Category: Chicago

Categories
Chicago Exam Questions Microeconomics

Chicago. Price Theory Core Examination. Summer 1962

What would your reaction be to the remark in your exam “Remember that you are writing an examination in economic theory”? But, hey, Chicago, you do you.

___________________

Chicago Price Theory
Preliminary/Core Exams
Previously Posted

Summer 1949
Summer 1951
Summer 1952
Winter 1955
Summer 1955
Winter 1957
Winter 1958
Summer 1960
Winter 1961
Winter 1963
Winter 1964
Winter 1965
Winter 1969
Summer 1975

___________________

CORE EXAMINATION
Theory
Summer 1962

Preliminary Examination for the Ph.D. and A. M. Degrees

WRITE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION ON YOUR EXAMINATION PAPER:

Your Code Number and NOT your name
Name of Examination
Date of Examination

Results of the examination will be sent to you by letter.

Answer all questions. Time: 3 hours. The suggested times for the various questions are guides to their weights in the grading.

  1. (60 minutes) True-False. State very briefly the reason for your answer to each question.
    1. The cross-elasticity of demand of left shoes with respect to the price of right shoes is zero.
    2. A competitive firm buying electrical equipment was not injured by the collusion of the producers (General Electric case) even if the collusion raised prices above the competitive level.
    3. If a consumer’s income rises in the same proportion as a Laspeyres index of his cost of living, his real income is rising.
    4. Duopolists with different costs cannot achieve a monopoly price without transfer payments between the firms.
    5. The marginal utility of income is not constant for a worker who increases his hours of work when the wage rate rises.
    6. If two goods are substitutes in consumption, a 10 cent fall in the price of either good will lead to the same increase in the consumption of the other good.
    7. A minimum wage law may increase the demand for labor by some firms.
    8. A competitive firm will have a more elastic demand function for a factor of production than a monopsonist.
    9. If a firm is operating in the region of falling marginal costs it must be making losses, since marginal cost is then less than average cost.
    10. A multiplant firm will schedule its output so that marginal costs are equal in all plants.
  2. (30 minutes) The stock market break of May 28 elicited many explanations. Comment upon the relevance of each of the following explanations.
    1. Stock prices had previously been too high.
    2. There was a holding back by big buyers.
    3. Inflation was no longer feared.
    4. Sellers became panic-stricken.
    5. The gold outflow, it was feared, would lead to exchange controls.

Remember that you are writing an examination in economic theory.

  1. (30 minutes) Capital formation may be defined as the use of current resources in such a way as to increase future income, and on this definition capital formation includes investments in equipment, human beings, and discovery of new knowledge. Discuss the problem of the meaning of the marginal product of capital, and whether capital as defined is subject to diminishing returns.
  2. (20 minutes) Each firm in an industry is given a license to operate, and no new firms are allowed to enter. The value of a license rises over time — does this prove that firms operate subject to diseconomies of scale?
  3. (40 minutes) It appears that the Federal Communications Commission will be given the power to compel manufacturers of television sets to build them in such a way that they will receive ultra-high frequency broadcasts (at an additional cost of about $25 per set). Then every community can have (say) a dozen channels. Will consumers be benefitted?

Source: Harvard University Archives. Papers of Zvi Griliches. Box 129. Folder “Preliminary Examinations, 1957-1965”.

Image Source: The School of Chicago (1972) as drawn by Roger Vaughan.

Categories
Chicago Columbia Economists Gender

Columbia. Meet an ABD economics alumna. Dorothy Beal Christelow, 1937-1940

The combination of government service during the Second World War and marriage followed by the birth of a daughter and son was probably sufficient to have gotten in the way of Dorothy Beal Christelow completing an economics Ph.D. dissertation at Columbia. 

I stumbled across Dorothy Beal in an economics department request for emergency funding on her behalf in 1938 (transcribed below). This led me to conduct my own background check on her life and career, the results of which are included in this post. Her obituary in the Springfield Reporter provides most of the details. 

