed in units of currency.”
    What do you say?
  3. Resemblances and differences between the “discounted marginal product” theory of wages and the specific product theory.
  4. “Interest under Socialism” as discussed by Böhm-Bawerk.
  5. What are “fair wages,” in Marshall’s view? Clark’s? Böhm-Bawerk’s? Your own?

____________________________________

1928-29

Course Enrollment: Economics 11
1928-29

 

[Economics] 11. Professor Taussig.—Economic Theory

Total 39: 28 Graduates, 1 Graduate Business, 1 Senior, 1 Junior, 8 Radcliffe.

 

Source: Harvard University. Reports of the President and Treasurer of Harvard College, 1928-29, p. 72.

 

 

 

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 11
Mid-year Final Examination
1928-29

Answer the questions in the order in which they are put; and answer them all, distributing your time accordingly.

  1. It had been maintained by Adam Smith and others that:
    (1) profits are lowered by the mutual competition of merchants;
    (2) taxes on necessaries cause money wages to rise;
    (3) a rise in money wages means a rise in all prices;
    (4) taxes on wages lessen farmer’s profits, and thus lower rent.
    What would Ricardo say under each head?
  2. It has been said by German writers that there is a certain degree of truth in the wages fund doctrine, in that the capital of employers is the immediate source from which wages come; but the ultimate source is in the incomes of consumers. What would Ricardo say to this? Walker? your own view?
  3. In the familiar diagram representing conditions of increasing costs for an agricultural commodity, does the supply curve indicate expenses of production or “real costs” of production?
    In a similar diagram for a manufactured commodity, based on accountants’ figures of costs, does the supply curve indicate expenses or “real costs”?
    Are the two curves different in meaning, or do they indicate essentially the same situation?
  4. “We have next to study the conditions of business management; and in so doing we must have in view a problem that will occupy our attention as we go on. It arises from the fact that, though in manufacturing at least every individual business, so long as it is well managed, tends to become stronger the larger it has grown; and though prima facie we might therefore expect to see large firms driving their smaller rivals completely out of many branches of industry, yet they do not in fact do so.”
    What is Marshall’s solution of the problem thus stated by him?
  5. “That part of a man’s income which he owes to the possession of extraordinary natural abilities is a free boon to him; and from an abstract point of view bears some resemblance to the rent of other free gifts of nature, such as the inherent properties in land. But in reference to normal prices, it is to be classed rather with the profits derived by free settlers from the cultivation of new land, or again with the find of the pearl-fisher.”
    On what grounds does Marshall rest this conclusion? What would Walker say to it?
  6. How, if at all, did Mill modify Adam Smith’s conclusions on the causes of the differences of wages in different employments? Cairnes modify Mill’s? Marshall modify Cairnes’s?
  7. “It might be supposed at first thought that . . . the area above the horizontal line (in the usual diagram) represents consumers’ surplus. This is not exactly true, however, and that for two reasons. In the first place, the satisfaction of additional wants which a lower price makes possible may make the more important wants less intense. A man might be willing to give ten dollars for a cord of wood in order that at least one room in his house could be heated during the winter. He might also be willing to give seven dollars a cord for two cords, so as to heat two rooms, but the heating of the second room might render the heating of the first room less important to him. He might not be willing, for example, to give ten dollars plus seven dollars in order to have the two rooms heated. In the second place, utility itself is to a large extent affected by price. So far as our purchases satisfy what has been called the desire for distinction, or represent what Thorstein Veblen has termed ‘conspicuous consumption,’ a lowering of the price of a commodity would lessen its utility to us.”
    Give your opinion on these objections; and consider which of them, if either, would necessarily tell against Marshall’s suggestion concerning bounties and taxes.

 

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 11
Year-end Final Examination
1928-29

 

Arrange your answers in the order of the questions.
Two questions may be omitted.

  1. Resemblances and differences between Ricardo and Boehm-Bawerk.
  2. The following have been suggested, by one writer or another, as the grounds on which the distinction between interest and rent turns:
    (1) Land is fixed in amount, instruments made by man are not.
    (2) Competition equalizes the return on instruments made by man but not that on land.
    (3) The returns on land and instruments alike depend on marginal productivity.
    Examine critically but briefly each statement; and give your own view.
  3. Would interest necessarily persist in a socialist state? The rent of land?
  4. “Quasi-rents are the net profits made in years of exceptionally good trade, or by business men of exceptional natural ability.”
    “Business profits are the net return secured in years of exceptionally good trade, or by business men of exceptional natural ability.”
    Do you agree in either case?
  5. (a) “The output of the least efficient producers forms part of the total output whose magnitude helps to determine price. But to argue from this that there is some special relation between price and the costs of the least efficient producers is a complete non sequitur.”
    (b) “‘ Rent is not an element in price’ — such is the classical statement on the subject. It even expresses a view that is now prevalent. The expression itself, however, is vague. It seems to mean that the fact of rent plays no part in the adjustment of values, and that things would exchange for one another in exactly the ratios in which they now do, if there were no such thing as rent. But if one defines rent as product imputable to a concrete agent, the impossibility of maintaining such a claim becomes apparent. Even if one were to restrict the term rent to the product created by land, the claim that it is not an element in adjusting market values would be absurd; for it would amount to saying that a certain part of the output of every kind of goods has no effect on their market value. The ‘price’ referred to in the formula is, of course, the market value expressed in units of currency.”
    What is your opinion?
  6. Are there important distinctions between these propositions:
    (a) Wages are determined by the specific product of labor;
    (b) Wages are determined by the imputed product of labor;
    (c) Wages are determined by the discounted marginal product of labor.
  7. “It is evident that, if the supply [of labor] is increased, whether the increase comes about through an addition to the number of workpeople or through an addition to their average capacity, the national dividend must be increased. Our problem is to ascertain the effect that will be produced upon the aggregate real income of labour. The analysis set out in the preceding section shows that the marginal net product of labour, in terms of things in general, and, therefore, its real earnings per unit, must be diminished. Whether its aggregate earnings will be increased depends, therefore, on whether the elasticity of the demand for labour in general is greater or less than unity. If this elasticity is greater than unity, labour in the aggregate will receive a larger absolute quantity of dividend than before; whereas, if the elasticity is less than unity, it will receive a smaller absolute quantity. It is, therefore, necessary to determine whether in fact the elasticity of demand is greater or less than unity.” Do you agree? and what is your conclusion on the elasticity of demand for labor?
  8. Compare Hobson’s analysis of “costless” savings with that of other recent writers.

____________________________________

1929-30

Course Enrollment: Economics 11
1929-30

[Economics] 11. Professor Taussig.—Economic Theory

Total 53: 44 Graduates, 3 Seniors, 5 Radcliffe, 1 Other.

 

Source: Harvard University. Reports of the President and Treasurer of Harvard College, 1929-30, p. 78.

 

 

 

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 11
Mid-year Final Examination
1929-30

Arrange your answers in the order of the questions. Answer ALL the questions.

  1. “The ordinary bargain between labour and capital is that the wage-receiver gets command over commodities in a form ready for immediate consumption, and in exchange carries his employer’s goods a stage further towards being ready for immediate consumption. But while this is true of most employees, it is not true for those who finish the process of production. For instance, those who put together and finish watches, give to their employers far more commodities in a form ready for immediate consumption, than they obtain as wages. And if we take one season of the year with another, so as to allow for seed and harvest time, we find that workmen as a whole hand over to their employers more finished commodities than they receive as wages.”
    What do you say to this? and what is its bearing on the questions raised by George and Walker?
  2. “This principle of the division of the produce of labour and capital between wages and profits, which I have attempted to establish, appears to me so certain, that excepting in the immediate effects, I should think it of little importance whether the profits of stock or the wages of labour, were taxed. . . . A tax on wages does not fall on the landlord, but it falls on the profits of stock: it does not ‘entitle and oblige the master manufacturer to charge it with a profit on the prices of his goods,’ for he will be unable to increase their price, and therefore he must himself wholly and without compensation pay such a tax.”
    What led Ricardo to the conclusions stated in this passage?
  3. (a) “As the inquiry to which I wish to draw the reader’s attention relates to the effect of the variations in the relative value of commodities, and not in their absolute value, it will be of little importance to examine into the comparative degree of estimation in which the different kinds of human labour are held. We may fairly conclude that whatever inequality there might originally have been in them, whatever the ingenuity, skill, or time necessary for the acquirement of one species of manual dexterity more than another, it continues nearly the same from one generation to another; or at least that the variation is very inconsiderable from year to year, and therefore can have little effect, for short periods, on the relative value of commodities.”
    (b) “Although general wages, whether high or low, do not affect values, yet if wages are higher in one employment than another, or if they rise and fall permanently in one employment without doing so in others, these inequalities do really operate upon values. . . . When the wages of an employment permanently exceed the average rate, the value of the thing produced will, in the same degree, exceed the standard determined by mere quantity of labour. Things, for example, which are made by skilled labour, exchange for the produce of a much greater quantity of unskilled labour; for no reason but because the labour is more highly paid.” Mill.
    What would Cairnes say about the proposition here laid down? What would Marshall say? What are your own opinions?
  4. Consider whether marginal cost determines price, or price determines marginal cost, in the following cases:
    (a) the short-period price of a manufactured commodity;
    (b) the short-period (seasonal) price of an agricultural commodity;
    (c) the long-period price of a manufactured commodity;
    (d) the long-period price of an agricultural commodity;
    (e) the long-period value of gold.
  5. Describe the supply curves (particular costs curves) which we have for agricultural products; indicate what they signify; and indicate also in what principles and in what manner such curves should be constructed in order to make them fit into the “orthodox” reasoning about the rent of land, or to serve as test or verification for that reasoning.
  6. (a) “The deepest and most important line of cleavage in economic theory” is “the distinction between the quasi-rents which do not, and the profits which do, directly enter into the normal supply prices of produce for periods of moderate length.”
    (b) A critic has remarked: “In that which is most characteristic, original and positive in his work, Professor Marshall has left the old concept of rent far behind. The logical consequence of his treatment is that all the division fences between the different sorts of material wealth have been levelled; and that rent is the income of any material agent. . . .”
    Why should Marshall consider the line of cleavage explained in (a) to be the most important? If he does, must he admit the “logical consequence” stated in (b)?
  7. “Curves of total satisfaction are purely abstract; that is to say, they represent the subjective value attached by a consumer to each increment of the commodity, or the amount he would purchase at any given price, apart from any consideration of the causes that might be supposed in actual experience to limit his supply or raise the price of the commodity, and apart from all reactions upon the price or other commodities. They are also isolated; that is to say, we cannot conceive of a system of such curves being so constructed as to be valid simultaneously. Nor can we sum their areas, taken successively, without omitting some values and counting others more than once. Nor can we read on them the effect of a rise or fall in the consumer’s income. Nevertheless their general form has a high theoretical significance. . . .
    It may well be asked whether a method that needs so much guarding and explaining is worth adopting at all. The answer is that the principle of declining marginal significances is absolutely fundamental. The doctrine of surplus value in the thing bought over and above the value of the price paid, is an inevitable deduction from it.”Explain, and give your own views.