__________________________

Almost certainly related to
Dorothy Beal’s Family’s
“Financial Catastrophe”

“Henry S. Beal, president of the Sullivan Machinery company since March, 1933, resigned his position Friday at a meeting of the directors in Boston. Preston Upham of Boston, grandson of one of the company’s founders, was named as chairman of the board…Mr. Beal assumed the presidency of the Sullivan Machinery company March 6, 1933.

Source: From the Springfield Reporter (Springfield, VT, 13 October 1938, p. 1.

__________________________

Emergency Funding Request
on Behalf of Dorothy Beal

Columbia University
in the City of New York
Faculty of Political Science

September 27, 1938

Committee on Education,
Board of Trustees,
Columbia University.

Gentlemen:

One of our outstanding students in Economics, Miss Dorothy Beal, very suddenly finds herself facing a financial emergency, due to a financial catastrophe which has just struck her family. Instead of having her year’s work financed, as she expected, she finds herself completely without resources. Inasmuch as she is one of the strongest students we have had in the Department from the standpoint of social and scholastic background, as well as in terms of work done with us during the past year, it is my hope that your Committee may find it possible, out of accumulated funds, to make a grant which will relieve her necessities sufficiently to enable her to go on to complete this year’s academic work. I know her personally, and colleagues with whom she has studied confirm my judgment that she is a very exceptional person. At the moment she is engaged on one piece of scientific research which Professor Wolman pronounces so promising that he is eager to have it pushed to successful completion. If an award could be made her which would cover tuition and a meagre allowance for living expenses for about eight months, I am sure that such action would be not only generous but wise. [handwritten insert:] $800 in all.

I might add that if the grant-in-aid fund had not already been exhausted, Miss Beal would unquestionably have received recognition from that quarter.

Yours faithfully,
[signed] Roswell C. McCrea

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Copy of letter

October 8, 1938

Professor Roswell C. McCrea
Department or Economics

Dear Professor McCrea:

Pursuant to the recommendation contained in your recent letter, the Trustees at their meeting today made available for a special award to Miss Dorothy Beal for the current academic year the sum of $800, chargeable to the accumulated income of the Garth Fellowship Fund.

Very truly yours,
[unsigned]
Frank D. Fackenthal

VJ

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Columbia University
in the City of New York
Faculty of Political Science

October 6, 1938

Mr. Philip M. Hayden,
213 Low Memorial Library.

Dear Mr. Hayden:

Thank you for the information that the Trustees had acted favorably on my request that $800 from the accumulated income in the Garth Fellowship be given to Miss Dorothy Beal, candidate for the degree of Ph. D. in the Department of Economics. I now wish formally to nominate Miss Beal for a Special Fellowship from the fund mentioned above.

Will you kindly arrange with the Bursar to have made available to Miss Beal now, at his office, a check for $400, and another check for $400 on Wednesday, February 1st. Miss Beal’s present address is 220 East 73d Street, New York.

With appreciation of your cooperation, I am

Yours faithfully,
[signed] Roswell C. McCrea

Source: Columbia University Archives. Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Central Files 1890-, Box 329, Folder “McCrea, Roswell C., 7/1938 — 5/1942”.

__________________________

Cherchez l’homme!

“[Miss Beal] attended Mont Choisi in Lausanne and Wellesley college. She was graduated from the University of Chicago and after graduate work at Columbia university has been on the research staff of a division of the Treasury Department in Washington.” … [Mr. Allan] Christelow studied at the University of Leeds, Oxford university and the University of California, and has been on the teaching staff of Oxford [Tutor in Queens College Oxford in 1939] and of Princeton university [1940]. He is with the British Advisory Council in Washington.”

Source: From the wedding announcement published in the Springfield Reporter (Springfield VT), 14 May 1942, p. 7.

__________________________

Background of Dorothy’s husband,
Allan Christelow

b. January 31, 1911, Bradford, Yorkshire, England
d. August 8, 1975, New Canaan, Connecticut
A.B. University of Leeds, 1932.
B. Litt. Oxford University, 1934
Commonwealth Fund Fellow, History.

__________________________

Obituary of Dorothy Beal Christelow

HANOVER — Dorothy Beal Christelow, 89, died May 28, 2005, in Hanover.