 

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 11
[Year-end Final Examination]
1929-30

Arrange your answers in the order of the questions.

  1. Explain briefly,

Simple Competition
Monopolistic Competition
Bilateral Monopoly
Simple Monopoly
Discriminating Monopoly

  1. What is the elasticity of demand for labor, on the reasoning of the Wages Fund doctrine? on that of Böhm-Bawerk? on that of Pigou? What is your own view?
  2. What are “pure profits”? and what would be “impure” profits? Can you distinguish? If so, how and why?
  3. “That able but wrongheaded man, David Ricardo, shunted the car of Economic Science on to a wrong line, on which it was further urged toward confusion by his equally able and wrongheaded admirer John Stuart Mill.”
    “Ricardo’s theory of cost of production is so expressed as almost to invite misunderstanding. In consequence, there is a widely spread belief that it has needed to be reconstructed by the present generation of economists. . . . On the contrary the foundations of the theory as they were left by Ricardo remain intact; much has been added to them and very much has been built upon them, but little has been taken from them.” Marshall.
    What ground for either view?
  4. Give the rest of your time — at least one hour — to a discussion of The Universal Law of Diminishing Returns.

 

 

Source for examination questions: Harvard University Archives. Prof. F. W. Taussig, Examination Papers in Economics 1882-1935 (Scrapbook).

Image Source:  Harvard Class Album, 1934.

Categories
Exam Questions Oxford

Oxford. Exams for Philosophy, Politics, and Economics (PPE), 1931

During the winter of 1931-32 Wesley Clair Mitchell of Columbia University taught as Eastman Professor at Balliol College, Oxford. In Mitchell’s papers in the Columbia University archives is a complete collection of the examinations for the Honour School of Philosophy, Politics, and Economics from Trinity term 1931 provided him by his  Oxford colleague Robert Hall. I have even transcribed the French/German/Italian texts for the “Unseen translation paper” (at least two of the three languages). Would be interested to know how a Google translation would have scored. I am following the ordering of the exams found in the Mitchell papers, reflecting Hall’s grouping of the examinations  (III, IV, VIII, IX required political economy topics; VII choice of one of three further topics in political economy; I, II, X, V, VI all the non-political-economy topics)

 

  1. HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY
  2. BRITISH CONSTITUTIONAL AND POLITICAL HISTORY
  3. POLITICAL ECONOMY
  4. POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC ORGANIZATION
  5. PRESCRIBED BOOKS: POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY
  6. UNSEEN TRANSLATION PAPER
  7. FURTHER SUBJECT IN POLITICAL ECONOMY

ADVANCED ECONOMIC THEORY
CURRENCY AND CREDIT
LABOUR MOVEMENTS SINCE 1815

 

  1. BRITISH SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY
  2. PRESCRIBED BOOKS: POLITICAL ECONOMY
  3. MORAL AND POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY

_____________________

“By 1930, however, the total number of PPE candidates had risen to 102, thus necessitating an additional examiner in economics. In 1931, the total number of candidates increased by one-third again, to 132. …Between 1931 and 1939, there were always two Oxford-based economists on the Committee [of examiners]. In 1931, Hall joined Hargreaves, and they both also served as examiners in 1932. “

Source:   W. Young and F. Lee, Oxford Economics and Oxford Economists, p. 82

______________________

Cover letter from Robert Hall to Wesley Clair Mitchell

Trinity College,
Oxford.

13.XI.31

Dear Mitchell,

Here are the papers set last year. I have divided them into three groups which will explain them: everyone takes ten papers of which seven are common to all.

I have seen practically everyone about the matter we discussed on Monday and they all feel that the course you suggested should be followed. Hargreaves has written to MacGregor inviting him to come next Tuesday.

If you have not already been invited to the Political Economy Club dinner on Saturday the 21st would you come with me? Harrod is speaking on the balance of trade between gold-standard countries.

Yours very sincerely,

Robert Hall

______________________

SECOND PUBLIC EXAMINATION
Honour School of Philosophy, Politics, and Economics

III
POLITICAL ECONOMY

  1. ‘To show that both under-population and over-population are possible is not the same thing as showing that either of these things exists now or has ever existed.’ Consider this statement.
  2. What importance do you attach to the distinction between long and short periods in an analysis of cost of production?
  3. What do you understand by the principle of charging ‘what the traffic will bear’? How far is it applicable outside the sphere of transport charges?
  4. Can the phenomenon of a rate of interest be adequately explained as the result of a preference for present over future income?
  5. ‘It is an illusion to suppose that the general level of wages can be appreciably and permanently raised by Trade Union action except in so far as it increases the efficiency of the workers, or incidentally stimulates the efficiency of the employers.’ Examine this assertion.
  6. What costs does the presence of risk and uncertainty entail? How is the burden of these costs actually borne and distributed?
  7. ‘Any formula which may be used to demonstrate that rent is a surplus may equally well be used to demonstrate that wages and interest are surpluses.’ Discuss this view.
  8. Is the aggregate volume of employment likely to be diminished by the introduction of new mechanical processes?
  9. What are the necessary conditions for the maintenance and effective operation of an international gold standard? Are these conditions realized to-day?
  10. What are the advantages and disadvantages of a policy of State control of foreign investment?
  11. What effects may different forms of protective tariffs be expected to produce upon the distribution of income within a community?
  12. In what different senses my the term ‘taxable capacity’ be used? How far is it possible to attach a precise meaning to the term in any of these uses?

[T.T. 1931.]

SECOND PUBLIC EXAMINATION
Honour School of Philosophy, Politics, and Economics

IV
POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC ORGANIZATION

[Questions should be attempted from each section]
A

  1. Discuss the view that to rely, for the preservation of peace, on the use of military and economic sanctions by the League of Nations, is to defeat the purpose of the League.
  2. Examine the effect of the separation of executive and legislative powers on American politics.
  3. ‘In spite of outward appearances the multi-party system of Germany and France provides more stable, more efficient, and more representative government than the English system.’ Discuss this statement.
  4. Discuss the merits of direct and indirect election as a means of choosing a second chamber.
  5. ‘No branch of government more immediately and more deeply affects the lives of ordinary citizens than the currency and banking policy of the State, and yet there is no branch of government which is less suitable for popular control.’ Do you see any solution to this difficulty?
  6. Discuss the view that substantial economies ought to be effected in this country by reducing the number of government servants.

B

  1. How far do you consider that control by the workers engaged in an industry is compatible with industrial efficiency.
  2. Discuss the effects of the increased burden of fixed interest charges caused by the recent fall in prices.
  3. ‘In view of the disparity between wholesale and retail prices, marketing rather than production is the most suitable sphere for state control.’ Examine this statement.
  4. Is the future development of British industry more likely to come from a revival of the exporting industries or from the expansion of new types of production?
  5. Discuss the view that expenditure on social services is a better investment for the community than the increase of private savings.
  6. Is the Stock Exchange necessary for the direction of capital into industry?

[T.T. 1931.]

SECOND PUBLIC EXAMINATION
Honour School of Philosophy, Politics, and Economics

VIII
BRITISH SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY

  1. ‘The agrarian Revolution took place earlier, and without its results the industrial Revolution would have been impossible’ (Brentano). Consider this judgment.
  2. Describe the changes which occurred in the localization of industries between 1760 and 1830.
  3. Did the British fiscal system during the first half of the nineteenth century seriously restrict industrial development?
  4. Examine the distribution and the effect of immigration into Great Britain.
  5. Describe and account for the changes in Trade Union policy between 1825 and 1870.
  6. ‘A more miserable history can hardly be found than that of the attempts of the Bank to keep a reserve and to manage a foreign drain between the year 1819 and the year 1857.’ Was Bagehot’s criticism of the policy of the Bank of England justified?
  7. What measures were taken to improve the living conditions of the working classes in the period 1836-90?
  8. ‘High farming the best substitute for Protection.’ How far were the methods and organization of British agriculture successfully adapted to the situation following upon the repeal of the Corn Laws?
  9. ‘The basis of taxation is extremely narrow (Goschen). To what extent was this true of the tax system in the period 1860-90?
  10. What changes did the University of Oxford undergo in the nineteenth century?
  11. What attempts has Parliament made to secure effective control over the development of mechanical transport?
  12. What part has the principle of the workhouse test played in the administration of the English poor law?

[T.T. 1931]

SECOND PUBLIC EXAMINATION
Honour School of Philosophy, Politics, and Economics

IX
PRESCRIBED BOOKS: POLITICAL ECONOMY

  1. ‘Every improvement in the circumstances of the society tends either directly or indirectly to raise the real rent of land.’ Discuss the manner in which Adam Smith reaches this conclusion.
  2. ‘The number of productive labourers can never be much increased but in consequence of an increase of capital.’ Does Adam Smith give a coherent account of the nature of capital?
  3. Can a clear account of the causes and effects of inflation be derived from Adam Smith and Ricardo?
  4. Compare the theories of Adam Smith and Ricardo on the mechanism of foreign trade.
  5. What is the importance of normal costs of production in Ricardo’s system?
  6. Can Ricardo’s views on the incidence of taxation be reconciled with modern theories on the subject?
  7. Is it fair to say that false hypotheses about the laws of population vitiate the accounts given by Ricardo and Marx of the relations between the profits of capital and the wages of labour?
  8. In what sense, if any, can commodities be said to contain ‘congealed labour-time’?
  9. ‘The starting-point of the development that gave rise to the wage labourer as well as to the capitalist was the servitude of the labourer.’ Discuss this statement.
  10. Discuss the views of the three writers on the place of competition in economic life.

[T. T. 1931]

_________________________________

Note by Hall:

“One of these 3. The best people do the first: the worst the last. (Economists only)”

SECOND PUBLIC EXAMINATION
Honour School of Philosophy, Politics, and Economics

VII
FURTHER SUBJECT IN POLITICAL ECONOMY
ADVANCED ECONOMIC THEORY

  1. ‘But if quantitative analysis can give us empirically valid demand curves…shall we not have a better theory of demand than qualitative analysis can supply?’ Discuss this view of economic method.
  2. Consider the problem of the attribution of portions of the product to units of productive factors.
  3. In what circumstances can it be said that a price is indeterminate?
  4. Consider the relation between enterprise and saving.
  5. Is it possible to construct a tax system on the principle of equal sacrifice?
  6. Discuss the problem of weighting in connexion with the construction of some type of index number.
  7. Consider the difficulties of economic forecasting.
  8. Give an account of the principal formulae connecting money and prices, with reference to the availability of statistical evidence.
  9. Can trade depressions be attributed either to under-consumption or to under-investment?
  10. How would you expect the price system of a Socialist economy to differ from that of a competitive one?

[T.T. 1931]

SECOND PUBLIC EXAMINATION
Honour School of Philosophy, Politics, and Economics

VII
FURTHER SUBJECT IN POLITICAL ECONOMY
CURRENCY AND CREDIT

  1. ‘The equations of the Quantity Theory of Money are truisms which tell us nothing in themselves.’ Discuss this view.
  2. Can the purchasing power of money be satisfactorily expressed in terms of a ‘general level of prices’?
  3. What types of legal regulation prevail to-day with regard to the cash reserves of central banks? To what extent may these regulations be regarded as obsolete?
  4. What grounds are there for assuming that the world’s annual supplies of gold are likely to prove inadequate to future monetary requirements?
  5. How far can the control of credit be effectively secured through the purchase and sale of securities by a central bank?
  6. Describe the chief features of British monetary policy between 1914 and 1925.
  7. ‘Booms and slumps are simply the expression of the results of an oscillation of the terms of credit about their equilibrium position.’ Consider this statement.
  8. How would you proceed to measure the purchasing power parity between two currencies?
  9. How far does experience indicate the practicability of a discrimination on the part of bankers between the different purposes to which credit may be applied?
  10. What are the main considerations which should govern the policy of a super-national bank?
  11. Give an account of the operation of the Indian Gold Exchange Standard between 1898 and 1914.
  12. ‘Banks can only lend what the public has entrusted to them.’ Examine this view.

[T. T. 1931]

SECOND PUBLIC EXAMINATION
Honour School of Philosophy, Politics, and Economics

VII
FURTHER SUBJECT IN POLITICAL ECONOMY
LABOUR MOVEMENTS SINCE 1815

  1. What were the principles of Owenism, and what attempts were made to apply them?
  2. Describe and account for the attitude of the Chartists towards the movement for the repeal of the Corn Laws.
  3. ‘The creation of a normal working day is the product of a protracted civil war, more or less dissembled, between the capitalist class and the working class’ (Marx). Does the history of factory legislation support this view?
  4. What changes in the legal status of Trade Unions were effected by the legislation of the years 1868-76?
  5. To what extent were trade unionists influenced by the wage theories of orthodox political economists during the latter half of the nineteenth century?
  6. To what influences was the emergence of the New Unionism of 1889-90 due?
  7. What have been the causes of the success of the Consumers’ Co-operative Movement in Great Britain?
  8. Examine and compare the various educational experiments which have been associated with working-class movements in Great Britain.
  9. ‘Of real Syndicalism there is in England probably none.’ How far was this statement true of the period 1906-14?
  10. What attempts have been made to deal with the special problems connected with casual labour?
  11. Discuss the attitude of the British Labour leaders to the Second and Third Internationals.

[T.T. 1931]

_________________________________

Note by Hall:

“These are the non-economic papers taken—a paper in Kant can be substituted for No. V. (Prescribed Books) but this is the usual one.”

SECOND PUBLIC EXAMINATION
Honour School of Philosophy, Politics, and Economics

I
HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY

  1. Explain and criticize Descartes’ view of the method of mathematics.
  2. Does either Spinoza or Leibniz give a coherent account of the apparent multiplicity of objects in the world?
  3. What reasons led Leibniz to his conception of the monad?
  4. Is Locke’s account of the origination of ideas satisfactory?
  5. Give an account of Berkeley’s theory of perception.
  6. Examine the grounds for the distinction between primary and secondary qualities.
  7. Discuss Hume’s criticism of the notion of the self.
  8. What is meant by apperception?
  9. On what grounds can a distinction be drawn between understanding and reason?
  10. ‘Its religious character is an essential feature of English Idealism, and the guiding principle of its development.’ Discuss this statement in regard to any one British Idealist.
  11. Examine any modern account of the nature and origin of belief.
  12. Is any satisfactory account known to you of the place of evil in the world?
  13. Explain, and estimate the success of, the attempt of any one philosopher to refute materialism.
  14. What is the function of philosophy according to any one modern philosopher?
  15. Discuss the account given by any one modern philosopher of the relation between the human mind and its body.

[T.T. 1931]

SECOND PUBLIC EXAMINATION
Honour School of Philosophy, Politics, and Economics

II
BRITISH CONSTITUTIONAL AND POLITICAL HISTORY

[Candidates are expected to answer questions from both sections of the paper.]

A

  1. To what extent were Parliamentary elections in the boroughs under the control of the Crown and of private individuals at the beginning of the reign of George III?
  2. What different ideas in political thought are represented in the careers of Burke and Fox?
  3. Discuss the problems raised by cases involving the privileges of the House of Commons between 1760 and 1860.
  4. ‘The Commons were right in accusing him; the Lords were right in acquitting him.’ Discuss this verdict on the impeachment of Warren Hastings.
  5. Discuss the view that Britain has never been in greater danger than at the time of the Treaty of Tilsit.
  6. How far does the history of England between 1822 and 1830 prove that good government without representative government is not enough?
  7. What problems were left unsolved by the Union with Ireland in 1801?
  8. What truth is there in the view that the Whig governments in the decade after the Reform Bill proved themselves to be as incompetent in financial questions as they were competent in political questions?
  9. Compare the extent of the personal influence of the monarch under George III and under Queen Victoria.

B

  1. ‘But then you have been Prime Minister in a sense in which no other man has been it since Mr. Pitt’s time’ (Gladstone, 1846). Discuss this estimate of Peel as a Prime Minister.
  2. How far were any British interests served by the Crimean War?
  3. ‘The real struggle in nineteenth-century England was not between Conservatives and Liberals but between rationalists and romantics in politics.’ Discuss.
  4. Discuss the view that the pre-war system of rigidly organized parties really dates from 1868.
  5. Discuss the claims of Disraeli’s administration from 1874 to 1880 to be considered more truly democratic than the administration of Gladstone which precede it.
  6. How far is it true to say that the South African War was due to the alternation between a policy of authority and a policy of conciliation?
  7. Estimate the effect on the Conservative Party of the adhesion of Joseph Chamberlain.
  8. Discuss the chief conflicts between the Commons and the Lords between 1860 and 1911.
  9. ‘A party without a policy and without philosophy.’ How far do you agree with this dictum of The Times on the Liberal party in 1906?

[T. T. 1931.]

SECOND PUBLIC EXAMINATION
Honour School of Philosophy, Politics, and Economics

X
MORAL AND POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY

  1. Of what value is the distinction between means and ends in moral inquiry?
  2. Can I ever do what I do not want to do?
  3. Is determinism compatible with belief in real values?
  4. ‘To know all is to pardon all.’ Is this true?
  5. Criticize the view that the will is identical with practical reason.
  6. ‘I ought to do what I believe to be right, even though my belief may be false.’ Is this view tenable?
  7. Can adequate grounds be given for asserting either that it is always wrong or that it is nearly always wrong to lie?
  8. ‘Every one to count as one, and no one to count as more than one.’ Is this a moral axiom?
  9. What is meant by obedience?
  10. Is the state the guardian of morality?
  11. Does the doctrine of the General Will imply the existence of a Group Mind?
  12. On what principles should a man who owes allegiance to more than one association decide which he is to obey?
  13. On what grounds can democracy be defended?

[T. T.  1931.]

SECOND PUBLIC EXAMINATION
Honour School of Philosophy, Politics, and Economics

V
PRESCRIBED BOOKS: POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY

  1. Discuss the view that Burke’s advocacy of the claims of expediency rather than right in dealing with the American colonies was a shallow and temporizing approach to a fundamental problem of politics.
  2. ‘But nothing in progression can rest on its original plan.’ How far did Burke apply this doctrine consistently in his political thinking?
  3. How far was Durham’s recommendation of union for Canada influenced by economic considerations?
  4. ‘We have not succeeded in making education practical.’ Do you consider that this statement in the India Report uncovers the main cause of discontent, and at the same time points to the most important remedy?
  5. How far are Mill’s proposed limitations of universal suffrage consistent with his general political principles?
  6. Comment on the view that Mill’s observations on Second Chambers are more sensible than those of Esmein and more profound than those of Bryce.
  7. Examine Bryce’s view of the special defects and dangers in the political systems of Australia and New Zealand.
  8. Assuming that the presumption of argument is in favour of the accurate representations of opinion, in what situations would you hold Proportional Representation to be undesirable?
  9. To what extent does Bryce’s treatise on democracy suffer from the omission of the United Kingdom from the countries he presents for examination?
  10. ‘Ce qui constitue en droit une nation, c’est l’existence, dans cette société d’hommes, d’une autorité supérieure aux volontés individuelles.’ Is it necessary for the preservation of this authority to formulate a theory of sovereignty in such terms as Esmein uses?
  11. ‘Dicey’s vindication of the rule of law holds good with regard to personal liberty but not with regard to security of property.’ Discuss this view.
  12. How far would you agree with the statement that the conventions of a constitution may become more rigid than its laws?

[T. T. 1931.]

SECOND PUBLIC EXAMINATION
Honour School of Philosophy, Politics, and Economics

VI
UNSEEN TRANSLATION PAPER

[Candidates are required to complete at least ONE of the following passages from each of two languages]

Translate into English:—

(a) De ce chef, la question prend une ampleur angoissante. L’utilisation de l’aviation dans la vie contemporaine est déjà telle, les perspectives qu’ouvre son développement ultérieur certain sont si larges, les services qu’elle doit rendre s’annoncent comme si étendus, qu’on voit mal comment l’humanité pourrait y renoncer. L’aviation est entrée dans notre existence quotidienne, et la part qu’elle  prendra dans la vie internationale, spécialement dans la vie économique, ne peut que grandir: le monde des affaire n’abandonnerait pas volontiers les possibilités énormes que lui donne dès aujourd’hui l’aviation, les espérances plus grandes encore qu’elle lui fait concevoir pour demain. On en revient à la fable d’Ésope: l’aviation, comme la langue, est la meilleure et la pire des choses. Puissant facteur du développement des relations internationales dans tous les domaines, elle est en même temps—ou elle peut être, suivant les intentions de ceux qui l’emploient, — un puissant facteur de destruction internationale. N’est-ce pas, dira-t-on, la rançon de tout ce qui représente un progrès matériel? Les chemins de fer, l’automobile, ne participent-ils pas aussi à la fois du bien de du mal? Les transports par voie ferrée ou par camions routiers n’ont-ils pas joué un rôle considérable dans les opérations de la guerre mondiale? C’est vrai. Mais l’aviation représente un danger d’un ordre particulier.