Mrs. Christelow was an economist with the Federal Reserve Bank of New York in the 1960s, ‘70s and ‘80s. specializing in Japanese economics. She was the author of When Giants Converge: The Role of U.S.-Japan Direct Investment, which was published by M.E. Sharpe in 1995, as well as many articles.

She was born in Springfield. Vt., on March 19, 1916. the oldest of three daughters of Henry Starr Beal and Alice Ada (Colburn) Beal. On graduating from Springfield High School, she began studies at Wellesley College. She received a bachelor’s degree in 1937 from the University of Chicago.

She was accepted into Columbia University’s graduate program in journalism. While in New York City, about to embark on this new stage of her life, a family friend asked her what she was interested in writing about. When she replied “economics,” he recommended that she study economics rather than journalism. She took his advice to heart and entered Columbia’s economics program instead. She was a student there from 1937 to 1940, with the exception of a year of work as a researcher at Fortune magazine. She ultimately completed all of the requirements for a doctorate except for a dissertation.

In 1941, she moved to Washington, D.C., to work as an economist for the U.S. Treasury Department, Division of International Monetary Research. Over the next six years she went on to work for the U.S. Offices of Price Administration and of War Mobilization and Reconversion. During this period. she was introduced by a friend to Allan Christelow, an Englishman who was working in Washington, D.C. for the British Treasury. They were married in 1942, in Westerly, R.I.

In 1953. Mr. Christelow went to work for Standard Vacuum Oil Co. and the family moved to New Canaan, Conn. His work took him to Asia frequently, and the family moved to Japan for a year in 1957. Four years later, with their two children in college and boarding school, they returned to Tokyo. A series of strokes incapacitated Mr. Christelow, leaving him an invalid until his death in 1974 [sic, death was August 8, 1975]. They returned to New Canaan, and Mrs. Christelow to the work force, to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

On retirement from the Federal Reserve in 1986, she continued to work for it as a consultant for a time while also embarking on the writing of her book. She was an active member of the Yale China Association, acting as a trustee from 1983 to 1988 and from 1990 to 1995, and traveling to China on a trip organized by that organization. She served on the town of New Canaan’s board of finance from 1976 to 1992.

Mrs. Christelow maintained close ties to Vermont throughout her life. On retirement her parents purchased a farm in Windsor. The family spent a portion of each summer there. In 1996, she moved to Kendal at Hanover, where she continued to be active in fiscal affairs, serving on the community’s finance committee for several years.

Mrs. Christelow is survived by a daughter, Eileen Christelow of East Dummerston, Vt.,  a son, Allan Christelow of Pocatello, Idaho; and two grandchildren.

Source: Valley News (West Lebanon, N.H.), 11 June 2005, p. 4.

Image Source: Picture of Eileen, Dorothy, and Allan Christelow. From the “About Me” page of the website of Eileen Christelow, Picture Book Author & Illustrator. Image mildly enhanced by Economics in the Rear-view Mirror.

Categories
Chicago Economists M.I.T.

Chicago. Caricature of Stanley Fischer by Roger Vaughan, 1973

Yesterday (May 31, 2025) I learned that another of my professors, Stanley Fischer, passed away. Many cohorts of the graduate program in economics at M.I.T. learned their macroeconomics as well as advanced monetary theory from him. My personal debt to Stan is that I finally “got” an understanding and intuition of macroeconomics from his courses. He was a phenomenal lecturer and we can all look forward to the coming testimonies from the legions of thesis advisees. With this post the fine line drawing of the young Stanley Fischer seen above enters the internet record for the first time.

The 1973 caricature of Stanley Fischer was drawn by the University of Chicago graduate student in economics Roger Vaughan and published in his series Great Moments in Economics. Roger Vaughan’s monumental work “The School of Chicago” can be viewed in an earlier post. Biographical information about the artist can be found at that link as well.

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

 

Categories
Chicago Exam Questions Microeconomics

Chicago. Preliminary Graduate Examination in Economic Theory. Winter Quarter, 1961

Detail of Friedman and Stigler in Vaughan's "The School of Chicago 1972"

Two things perhaps worth noting for this post. (1) The winter 1961 examination is for Economic Theory. The title of the prelim exam only morphs to Price Theory in the 1962-63 academic year, coinciding with the publication of Milton Friedman’s text “Price Theory: A Provisional Text”; (2) this exam has one, and only one, equation:

q = 100 – p.