(b) Mais les gens qui vivaient alors, qui étaient attachés au gouvernement républicain par tradition et par souvenir, qui se rappelaient les grandes choses qu’il avait faites, qui lui devaient leurs dignités, leur position et leur renommée, pouvaient-ils penser comme nous et prendre aussi facilement leur parti de sa chute? D’abord ce gouvernement existait. On était familiarisé avec ses défauts depuis si longtemps qu’on vivait avec eux. On en souffrait moins par l’habitude qu’on avait de les supporter. Au contraire on ne savait pas ce que serait ce pouvoir nouveau qui voulait remplacer la république. La royauté inspirait une répugnance instinctive aux Romains, surtout depuis qu’ils avaient conquis l’Orient. Ils avaient trouvé là, sous ce nom, le plus odieux des régimes, l’asservissement le plus complet au milieu de la civilisation la plus raffinée, tous les plaisirs du luxe et des arts, le plus bel épanouissement de l’intelligence avec la tyrannie la plus lourde et la plus basse, des princes accoutumés à se jouer de la fortune, de l’honneur, de la vie des hommes, sortes d’enfants gâtés cruels comme on n’en rencontre plus que dans les déserts de l’Afrique. Ce tableau n’était pas fait pour les séduire, et quelques inconvénients qu’eût la république, ils se demandaient s’il valait la peine de les échanger contre ceux que pouvait avoir la royauté.

(c) Kants Vater war ein Mann von offenem, geradem Verstande, der Arbeitsamkeit und Ehrlichkeit als höchste Tugenden ansah, zu denen er auch seine Kinder erzog. Tieferen Einfluß auf den Sohn hatte die Mutter, die er schildert al seine Frau von großem natürlichen Verstand, einem edlen Herzen und einer echten, durchaus nicht schwärmerischen Religiosität. Sie ging oft mit dem Jungen ins Freie, machte ihn auf Gegenstände und Vorgänge in der Natur aufmerksam, lehrte ihn nützliche Kräuter kennen, erzählte ihm vom Bau des Himmels und pries ihm die Allmacht, Weisheit und Güte Gottes. Noch als Greis gestand Kant: ‚Ich werde meine Mutte [sic] nie vergessen; denn sie pflanzte und nährte den ersten Keim des Guten in mir, sie öffnete mein Herz den Eindrücken der Natur; sie weckte und erweiterte meine Begriffe, und ihre Lehren haben einen immerwährenden heilsamen Einfluß auf mein Leben gehabt.’ Er war auch der Meinung, seine Gesichtszüge und seine körperliche Konstitution, bis auf die eingebogene Brust, habe er von der Mutter geerbt. Tief hat er es stets bedauert, daß er sie bereits als Dreizehnjähriger verlor. Am Bette einer an typhösen Fieber enkrankten [sic] Freundin holte sie sich dieselbe Krankheit und starb in ihrem vierzigsten Lebensjahr bereits 1737. Fünf Jahre vorher war Kant als Achtjähriger in die beste Schule seiner Vaterstadt, das Collegium Fridericianum (ein heute noch bestehendes Gymnasium), aufgenommen worden.

(d) Es geht bei der Philosophie fast wie bei der Politik. Wenn hier auch nicht jeder des Aristoteles acht Bücher vom Staate, Spinozas Tractatus theologico-politicus oder Montesquieus ‘Geist der Gesetze’ liest, so halt er doch seine Zeitung, sucht sich die Geschehnisse zurecht zu legen und bekennt sich zu gewissen Prinzipien und Parteien. Ähnlich in der Philosophie. Gar manchen, der wenig von all den Systemen weiß, die, seit Thales die Welt aus dem Wasser entstehen ließ, aus den wogenden Gedanken hervorragender Geister auftauchten, haben doch die philosophischen Probleme nicht ganz unberührt gelassen. Auch ihn haben die großen Rätsel des Menschenlebens und Weltzusammenhangs beunruhigt gelassen. Auch ihn haben die großen Rätsel des Menschenlebens und Weltzusammenhangs beunruhigt und, nach der Lösung suchend, hat er sich Meinungen gebildet, die dann lange Zeit gehegt, vielleicht auch von anderen in seiner Umgebung geteilt, sich schließlich für ihn mit der ganzen Macht der Gewohnheit und des Gefühls umkleideten und wie etwas selbstverständlich Evidentes in seinem Kopfe festgesetzt haben. Was ist denn nun aber die Philosophie, für die sich so viele interessieren, wenn sie auch ihre Schwierigkeit und das Erfordernis sorgsamer Vorbereitung nicht immer genügend würdigen? Wir sprachen eben davon, wie auf diesem Gebiete fast jeder leichthin und kühnlich zu urteilen wage. Seltsam darum, wenigstens für den Augenblick, daß doch die scheinbar einfache und elementare Frage, was die Philosophie sei, die Leute gemeiniglich in eine nicht geringe Verlegenheit bringt. Wenden wir uns aber damit statt an die philosophischen Dilettanten an die Berufsphilosophen, so hat von diesen zwar gewiß jeder eine Antwort bereit, aber fast jeder eine andere.

(e) La ricchezza e la prosperità inglese aumentavano dunque in questo tempo, ma tendevano ancora ad un timido piede di casa, e trovando nell’agricoltura larghe possibilità di investimento, cercavano di ripiegarsi su di essa, come nell’impiego più sicuro, ed era questo un fenomeno che non solo riguardava l’aristocrazia campagnola e gli affittuari di terre, ma anche i borghesi manifatturieri di città che consideravano le loro industrie come un mezzo di far denaro, considerando l’agricoltura un mezzo per impiegarlo. Quindi il capitale inglese, rapidamente crescente, aveva la pacifica tendenza a ripiegarsi sui più sicuri impieghi terrieri o, tutt’ al più, sulle industrie cittadine largamente protette; certo nella sua gran massa, se si eccettuano gli avventurosi armatori di navi corsare come quelle di Drake o i monopolisti del commercio internazionale, mal volentieri si avventurava ad imprese marinare e si investiva in navi, anzi sentiva così poco la necessità economica di una florida marina mercantile che perfino rifiutava di contribuire alla creazione di una marina reale che lo proteggesse e alla difesa della costa e dei porti sui quali neppur mancavano le incursioni barbaresche e lasciava affittare agli olandesi per un misero canone la pesca sulle sue coste.

(f) Nasce da questo una disputa: ‘S’egli è meglio essere amato che temuto, o temuto che amato.’ Rispondesi, che si vorrebbe essere l’uno e l’altro; ma perché gli è difficile che gli stiano insieme, è molto più securo l’esser temuto che amato, quando s’abbi a mancare dell’un de’duoi. Perchè degli uomini si può dir questo generalmente, che sieno ingrati, volubili, simulatori, fuggitori de’pericoli, cupidi di guadagno: e mentre fai lor bene, sono tutti tuoi, ti offeriscono il sangue, la roba, la vita, ed i figli, come di sopra dissi, quando il bisogno è discosto; ma quando ti si appressa, si rivoltano. E quel principe che si è tutto fondato in su le parole loro, trovandosi nudo d’altri preparamenti, rovina: perchè l’amicizie che si acquistano con il prezzo, e non con grandezza e nobiltà d’animo, si meritano, ma le non s’hanno, ed a’tempi non si possono spendere. E gli uomini hanno men rispetto d’offendere uno che si facci amare, che uno che si facci temere: perché l’amore è tenuto da un vinculo d’obbligo, il quale, per esser gli uomini tristi, da ogni occasione di propria utilità è rotto; ma il timore è tenuto da una paura di pena, che non abbandona mai.

[T. T. 1931.]

Source:  Columbia University Libraries Manuscript Collections. Mitchell, W. C. Collection, Box 10, Folder “Hall Robert, 13 Nov 1931”.

Image Source:  Robert Lowell Hall  .

Categories
Business School Economists Harvard

Harvard. Economics Ph.D. Alumnus and Harvard Business School Professor, Copeland, 1910

 

Another obituary for the series: Meet a Ph.D. Economist! Copeland apparently was the first to organize a collection of case studies that were later to became a hallmark of the Harvard Business School. Of particular value is the link I found to his history of the Harvard Business School that was published in 1958.

_______________________________________

Examination for the Degree of Ph.D.
Division of History and Political Science

Melvin Thomas Copeland.

Special Examination in Economics, Friday, December 14, 1909.
General Examination passed May 13, 1908.
Committee: Professors Ripley (chairman), Hart, Carver, Sprague, and Munro.
Academic History: Bowdoin College, 1902-06; Harvard Graduate School, 1906-09; A.B. (Bowdoin), 1906; A. M. (Harvard) 1907. Austin Teaching Fellow (Harvard), 1908-09; Instructor, 1909-10.
Special Subject: Economic History of the United States.
Thesis Subject: “The Organization of the Cotton Manufacturing Industry in the United States.” (With Professors Taussig and Gay.)
Committee on Thesis: Professors Gay, Ripley, and Sprague.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Examinations for the Ph.D. (HUC 7000.70), Folder “Examinations for the Ph.D., 1909-10”.

_______________________________________

 

Source: Harvard Business School Yearbook, 1930-31.

_______________________________________

From the Report of the President of Harvard College, 1975-75

Melvin Thomas Copeland, George Fisher Baker Professor of Administration, Emeritus, died March 27, 1975 in his 91st year. Although not a member of the Business faculty until 1912 when the School was four years old, “Doc” Copeland justly ranks with its founders because of his organization of the first collection of business cases for study. A 1906 graduate of Bowdoin College, Copeland came to Harvard to earn his A.M. (1907) and Ph.D. (1910) degrees. His doctoral dissertation, Cotton Manufacturing Industry of the U.S.,  won the Wells Prize and was published in 1912. While still a graduate student, he served as an Assistant in Economics and later as Instructor in Economic Resources. He then spent a year teaching on the faculty of New York University, returning to Harvard in 1912 to teach a course in business statistics at the fledgling Business School, thus beginning a career which continued until his retirement in 1953. Copeland became an Instructor in Marketing in 1914, Professor of Marketing in 1919, and was Director of the Bureau of Business Research twice (from 1916 to 1920 and from 1942 to 1953). He worked on the organization of business cases and on project research for faculty members in this latter job. He was named George Fisher Baker Professor in 1950. Over the years he earned a reputation as a distinguished editor and writer on business topics; before his retirement he produced six books, and afterwards was asked to write the Business School’s history, And Mark an Era, which appeared in 1958. His volume about the Gloucester, Massachusetts area where he lived, The Saga of Cape Ann (1960), also appeared after his retirement. In 1973, in his eighty-ninth year, Copeland received from the Business School its Distinguished Service Award.

 

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College and reports of departments, 1974-75, pp. 32-3.

Image Source: Harvard Album, 1920.

 

 

Categories
Courses Gender Radcliffe

Radcliffe. Economics Course Offerings, 1894-1900

 

Besides documenting the course offerings available to Radcliffe students at the end of the 19th century, the post today offers us relatively thick course descriptions of what were essentially identical to Harvard economics courses that I have not found for that period. Pre-Radliffe economics course offerings and the first actual Radcliffe courses for  1893-94 have been posted earlier.

____________________________________

1894-95
ECONOMICS.

(Primarily for Undergraduates.)

PROFESSOR CUMMINGS. — Outlines of Economics. — Mill’s Principles of Political Economy. — Lectures on Economic Development, Distribution, Social Questions, and Financial Legislation. This course gave a general introduction to Economic study, and a general view of Economics for those who had not further time to give to the subject. It was designed also to give argumentative training by the careful discussion of principles and reasoning. The instruction was given by question and discussion. J. S. Mill’s Principles of Political Economy formed the basis of the work. At intervals lectures were given which served to illustrate and supplement the class-room instruction. In connexion with the lectures, a course of reading was prescribed. The work of students was tested from time to time by examinations and other written work. — 13 students.

PROFESSOR ASHLEY. — The Elements of Economic History from the Middle Ages to Modern Times. The object of this course was to give a general view of the economic development of society from the Middle Ages to the present time. It dealt, among others, with the following topics: the manorial system and serfdom; the merchant gilds and mediaeval trade; the craft gilds and mediaeval industry; the commercial supremacy of the Italian and Hanseatic merchants; trade centres, and trade routes; the merchant adventurers and the great trading companies; the agrarian changes of the sixteenth century; domestic industry; the struggle of England with Holland and France for commercial supremacy; the beginning of modern finance; the progress of farming; the great inventions and the factory system. Attention was devoted chiefly to England, but that country was treated as illustrating the broader features of the economic evolution of the whole of western Europe. Arrived at the 17th century, it was shown how English conditions were modified by transference to America. The opportunity was taken, throughout the course, to introduce the students to the use of the original sources. — 6 students.

 

(For Graduates and Undergraduates.)

PROFESSOR ASHLEY. — Aristotle to Ricardo. — Economic Theory. This course traced the development of economic theory from its beginnings to Ricardo. It was treated partly by lectures and partly by the discussion of selections from leading writers. The more important chapters of Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations, of Malthus’s Essays on Population, and Ricardo’s Principles of Political Economy and Taxation, were read by students, and discussed in the class-room; and an attempt was made to show the relation of the “classical economists ” to more recent economic speculation. — 8 students.

PROFESSOR CUMMINGS. — The Principles of Sociology. — Development of Modern State, and of its Social Functions. An introductory course in sociology, intended to give a comprehensive view of the structure and development of society in relation to some of the more characteristic ethical and industrial tendencies of the present day. The course began with a theoretical consideration of the relation of the individual to society and to the state, – with a view to pointing out some theoretical misconceptions and practical errors traceable to an illegitimate use of the fundamental analogies and metaphysical formulas found in Comte, Spencer, P. Leroy Beaulieu, Schaeffle, and other writers. The second part followed more in detail the ethical and economic growth of society. Beginning with the development of social instincts manifested in voluntary organization, it considered the genesis and theory of natural rights, the function of legislation, the sociological significance of the status of women and of the family and other institutions, – with a view to tracing the evolution of certain types of society based upon a more or less complete recognition of the social ideas already considered. The last part dealt with certain tendencies of the modern state, discussing especially the province and limits of state activity, with some comparison of the Anglo-Saxon and the continental theory and practice in regard to private initiative and state intervention in relation to public works, industrial development, philanthrophy, education, labor organization, and the like. Each student selected for special investigation some question closely related to the theoretical or practical aspects of the course; and a certain amount of systematic reading was expected. —  7 students.

PROFESSOR ASHLEY. — Economic Seminary. Here four graduate students investigated the present industrial organization of the U. S.; one giving particular attention to the Woollen and Cotton Industries of New England; a second to the Coal and Iron Industries of Pennsylvania; a third to the Petroleum business; and the fourth to the Labor movement, especially around Chicago.

 

Source:   Radcliffe College. Report of the President, 1894-95, pp. 48-49.

____________________________________

1895-96
ECONOMICS.

(Primarily for Undergraduates.)

1. PROFESSOR CUMMINGS. — Outlines of Economics. — Mill’s Principles of Political Economy. — Lectures on Economic Development, Distribution, Social Questions, and Financial Legislation. This course gave a general introduction to economic study, and a general view of Economics. It was conducted mainly by questions and discussions, supplemented by lectures. Large parts of Mill’s Principles of Political Economy were read, as well as parts of other general books; while detailed reference was given for the reading on the application and illustration of economic principles. — 20 students.

 

(For Graduates and Undergraduates.)

10. PROFESSOR ASHLEY. — The Mediaeval Economic History of Europe. The object of this course was to give a general view of the economic development of society during the Middle Ages. It dealt, among others, with the following topics: the manorial system in its relation to mediaeval agriculture and to serfdom; the merchant gilds and the beginnings of town life and of trade; the craft gild and the gild-system of industry, compared with earlier and later forms: the commercial supremacy of the Hanseatic and Italian merchants; the trade routes of the Middle Ages and of the sixteenth century; the merchant adventurers and the great trading companies; the agrarian changes of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries and the break-up of the mediaeval organization of social classes; the appearance of new manufactures and of domestic industry. Special attention was devoted to England, but that country was treated as illustrating the broader features of the economic evolution of the whole of western Europe. — 6 students.

21. PROFESSOR ASHLEY. — Economic Theory, from Adam Smith to the present time.- Selections from Adam Smith and Ricardo. — 8 students.

22. PROFESSOR MACVANE. — Economic Theory. Modern Writers. — 4 students.

3. PROFESSOR CUMMINGS. — The Principles of Sociology. This course began with a general survey of the structure and development of society; showing the changing elements of which a progressive society is composed, the forces which manifest themselves at different stages in the transition from primitive conditions to complex phases of civilized life, and the structural outlines upon which successive phases of social, political, and industrial organization proceed. Following this, was an examination of the historical aspects which this evolution has actually assumed: Primitive man, elementary forms of association, the various forms of family organization, and the contributions which family, clan and tribe have made to the constitution of more comprehensive, ethnical, and political groups; the functions of the State, the circumstances which determine types of political organization, the corresponding expansion of social consciousness, and the relative importance of military, economic, and ethical ideas at successive stages of civilization. There was careful consideration of the attempts to formulate physical and psychological laws of social growth; the relative importance of natural and of artificial selection in social development; the law of social survival; the dangers which threaten civilization; and the bearing of such general considerations upon the practical problems of vice, crime, poverty, pauperism, and upon mooted methods of social reform. The student was made acquainted with the main schools of sociological thought, and opportunity was given for a critical comparison of earlier phases of sociological theory with more recent contributions in Europe and the United States. Regular and systematic reading was required. Topics were assigned for special investigation in connection with practical or theoretical aspects of the course. — 4 students.

 

(Primarily for Graduates.)

20. PROFESSOR ASHLEY. — Seminary in Economics. One student continued her investigation into mediaeval land tenure, and another began an inquiry into the relations between Adam Smith and Turgot. — 2 students.

 

Source:   Radcliffe College. Report of the President, 1895-96, pp. 46-47.

____________________________________

1896-97
ECONOMICS.

Primarily for Undergraduates:

1. Asst. Professor CUMMINGS and Dr. JOHN CUMMINGS. — Outlines of Economics. Principles of Political Economy. Lectures on Economic Development, Distribution, Social Questions, and Financial Legislation. 3 hours a week.

15 Undergraduates, 3 Special students. Total 18.

 

For Graduates and Undergraduates:

11. Professor ASHLEY. — The Modern Economic History of Europe (from1400). 2 hours a week.

2 Graduates, 1 Undergraduate, 1 Special student. Total 4.

9. Asst. Professor CUMMINGS and Dr. JOHN CUMMINGS. — The Labor Question in Europe and the United States. — The Social and Economic Condition of Workingmen. 3 hours a week.

1 Undergraduate, 4 Special students. Total 5.

3. Asst. Professor CUMMINGS. — The Principles of Sociology. Development of the Modern State and of its Social Functions. 3 hours a week.

1 Graduate, 1 Undergraduate, 4 Special students. Total 6.

 

Source:   Radcliffe College. Report of the President, 1896-97, p. 38.

____________________________________

1897-98
ECONOMICS.

Primarily for Undergraduates:

1. Asst. Professor CUMMINGS and Dr. JOHN CUMMINGS. — Outlines of Economics. Principles of Political Economy. Lectures on Economic Development, Distribution, Social Questions, and Financial Legislation. 3 hours a week.

1 Graduate, 20 Undergraduates, 4 Special students. Total 26.

 

For Undergraduates and Graduates:

11. Professor ASHLEY. — The Modern Economic History of Europe (from1400). 2 hours a week.

1 Graduate, 3 Special students. Total 4.

9. Asst. Professor CUMMINGS and Dr. JOHN CUMMINGS. — The Labor Question in Europe and the United States. — The Social and Economic Condition of Workingmen. 3 hours a week.

1 Graduate, 3 Undergraduates, 1 Special student. Total 5.

3. Asst. Professor CUMMINGS. — The Principles of Sociology. Development of the Modern State and of its Social Functions. 3 hours a week.

1 Graduate, 2 Undergraduates, 1 Special student. Total 4.

6. Dr. CALLENDER. — The Economic History of the United States. 3 hours a week.

1 Graduate, 1 Undergraduate. Total 2.

22. Professor TAUSSIG. — Economic Theory. Half-course. 3 hours a week. 2d half-year.

3 Undergraduates, 1 Special student. Total 4.

 

Primarily for Graduates:

20. Professor ASHLEY. — Seminary in Economics. The Mediaeval History of certain English manors.

1 Graduate. Total 1.

 

Source:   Radcliffe College. Report of the President, 1897-98, pp. 38-39.

____________________________________

1898-99
ECONOMICS.

Primarily for Undergraduates:

1. Asst. Professor CUMMINGS and Dr. JOHN CUMMINGS. — Outlines ofEconomics. Principles of olitical Economy. Lectures on Economic Development, Distribution, Social Questions, and Financial Legislation. 3 hours a week.

16 Undergraduates, 4 Special students. Total 20.

 

For Undergraduates and Graduates:

112. Dr. CUNNINGHAM. — The Industrial Revolution in England in the 18th and 19th centuries. Half-course. 3 hours a week, 2d half-year.