Sputnik was lauched less than four years before these questions were written. While economic theory had not yet attained the status of “rocket-science” in 1961, let’s not fool ourselves, this is an exam designed to make or break character!

____________________

Chicago Price Theory
Preliminary/Core Exams
Previously Posted

Summer 1949
Summer 1951
Summer 1952
Winter 1955
Summer 1955
Winter 1957
Winter 1958
Summer 1960
Winter 1963
Winter 1964
Winter 1965
Winter 1969
Summer 1975

____________________

CORE EXAMINATION
ECONOMIC THEORY
Winter 1961

Preliminary Examination for the Ph. D. and A.M. Degrees

WRITE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION ON YOUR EXAMINATION PAPER:

Your Code Number and NOT your name
Name of Examination
Date of Examination

Results of the examination will be sent to you by letter.

Answer all questions. Time 3 hours.

  1. (1 hour) Answer each question “true” or “false” and explain your answer very briefly.
    1. It is a tautology that the average costs of all firms are equal in equilibrium in a competitive industry.
    2. A cartel which allows its members to buy and sell output quotas will have a larger net profit for all firms combined than one which does not.
    3. Since all firms in a competitive industry have the same marginal costs, it is meaningless to speak of more and less efficient firms.
    4. A fall in the price of houses will increase the sales of doorbells; a fall in the price of doorbells will not increase the sales of houses; therefore Slutsky’s equation is wrong.
    5. The average size of farm has risen in recent decades in the United States and Canada. This shows that the farm enterprise is typically subject to increasing returns to scale.
    6. A specialized machine has a life of 5 years. Total returns to it in periods of less than 5 years are quasi-rents.
    7. Assume that the world demand elasticity for tin is -2, and that Bolivia produces 1/3 of the world’s tin. Therefore, the elasticity of demand for Bolivia tin is at most -6. 0.
    8. If factors of production are used in absolutely fixed proportion in the production of a particular product, the demand for each of the factors by the producers of the product will be completely inelastic with respect to price.
    9. A supply curve is a curve displaying the quantities which will be supplied at all possible prices. It follows that there is no supply curve under monopoly.
    10. If a firm is operating in the region of falling marginal costs, it must be making losses because marginal cost is then less than average cost.
  1. (40 minutes)
    1. The long run demand function for a commodity is
      q = 100 – p. The price has been $30 for several years; it now drops to $20. Half the consumers react to the new price immediately; the other half (due to habit, etc.) do not adapt until a year later. Calculate the elasticity of demand at a price of $20 (1) the first year, and (2) the second year after the price reduction.
    2. A consumer assures you that his indifference curves intersect each other. You have an unlimited number of observations on his purchases at various incomes and prices. What tests can you make of the alleged intersections?

III. (40 minutes)

    1. It has often been suggested that the demand for a durable good could be increased if “something were done about the large number of used items on the market” The practical suggestions usually are (1) a government regulation forbidding the use of items older than some specified age, e.g. declaring all pre-1950 cars as “unsafe” and withholding license plates from them or (2) “the manufacturers should buy up the used items and destroy them or export them at a loss. [sic, closing quotation marks missing in original] Discuss the consequences of these two types of policies on (a) the demand for new durable equipment and (b) the profitability to the industry of the two policies.

IV. (40 minutes)

    1. “The first impact of this policy (tight money) is the higher interest rate. Plainly the impact of this will be very different on a firm that has control over its prices and hence can pass along this higher cost as compared with the firm whose prices are given and which, accordingly, must bear the cost itself. The point need not be labored.
      “The U.S. Steel Corporation justified its price increase of 2 weeks ago by the contention that its cost had risen. In doing so it not only conceded its ability to pass higher costs, including higher interest charges, to the consumer but based its policy on the need to do so. But no such opportunity is open to the farmer or to the smaller businessman. They cannot raise their prices, for they are market-determined. They shoulder themselves the costs of this policy.”
      Analyze and evaluate this statement. Disregard the peculiar problems of monetary policy. Treat it as a question about the differential impact of a change in any factor price on a competitive firm or industry as against the impact on a monopolistic firm. Does a change in factor cost “hurt” less in one case than in the other? What do you understand by “passing the cost on to the consumer” and how does the distinction between a monopoly and a competitive industry affect this? Assume the same cost curves and the same shifts in both cases.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Papers of Zvi Griliches. Box 129, Folder “Preliminary Examinations, 1957-1965.”

Image Source: Roger Vaughan’s classic drawing “The School of Chicago 1972”.

Categories
Chicago Exam Questions Microeconomics

Chicago. Preliminary Graduate Examination in Economic Theory. Winter Quarter, 1963

 

A necessary condition for becoming a certified Chicago economist is to have cleared the hurdle of the prelim exam for price theory. With this post we fill in a gap in our fine collection of price theory prelims that has now grown to a baker’s dozen (i.e. 13).

____________________

Chicago Price Theory
Preliminary/Core Exams
Previously Posted

Summer 1949
Summer 1951
Summer 1952
Winter 1955
Summer 1955
Winter 1957
Winter 1958
Summer 1960
Winter 1964
Winter 1965
Winter 1969
Summer 1975

____________________

CORE EXAMINATION
Price Theory
Winter 1963

Preliminary Examination for the Ph. D. and A.M. Degrees

WRITE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION ON YOUR EXAMINATION PAPER:

Your Code Number and NOT your name
Name of Examination
Date of Examination

Results of the examination will be sent to you by letter.

Answer all questions.

Time 3 hours.

  1. (60 points) Indicate whether you believe each of the following statements to be true, false, or uncertain. In each case write a few sentences explaining your answer. Your grade will depend heavily on your explanation.
    1. If the rate of obsolescence is constant over time for each type of capital equipment, a rise in the rate of interest will shorten the optimal life of capital equipment.
    2. If oranges are substitutes for apples, apples are complementary to cheese, and cheese is a substitute for butter, oranges and butter are complements.
    3. If a certain commodity is rationed and subject to price control, and there is a black market price for it, the black market price is the equilibrium price of the commodity in the absence of price control.
    4. Let Σipi1xi1 and Σipi2xi2 be the expenditure of a firm on factors of production per unit of output at two points in time. If Σipi1xi2 > Σipi1xi1 and Σipi2xi1 < Σipi2xi2, the production function of the firm has changed between the two points of time.
    5. A company cannot have a monopoly if its shareholders receive only the normal rate of earnings on their stock in it.
    6. If the production function of an Industry is subject to constant returns to scale, the industry supply curve will be horizontal.
    7. If it were possible to travel backwards as well as forwards in time, everyone would be a millionaire.
    8. The development of better fertilizer will increase the value of farm land.
    9. Manufacturers frequently advertise that their products contain extra ingredients, and they generally succeed in selling “extra-ingredient” products (e.g. Bufferin) at higher prices than “similar” single-ingredient products (e.g. aspirin). This implies that consumers have a diminishing marginal rate of substitution between the ingredients.
    10. The removal of a barrier to competition anywhere in the economy must make society better off.
    11. Given:
        1. a three-product world,
        2. the cross-elasticity of demand of x with respect to the price of z is zero,
        3. the own-price elasticity of demand for x is -1,
        4. y and z are substitutes,
        5. expenditures on X occupy half of consumers’ budgets, expenditures on Y one quarter of consumers’ budgets in the initial situation,

it follows that the own-price elasticity of demand for y is greater than 1.5 in absolute value. (For this question consider all price-elasticities defined to include the substitution effect only.)