1 Graduate, 11 Undergraduates, 7 Special students. Total 19.

6. Dr. CALLENDER. — The Economic History of the United States. 3 hours a week.

1 Graduate, 3 Undergraduates, 1 Special student. Total 6.

3. Asst. Professor CUMMINGS. — The Principles of Sociology. Development of the Modern State and of its Social Functions. 3 hours a week.

1 Graduate, 2 Undergraduates, 1 Special student. Total 4.

9. Asst. Professor CUMMINGS and Dr. JOHN CUMMINGS. — The Labor Question in Europe and the United States. — The Social and Economic Condition of Workingmen. 3 hours a week.

2 Graduates, 4 Undergraduates, 2 Special students. Total 8.

 

Primarily for Graduates:

20. Asst. Professor CUMMINGS. — Seminary in Economics.

1 Special student. Total 1

 

Source:   Radcliffe College. Report of the President, 1898-99, pp. 35-36.

 

____________________________________

1899-1900
ECONOMICS.

Primarily for Undergraduates:

1. Asst. Professor CUMMINGS and Dr. JOHN CUMMINGS. — Outlines of Economics. — Principles of Political Economy. — Lectures on Economic Development, Distribution, Social Questions and Financial Legislation. 3 hours a week.

27 Undergraduates, 4 Special Students. Total 31.

 

For Undergraduates and Graduates:

11. Professor ASHLEY. — The Modern Economic History of Europe and America (from 1600). 2 hours a week (and occasionally a third hour).

8 Graduates, 7 Undergraduates, 2 Special students. Total 17.

6. Dr. CALLENDER. — The Economic History of the United States.2 hours a week.

2 Graduates, 5 Undergraduates. Total 7.

3. Asst. Professor CUMMINGS. — The Principles of Sociology. — Development of the Modern State and of its Social Functions. 3 hours a week.

2 Graduates, 6 Special students. Total 8.

 

Primarily for Graduates:

**15. Professor ASHLEY. — The History and Literature of Economics to the close of the Eighteenth Century. 2 hours a week.

1 Graduate. Total 1.

**20c1. Professor Taussig. The Tariff History of the United States.Thesis. Half-course. 1 hour a week, 1st half-year.

1 Graduate. Total 1.

 

Source:   Radcliffe College. Report of the President, 1899-1900, pp. 42-43.

Image Source:  Library in Fay House, 1890s. Schlesinger Library. Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study Harvard University Webpage.

Categories
Chicago Economists

Chicago. Economics Department on Possible Candidate for Permanent Employment, 1950

 

How big was the split within the department of economics in 1950 at the University of Chicago? Judging from the decision by chairman T. W. Schultz to essentially table the matter of approaching the central university administration with a candidate for a permanent position, there was a departmental deadlock.

The half-dozen economists discussed were: George Stigler, Abba Lerner, Kenneth Boulding, Leonid Hurwicz, Kenneth Arrow, and Lawrence Klein. Contemplate those names for a moment and then read aloud the following two sentences:

Several members of the Department stated that none of these men had all of the qualities sought: a good mind reaching out fruitfully in new directions in economics. It was agreed, however, that there were no likely candidates possessing these qualities in a high degree.   

We can only speculate which alpha economists happened to lock horns in those three meetings.

_________________________

From the MINUTES, Meeting of the Department,
May 24, 1950.

Present: T. W. Schultz, T. Koopmans, A. Rees, H. G. Lewis, D. G. Johnson, E. J. Hamilton, R. Burns, J. Marschak, F. H. Harbinson, F. H. Knight, M. Friedman, B. Hoselitz, L. Metzler

[…]

II. Appointments

Schultz informed the Department that Hildreth’s position has been renegotiated for a term of three years. The Department approved a motion authorizing for Hildreth the courtesy rank of Associate Professor for a three year term.

The Department then considered the appointment problem raised by the leaving of Blough (probably initially on a one year leave of absence) and Brownlee. Schultz suggested that the Department had two alternatives open to it: a temporary replacement (construed broadly) and a permanent appointment of a top ranking person.

The Department considered first possible candidates for permanent appointment. Attention centered on George Stigler, Abba Lerner, Kenneth Boulding, Leonid Hurwicz, Kenneth Arrow, and Lawrence Klein. For a temporary appointment Schultz suggested Gunnar Myrdal.

[Meeting began at 3:30 pm and ended 5:45 p.m.]

_________________________

From the MINUTES, Meeting of the Department,
May 30, 1950.

Present: T. W. Schultz, R. Burns, D. G. Johnson, E. J. Hamilton, F. H. Knight, L. Metzler, R. Blough, F. H. Harbinson, A. Rees, H. G. Lewis, T. Koopmans, J. Marschak, M. Friedman.

Appointments

The discussion of appointments continued from the previous meeting. Schultz expressed the conviction that the time was propitious for a new permanent appointment. On Metzler’s suggestion, the Department returned to discussion of the following candidates for a permanent appointment: Stigler, Hurwicz, Boulding, Klein, Lerner, Arrow.

Several members of the Department stated that none of these men had all of the qualities sought: a good mind reaching out fruitfully in new directions in economics. It was agreed, however, that there were no likely candidates possessing these qualities in a high degree.

The chairman then polled those present with respect to their first choice (or ties for first) for a permanent appointment. As a result of the poll the list of candidates was narrowed to Hurwicz, Stigler, and Lerner. The chairman then polled those present on their position toward permanent appointment of each of these men.

The poll showed that of those present

4 would favor and 5 oppose the permanent appointment of Hurwicz
4 would favor and 5 oppose the permanent appointment of Lerner
6 would favor and 6 oppose the permanent appointment of Stigler

A motion was passed instructing the chairman to poll the absent members of the Department in the same way on the appointment of Hurwicz, Lerner, and Stigler and to report back to the Department for further discussion.

[Meeting began at 3:30 pm and ended 6:15 p.m.]

_________________________

From the MINUTES, Meeting of the Department,
June 8, 1950.

Present: T. W. Schultz, H. G. Lewis, D. G. Johnson, J. Marschak, H. Kyrk, P. Thomson, M. Friedman, T. Koopmans, A. Rees, E. J. Hamilton, F. H. Knight, R. Blough.

Appointments

Schultz reported that he had polled Kyrk, Thomson, Mints, and Nef (but had not heard from Goode) on the matter of a permanent appointment for Stigler or Hurwicz or Lerner. The upshot of the poll was that the Department, the Chairman not voting, was evidently divided in its rating of Stigler for a permanent appointment; both permanent members and temporary members of the faculty showed an even division. The Chairman explained that he would abstain from voting on the belief that the Department was not now prepared to advance, with a strong meeting of minds, a strong case to the Central Administration for a permanent appointment. Schultz proposed that we investigate a slate of names for a one-year appointment.

A motion was passed authorizing the Chairman to put Gunnar Myrdal in the first position on the slate for a one-year appointment.

Successive motions passed by the Department added the following names to the slate:

Nicholas Kaldor   Simon Kuznets
Arthur F. Burns
H. M. Henderson
W. Vickrey
A. Hart
H. Stein

The Department then, following the system of ranking used in fellowship appointments, ranked these seven persons. The rank order follows:

1. Kaldor
2. Burns
3. Henderson
4. Kuznets
5½. Vickrey
5½. Hart
7. Stein

[Meeting began at 3:30 pm and ended 6:00 p.m.]

Source: University of Chicago Archives, Department of Economics Records, Box 41, Folder 12.

Image Source: Social Science Research Building.  University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf2-07466, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.

 

Categories
Economists Harvard Yale

Harvard. Three generations of Economics Ph.D.’s. The Ruggles Dynasty

 

 

The passing of the torch from one generation in a family to another in economics is noteworthy, but hardly a rare occurrence. Everyone has heard of James and John Stuart Mill, Neville and Maynard Keynes, Robert Aaron and Margaret S. and their economist sons Robert J. and David Gordon, Bob and Anita with their bouncing Larry Summers, Richard and Jonathan Portes, as well as Ken and Jamie Galbraith, to drop only a few names. But one can honestly say that economists are underachievers in this torch-passing respect.

After all, musicians appear to find little difficulty in getting the beat to go on in the family, medical doctors seem to fall from family trees of doctors, the clergy (for religions in which sexual reproduction is a feature and not a bug) show little difficulty in begetting future clerics, and indeed the professional military is generally successful in instilling a pride of warriorship in its young. At least we economists can console ourselves that no one has (yet) composed a song with a title like “Mammas Don’t Let Your Babies Grow Up to Be Cowboys”.

With all of this in mind, I present Economics in the Rear-view Mirror’s very first economics Ph.D. family trifecta: meet the Ruggles dynasty, three generations of Harvard economics Ph.D.’s who collectively span a century’s worth of economics right up to the present day.

I’ll let others assess the “relative” achievements of the dynasty founder, Clyde Orval Ruggles (“The economic basis of the greenback movement in Iowa and Wisconsin”, Harvard PhD, 1913),  vs. the middle-generation of Clyde’s son, Richard Francis Ruggles (“Price structure and distribution over the cycle”, Harvard PhD, 1942), and Richard’s first wife, Nancy Dunlap Ruggles (“Resource allocation and pricing systems”, Radcliffe PhD, 1949), vs. Clyde’s granddaughter, Patricia Ruggles (“The allocation of taxes and government expenditures among households in the United States”, Harvard PhD, 1980). Two remarks: (i) Appointments to a professorship at the Harvard Business School (Clyde) or to staff director of the Joint Economic Committee of the U.S. Congress and a pair of NSF fellowships (Patricia) are hardly chopped liver according to any meaningful metric; (ii) published tributes to the work of Richard and Nancy Ruggles are easy to find.

  • Barbara M. Fraumeni “Ruggles and Ruggles—A National Income Accounting Partnership” Survey of Current Business, April, 2001, 14-15. 
  • Timothy Smeeding (December 2001), In Memoriam: Richard Ruggles—a man for all seasons (1916-2001). Review of Income and Wealth, 47: 561-563.
    James Tobin (September 2001), In Memoriam: Richard Ruggles (1916-2001). Review of Income and Wealth, 47: 405–408.
  • Edward N. Wolff (September 2001), In Memoriam: Richard Ruggles (1916-2001). Review of Income and Wealth, 47: 409–415.
  • Helen Stone Tice (June 2004), Essays in Honor of Nancy and Richard Ruggles: Editor’s Introduction. Review of Income and Wealth, 50: 149-151.

Below you will find a variety of artifacts culled from public sources with (auto-)biographical information about the members of this dynasty. 