      1. The price-elasticity of demand on the part of a competitive industry for a factor of production will be greater, the smaller is the share of that factor of production in the total costs of the industry in question.
      2. If production in industry X (assumed to be competitive) is governed by a Cobb-Douglas production function, then no wage set by the trade union in that industry will produce greater total labor income than any other wage.
      3. A tax of a fixed amount per unit of output, placed upon the product of an industry with constant costs, will necessarily result in a smaller rise in price if that industry is organized (and behaves) as a monopoly than if the industry is competitive.
      4. In an industry employing just two factors of production, the elasticity of demand on the part of that industry for either factor must be less in absolute value than the elasticity of substitution between the two factors in that industry.
  1. (15 points) The University City Art Theater, a motion picture house showing foreign films, has the following price policies: The basic admission price is $1.00 for evening performances and 60 cents in the afternoon. Registered university students are admitted at half price at all times. A member of the University’s economics department has complained that the theater is a discriminating monopolist and should be required by local ordinance to follow a one-price policy. Comment on the desirability of this recommendation.
  2. (25 points)
    1. Industry X is composed of 10 firms, and organized as a cartel. The pricing policy of the cartel is determined by the following rule: each firm will produce one-tenth of the output of the whole industry, and the price set for the final product will be just equal to the marginal cost of production in the firm with the highest marginal cost. Show how you would measure the welfare cost of this arrangement, as compared with a competitive equilibrium.
    2. The firms now merge into a single monopoly firm, the previous 10 firms now becoming 10 divisions of the new company. All ten divisions continue to operate and have the same marginal cost functions as they did when operating separately. Show how you would measure the welfare costs of this new arrangement. Under what circumstances, if any, would these welfare costs be lower than those of case A?
    3. The government now intervenes to break up the monopoly. The same 10 firms as existed in case A are reconstituted; collusion is somehow prevented; and merger is precluded by a requirement that no firm shall expand the total volume of its capital. Assume that the firms begin operating under this new arrangement with each of them having the amount of capital resulting from a long-run equilibrium under case B, and that the firms behave competitively. How would you measure the welfare costs of this arrangement? Under what circumstances, if any, would these welfare costs exceed those measured under case B?

Source: Harvard University Archives. Papers of Zvi Griliches. Box 129, Folder “Preliminary Examinations, 1957-1965.”

Categories
Chicago Exam Questions Microeconomics

Chicago. Preliminary Graduate Examination in Economic Theory. Winter Quarter, 1958

The collection of price theory prelim exams from Chicago here at Economics in the Rear-view Mirror has just grown by another exam. What is particularly noteworthy about the copy that I have just transcribed is that it appears to have been recycled as a problem set sometime later by Zvi Griliches when he taught the second quarter of Chicago price theory, Economics 300b.

____________________

Chicago Price Theory
Preliminary/Core Exams
Previously Posted

Summer 1949
Summer 1951
Summer 1952
Winter 1955
Summer 1955
Winter 1957
Summer 1960
Winter 1964
Winter 1965
Winter 1969
Summer 1975

____________________

Note in pencil at top of page:

30 copies, Griliches Weds. 
300B Griliches Feb. 
take home problems

____________________

ECONOMIC THEORY
Preliminary Examination
for the Ph.D. and A.M. Degrees
Winter Quarter 1958

WRITE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION ON YOUR EXAMINATION PAPER:

Your Code Number and NOT your name
Name of Examination
Date of Examination

Results of the examination will be sent to you by letter after results on all preliminary examinations have been received.

Answer all questions. Time: Four hours.

Total Points: 240 (Equals number of minutes allowed for the examination.)

  1. (60 points) Develop the major aspects of the theory of a competitive firm, and compare it with the theory of consumer behavior. What are the similarities and the differences between the two theories and the concepts used in each?
  2. (50 points) Analyze briefly each of the following propositions: Marginal productivity analysis…
    1. proves that the existing distribution of income is ethically just;
    2. provides a basis for understanding the demand for factors of production;
    3. is a complete theory of the determination of the prices of production;
    4. provides a basis for understanding the supply of factors of production;
    5. does not apply in the case of fixed proportions.
  3. (50 points) Indicate briefly the meaning of each of the following phrases, identify the economist (or economists) associated with each, and state some of his major contributions to economics:
    1. Engel’s Law
    2. Say’s Law
    3. Iron Law of Wages
    4. Schumpeterian innovators
    5. Conspicuous consumption
    6. Contract curve
    7. Elasticity of demand
  4. (40 points) In calculating whether the government ought to undertake certain investment projects, a rate of interest is frequently used. How in principle would you determine what rate of interest is appropriate?
  5. (40 points) It is argued in connection with the development of underdeveloped countries that basic industries such as steel should be developed by the government, since private investors will neglect the external economies brought to other industries by low-cost steel, and therefore will underinvest. Evaluate this argument. For what general class or classes of cases is the argument correct?