_______________________________________

Biographical Note about Clyde Orval Ruggles from the Baker Library of Harvard Business School

Clyde Orval Ruggles was born in Fairfield, Iowa on December 7, 1878. He received his BA from Iowa State Teachers College in 1906, his MA from the University of Iowa in 1907, and his PhD from Harvard in 1913. He also received a Litt.D. from Suffolk University in 1938.

Ruggles was the head of the Department of History and Social Science at the Iowa State Teachers College from 1909-1913. He then served on the faculty of the Department of Economics at Ohio State University from 1913-1920. He left Ohio State for a year to take up the position of Head of the School of Commerce and the Department of Economics at the University of Iowa from 1920-1921. He then moved back to Ohio State in 1921, serving as the Head of the Department of Business Administration from 1921 to 1926, and as Dean of the College of Commerce and Journalism from 1926-1928.

In 1928 he came to HBS as a Professor of Public Utility Management (later amended to Professor of Public Utility Management and Regulation), a position he held until his retirement from HBS in 1948, when he became an emeritus professor. He also served as the Director of the Division of Research from 1940-1942. After his retirement from HBS, he continued to teach, lecturing at or serving on the faculties of Ohio State, Wright Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio, the Georgia Institute of Technology and Northeastern University.

Ruggles was a nationally known economist with diverse research interests in the areas of public utilities management and business education. In addition to his academic work, Ruggles also served as a consultant to a variety of public and private agencies and companies, including the Civil Aeronautics Board, the National Monetary Commission, the United States Shipping Board, and the Montreal Tramways Company.

Ruggles’ publications include Terminal Charges at United States Ports (1919), Problems in Public Utility Economics and Management (1933 and 1938), Aspects of the Organization, Functions and Financing of State Public Utility Commissions (1937), and numerous journal and newspaper articles.

Clyde O. Ruggles died on April 6, 1958 in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

 

Source:   Baker Library Historical Collections, Harvard Business School, Harvard University. Clyde O. Ruggles Papers, 1918-1957: A Finding Aid.

Image Source: Harvard Business School Yearbook 1938-39.

_______________________________________

Clyde O. Ruggles’ Daughter Catherine G. Ruggles
Radcliffe Ph.D. Conferred, June 1937

Catherine Grace Ruggles, A.M. Subject, Economics. Special Field, Public Finance. Dissertation, “The Financial History of Cambridge, 1846-1935.” Research Assistant, Harvard Department of Economics.

Source: Radcliffe College, President’s Report 1936-37, p. 20.

_______________________________________

American Economic Association’s Biographical Listing of Members (Dec. 1981)

Ruggles, Nancy D., 100 Prospect St., New Haven, CT 06511. Phone: Office (203)436-8583; Home (203) 777-4187. Fields: 220, 320. Birth Yr: 1922. Degrees: A.B., Pembroke Coll., 1943; Ph.D., Radcliffe Coll., 1948. Prin. Cur. Position: Sr. Res. Econ., Yale U., 1980-. Concurrent/Past Positions: Secy., Int’l. Assn. for Res. in Income & Wealth, 1961-; Asst. Dir., Statistical Off., United Nations, 1975-80. Research: Nat. acctg. systems & their integration with economic-social microdata.

Ruggles, Richard, 100 Prospect St., New Haven, CT 06511. Phone: Office (203) 436-4040; Home (203) 777-4187. Fields: 220, 320. [Birth Yr: 1916.] Degrees: A.B., Harvard Coll., 1939; M.A. Harvard U., 1941; Ph.D., Harvard U., 1942. Prin. Cur. Position: Prof. of Econs., Yale U., 1947-. Research: Nat. acctg. systems & their integration with economic-social microdata.

 

Source: Biographical Listing of Members in the 1981 Survey of Members (Dec., 1981) The American Economic Review, Vol. 71, No. 6. p. 354.

_______________________________________

Richard Ruggles (1916-2001),
Noted Economic Statistician, Dies

Richard Ruggles, a member of the Yale economics faculty for nearly 40 years who was a specialist in the fields of national economic accounting and economic theory, died March 4 at his home in New Haven of complications from prostate cancer.

Professor Ruggles, who was 84, was known for developing accounting tools for measuring national income and improving price indexes used in formulating government policy. Throughout his Yale career, he conducted research for numerous government agencies and bodies, including the United Nations, the Organization of American States, the Federal Reserve Board, the Bureau of the Census and the National Bureau of Economic Research, as well as the Ford Foundation. He also served on various governmental committees concerned with economic statistics.

The economist did much of his work with his first wife, Nancy, who died in 1987. Pricing Systems, Indexes, and Price Behavior, Macro- and Microdata Analyses and Their Integration, and National Accounting and Economic Policy, collections of their work, were published in 1999.

Born on June 15, 1916, in Columbus, Ohio, Mr. Ruggles was the son of economist Clyde O. Ruggles, who taught at and was dean [sic] of the Harvard Business School. The younger Mr. Ruggles attended Harvard for both undergraduate and graduate study, earning his B.A. in 1939, an M.A. in 1941 and his Ph.D. in 1942.

After earning his doctorate, Professor Ruggles joined the Office of Strategic Services as an economist. During World War II, he worked for the office in London, where he estimated the production rates of tanks at German factories using photographs of the serial numbers from captured or destroyed tanks. In 1945-46 he was with the U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey in Tokyo and Washington.

Professor Ruggles returned briefly to Harvard as an instructor in 1946 before joining the Yale faculty a year later as an assistant professor of economics. He was named an associate professor in 1949 and a full professor in 1954. He was appointed the Stanley Resor Professor of Economics in 1954. He chaired the Department of Economics from 1959 to 1962, and also served as director of undergraduate studies in the department.

Professor Ruggles and his family traveled frequently, making trips to the Soviet Union and to various developing countries, among other places.

Professor Ruggles married Caridad Navarette Kindelán in 1989. In addition to his wife, he is survived by three children, Steven Ruggles of Minneapolis, Minnesota; Patricia Ruggles of Washington, D.C.; and Catherine Ruggles of Los Angeles, California; two sisters, Catherine Ruggles Gerrish of Cambridge, Massachusetts, and Rebecca Ruggles of New York City; four grandchildren; and his wife’s seven children and 13 grandchildren.

 

Source: Yale Bulletin & Calendar, Vol. 29, No. 23 (March 23, 2001).

_______________________________________

Memories and Musings of Yale by Richard Ruggles (ca. 2000)

In 1939 I graduated from Harvard with my classmates, William Parker and James Tobin, and like them undertook graduate study in economics. The previous cohort of Harvard graduate students in economics was very distinguished and included Paul Samuelson, Ken Galbraith, Abe Bergson, Lloyd Reynolds, John Miller, Lloyd Metzler, Robert Triffin, Henry Wallich, and many others, including my sister Catherine Ruggles. With the outbreak of World War II, Bill Parker went into the Army and Jim Tobin went into the Navy. I managed to finish my graduate work and I went into OSS. I served in London in 1943, in Europe in 1944, and went to Japan for the Bombing Survey at the end of the war.

In 1946, I returned to Harvard as an Instructor and married Nancy Dunlap, who enrolled as a graduate student in economics at Radcliffe. At the 1946 meetings of the American Economic Association, I met John Miller, who had moved to Yale, and he invited me to give a talk at Yale. I did so and was appointed Assistant Professor. At that time Ed Lindblom, Neil Chamberlain and Challis Hall were also appointed as Assistant Professors. Although, at Harvard, Yale was viewed as a boys’ finishing school, there was a group of younger faculty members who were highly regarded. In addition to John Miller, Lloyd Reynolds had come from Harvard, and there were Max Millikan, Richard Bissell (who was always on leave) and Wight Bakke. The so-called “ice cap” consisted of pre-Keynesian economists who, for the most part, specialized in specific areas such as transportation, corporate finance, accounting, and money and banking. Generally speaking, the “ice-cap” were reasonable men, but they were oriented toward training Yale undergraduates to go out into the business world.

The newly appointed Assistant Professors were quite congenial and held Saturday night dances in the Strathcona lounge. There was, however, no role for professional women in the Economics Department so Nancy and I became consultants for the government, the United Nations, and foundations. In 1948, we went to Europe for the Economic Cooperation Administration. In the 1950s, we worked for ECA in Washington, the Ford Foundation, and the United Nations in New York. When the Korean war broke out, we were asked to create an intelligence unit for the CIA for collecting and analyzing Soviet factory markings. We hired some Yale students and employees from ECA. At Yale we developed a “Rapid Selector” project in conjunction with the Yale Electrical Engineering Department to help analyze the factory markings data collected from Korea. The “Yale Rapid Selector” was quickly made obsolete by the development of computers.

During the 1950s, Lloyd Reynolds was building up the Economics Department at Yale. He recruited Robert Triffin, Henry Wallich, and William Fellner. The Yale Economics Department was becoming known for the quality of its faculty. At that time, the Cowles Commission at the University of Chicago was unhappy with their arrangements there and approached Lloyd about coming to Yale. The arrangements for bringing Cowles to Yale were made in 1955, with Tjalling Koopmans and Jacob Marschak being appointed as Professors in the Economics Department. As part of the agreement, the Econometric Society also moved to Yale, and I agreed to serve as Secretary, with Nancy as Treasurer.

By 1959, however, friction developed between some members of the Cowles Foundation and the Chairman, Lloyd Reynolds. As a consequence I was asked to serve as chair. As Chairman I managed to recruit Joe Peck, William Parker, and Hugh Patrick, who had been an undergraduate at Yale and had participated in the CIA Korean project. However, I did not like being Chairman, and I resigned in 1962.

The Yale Economic Growth Center was established in 1961. Lloyd Reynolds and I had served as consultants to the Ford Foundation, and they had expressed an interest in establishing a center for the study of economic development at Yale. In addition, Nancy and I were actively consulting for the Agency for International Development in Washington D.C., and they also wished to foster such research. As a consequence, Lloyd Reynolds established the Yale Economic Growth Center. It had as its mission the development of “country studies” of economic development. Graduate students in economics writing their doctoral dissertations were sent to developing countries to do “country studies.” To facilitate and manage the operations, Miriam Chamberlain was appointed Executive Secretary to manage the day-to-day operations of the Growth Center. Miriam had been working at the Ford Foundation in New York and had moved back to New Haven when her husband Neil was made a Professor of Labor Economics. Mary Reynolds, wife of Lloyd Reynolds, was placed in charge of building up a library of books, documents, and data relating to developing countries. Nancy Ruggles was hired with AID funds to design the framework of data for the country studies. In addition, Nancy agreed to become the Secretary of the International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, which was transferred to the Economic Growth Center from the University of Cambridge, England. All three women had Ph.D.s from Radcliffe and were highly qualified for their functions.

To some members of the Economics Department, however, the hiring of faculty wives seemed inappropriate, and in 1966 the Chairman, therefore, asked for their resignations. Simon Kuznets suggested that Nancy and I could carry out our research program at the National Bureau of Economic Research in New York. For the next decade I carried out my research activities at the NBER in New York and Washington D.C. I taught the undergraduate course of the “Economics of the Public Sector,” the Senior Honors Seminar, the graduate course in “National Accounting,” and carried out the administrative tasks of Director of Undergraduate Studies or Director of Graduate Studies in Economics.

In 1978, I transferred my research activities from the NBER to the Institution for Social and Policy Studies at Yale. Nancy had been employed as the Assistant Director of the United Nations Statistical Office, but she also became associated with ISPS in 1980. We jointly carried out our research at ISPS until the accidental death of Nancy in 1987.

 

Source:   M. Ann Judd, The Yale Economics Department: Memories and Musings of Past Leaders

_______________________________________

Nancy Dunlap Ruggles
Radcliffe Ph.D., 1948

When Yale’s Economic Growth Center was founded in the 1961, three women, all with Ph.D.s, were hired as researchers or administrators. All three also happened to be married to Yale economics professors.

Five years later, amid a flash of concern about nepotism, the three women were required to leave their positions, despite being fully qualified.

For one of the women, Nancy Ruggles, the injustice was particularly acute given that she co-authored essentially all of her tenured husband’s academic work — a partnership she and her spouse, Yale economist Richard Ruggles, acknowledged and treasured.

“The situation with Nancy Ruggles was a shame, because she was someone who had all of the necessary qualifications to be a professor, should have been, and would be under present circumstances,” Yale economist and Nobel laureate Jim Tobin would later lament.

As Yale marks Women’s History Month and continues to commemorate the 50th anniversary of coeducation in Yale College and the 150th anniversary of female students at the university, it celebrates the visible achievement of women students and faculty. There’s also fresh appreciation of scholars whose accomplishments went unrecognized because of their gender.

Nancy Ruggles was born in 1922 and grew up during the Great Depression and World War II, formative experiences that exposed her to the importance of economics. She completed her undergraduate degree at Pembroke College, the women’s college affiliated with Brown University, in 1943. Immediately afterward, she took a job with the Office of Price Administration. There, through a co-worker, she met her future husband, Harvard economics Ph.D. Richard Ruggles.

Their daughter, Patricia Ruggles ’74, said Nancy’s experiences in Washington, D.C. during the war led her to study economics, and that Richard encouraged Nancy to enroll in a Ph.D. program once the war was over. At Radcliffe College, Nancy wrote her thesis on marginal cost pricing, an innovative idea at the time, and received her doctorate in 1948.

Patricia Ruggles said her mother, like other women, was made to accept less illustrious degrees from women’s colleges.

“My mother was very insulted when she was offered to trade her [Radcliffe] Ph.D. for a Harvard one both because it implied that a Radcliffe degree was second class and because she had been denied a Harvard degree in the first place, even though all of her courses were at Harvard.”

The Ruggles moved to New Haven in 1946, after Richard was appointed a professor at Yale. Together, their main research focus was developing the rules for national income accounting, which measures economic activity in a country. In 1947, the Ruggles worked on the implementation of the Marshall Plan and helped develop assessments for measuring the aid’s effectiveness in stimulating the health of European economies. Later, the Ruggles’ framework was adopted for calculating U.S. national accounts.

“As far as I know, my father never wrote anything without my mother as a co-author during the time they were married,” Patricia Ruggles said.

In a review of the Ruggles’ work, economist Utz-Peter Reich remembers Richard’s response to a question about the authorship of their work as, “It does not matter — it’s always been both of us who have been at it anyway.”

Still, gender barriers were a common theme in Nancy Ruggles’ career. She was a founding member of the International Association for Research on Income and Wealth and its secretary for many years. Though her husband served as editor of the association’s journal, she in fact did the bulk of the editorial work with manuscripts, according to Patricia Ruggles, because Richard was dyslexic.

The pair did much of their research out of their home on Prospect Street, which Sterling Professor of Economics and Economic Growth Center founder Lloyd Reynolds remembered as a “two-person, computerized data factory.”

According to Professor Emeritus Bill Brainard, the Ruggles had installed a 24-volt system to control all electricity in the house and created a sophisticated data storage center in the home. He also recalled a Ford van the Ruggles outfitted with plumbing and communications infrastructure, allowing them to work on road trips across the country and even around the world, going as far as Russia after World War II.

The Ruggles’ dynamism as a research duo was recognized and appreciated by many of their contemporaries. Said Tobin, “[The Ruggles] were probably the best husband-wife team in the history of economics.”

Unfortunately for Nancy Ruggles, the prevailing view at Yale during her time was that appointing spouses to faculty positions was immoral nepotism, especially within the same department, Tobin said.

After being let go from Yale, she went on to work for the United Nations, where she was assistant director of the Statistical Office from 1975 to 1980. In that role, she helped develop the rules for national income accounts published by the United Nations, especially for developing countries for whom the accounting rules of developed countries were less applicable. Her work had important implications for crafting economic development policies globally. After 1980, Nancy Ruggles returned to Yale, becoming affiliated with the Institute for Social and Policy Studies as a senior research economist. Back in New Haven, she resumed her joint research with her husband. She died in 1987.

“My parents were a very effective team except for the fact that my mother got no recognition for her part of it,” said Patricia Ruggles, who earned an economics degree as a member of Yale’s second fully co-ed undergraduate class, in 1974.

Following in her parents’ footsteps, she also went on to earn a Ph.D. in economics from Harvard, in 1980.

It would not be until 2001 that Yale had its first tenured women economics professor, when the department hired Penny Goldberg from Columbia University.

Source:  Lisa Qian, “Giving economist Nancy Ruggles her due” web publication of Yale News, March 10, 2020.

_______________________________________

About Patricia Ruggles at the NORC website

[2018]

Pat Ruggles
Senior Fellow
Economics, Justice, and Society

B.A., Economics, Yale University
M.A., Economics, Harvard Unversity
Ph.D., Economics, Harvard Unversity

Patricia Ruggles is a Senior Fellow with the Economics, Labor and Population Studies department. She has worked throughout her career to improve the quality of the economic and social statistics used for research and policy analysis. She has been involved in the development of methods for analyzing longitudinal data sets since the 1980s, when she was a researcher at the Urban Institute. She was an early user of the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP), using it to create integrated longitudinal files for the analysis of income and poverty spells over time. She served on the National Academy of Sciences Panel to evaluate the SIPP in 1989 and 1990.

Patricia has held two NSF/ASA fellowships at the Bureau of the Census, both focused on improving data quality and usability.. The analyses of poverty-related issues that came out of her first NSF fellowship contributed to her book, Drawing the Line, which analyzed the impacts of alternative poverty measures. That book led to a major review of poverty measurement by the National Academy of Sciences, and Census is now issuing a Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM) that incorporates those recommendations. Patricia’s second NSF fellowship at Census focused on improving welfare program data in the SIPP, and led to her well-known work with Rebecca Blank on the dynamics of welfare spells. Patricia has also published many other studies based on the SIPP, the Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID) and other longitudinal data bases.

Patricia joined the staff of the Joint Economic Committee of the U.S. Congress in 1990, where she was concerned with data and measurement issues that affect policy analysis. In addition to a series of hearings on poverty measurement, she organized hearings on price measurement, unemployment, productivity, and other major economic indicators. She also worked extensively on issues relating to health insurance, health needs, and welfare. After a break to serve in the Clinton Administration, Patricia returned to the JEC as staff director in 2000.

In 1996 Patricia became the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Income Policy and the Chief Economist for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. In that role she was responsible for an annual budget of about $20 million to oversee research on issues relating to income and poverty.

More recently, Patricia has worked at the National Academy of Sciences on projects relating to social and economic indicators and on a re-evaluation of the SIPP. She has also consulted with the city of New York on the creation of a city-specific poverty measure and with the United Nations on tracking environmental data in the context of the System of National Accounts.

Source:NORC experts webpage for Patricia Ruggles  .

 

[2013 NORC announcement of appointment of Patricia Ruggles]

Leading Poverty Economist Patricia Ruggles Joins NORC at the University of Chicago as a Senior Fellow in the Economics, Labor, and Population Studies Department

6/12/2013, Bethesda, MD.

– Patricia Ruggles, Ph.D., a long-time advocate for better poverty measurement and other important economic and social indicators, has been named a Senior Fellow at NORC at the University of Chicago. Ruggles has worked at the highest levels in both government and higher education. She has also written books and journal articles on poverty and on improving the quality of the economic and social statistics used for research and policy analysis. She has testified frequently before Congress on these issues, and was elected a Fellow of the American Statistical Association in recognition of her work on improving economic and social measurement.

“NORC at the University of Chicago has a strong track record in providing high-quality data and analysis on issues of social importance, and I look forward to being able to contribute to those efforts,” said Ruggles. “I will continue to work on issues relating to poverty, and will also conduct research on the accuracy and appropriateness of measures used to compute cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) for Social Security and other programs. I believe that good data, accurate and appropriate statistical measures, and effective, high-quality dissemination of data and research findings are all crucial to good policy decisions.”

“Patricia Ruggles’ deep expertise studying poverty and improving the methods leading researchers employ to understand this problem is invaluable to our organization and her field,” said Dan Gaylin, Executive Vice President, Research Programs at NORC. “NORC is fortunate to have her join our staff.”

Ruggles has held two National Science Foundation (NSF)/American Statistical Association fellowships at the Bureau of the Census, both focused on improving data quality and usability. The analyses of poverty-related issues that came out of her first NSF fellowship contributed to her book, Drawing the Line, which analyzed the impacts of alternative poverty measures. Ruggles’ second NSF fellowship at the U.S. Census Bureau focused on improving welfare program data in the Survey of Income and Program Participation, and led to her well-known work with economist Rebecca Blank on the dynamics of welfare participation.

“We are excited to add an economist of Patricia Ruggles’ experience and expertise to our department,” said Chet Bowie, Senior Vice President and Director of the Economics, Labor, and Population studies department at NORC. “Here at NORC, she will continue her work on improving the quality of the data and measures policymakers use to make critical decisions on social policy.”

From 1996 to 2001, Ruggles was the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Human Services Policy and the Chief Economist for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. In that role she was responsible for an annual budget of about $20 million to oversee research on issues relating to income, poverty, and human services programs. Both before and after her employment at HHS, Ruggles served on the staff of the Joint Economic Committee of the U.S. Congress, from which she retired as Staff Director in 2003. She was also a visiting professor at Georgetown University in 2003-2004.

Source:  NORC press release.

Image Source:  Richard and Nancy Ruggles’ Tourist Card for Brazil dated 30 December 1962.