Source: Harvard University Archives. Papers of Zvi Griliches. Box 130. Folder “Preliminary Examinations, 1957-1965”.

Image Source: Social Science Research Building. University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf2-07490, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.

Categories
Chicago Exam Questions Microeconomics

Chicago. Price Theory Core Examination. Winter 1965

Another specimen of the Chicago price theory exam featuring True/False/Uncertain questions. This copy found in the Zvi Griliches’ papers in the Harvard Archives.

____________________

Chicago Price Theory
Preliminary/Core Exams
Previously Posted

Summer 1949
Summer 1951
Summer 1952
Winter 1955
Summer 1955
Winter 1957
Summer 1960
Winter 1964
Winter 1969
Summer 1975

____________________

CORE EXAMINATION
Price Theory
Winter, 1965

Preliminary Examination for the Ph.D. and A.M. Degrees

WRITE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION ON YOUR EXAMINATION PAPER:

Your Code Number and NOT your name
Name of Examination
Date of Examination

Results of the examination will be sent to you by letter.

Answer all questions. Time: 3 hours

  1. Indicate whether you believe each of the following statements to be true, false, or uncertain. In each case write a few sentences explaining your answer. Your grade will depend heavily on your explanation.
    1. A monopolist can always get more revenue from a consumer by a fixed sum plus price-per-unit system of charging than by the price-per-unit alone.
    2. A flat sum tax on the firms in an industry will never have an effect upon output in the short-run.
    3. If a demand curve is defined as the relationship between price and quantity of X, the real income and the prices and quantities of other goods held constant, it will have an elasticity of -1.
    4. If a cartel assigns quotas to its member firms on the basis of their “capacity” there will be more than the profit-maximizing amount of investment in the industry.
    5. If all commodities had positive income elasticities, there would be no merit in the present distinction between substitution and income effects.
    6. The elasticity of demand for X with respect to the price of Y never equals the elasticity of demand of Y with respect to the price of X.
    7. The short-run price elasticity of the supply of beef can be negative.
    8. The assumptions of competition, constant returns to scale, and equilibrium are inconsistent.
    9. A competitive firm will increase its output as a result of a fall in the price of one of its inputs.
    10. The own-price elasticity of demand for a commodity is no smaller, in absolute value, than the marginal propensity to consume that commodity.
    11. “The price paid for water is no indication of its true value in use because the water makes the production of additional wealth possible. Thus a farmer may pay his irrigation district $8.00 for water per acre of land, but the value of the crops grown might be in the neighborhood of $100 per acre.”
    12. “A central planning authority may or may not decide to weight equally the welfare of the future generation and the welfare of the present generation. This is essentially an ethical question. But if equal weights are to be applied, the appropriate rate of discount (interest) to use in comparing the costs and benefits from alternative public investments is a zero rate.”
    13. In equilibrium, a competitive firm has all the business (sales) it wants. Hence advertising is incompatible with either competition or equilibrium.
    14. The fact that a consumer, in equilibrium, is not consuming all of the possible commodities, implies that he gets increasing marginal utilities from the commodities that he does consume.
    15. A tax on American citizens who go abroad will reduce tourist expenditures and hence improve the U.S. balance of payments only if the demand for foreign trips is elastic.
  1. “Exploration for natural gas or oil is a form of investment. As such, like all investments, it depends on the expected level of future output (demand). Thus, a rise in the governmentally fixed (regulated) price of natural gas will decrease consumption and hence curb exploration. Conversely, lowering the price of gas will stimulate both consumption and exploration.” Appraise.
  2. Assume the following simple world, in which you are asked to determine the optimum rate of automobile accidents.
    1. The only type of accident which occurs is that a car may run into a house. The damage is then always $200.
    2. The probability of an accident will be greater,
      1. …the faster automobiles are driven
      2. …the closer houses are set to the highway.

Assume explicitly any additional information you need to define the socially optimum accident rate. What mechanism, if any, could you design to achieve it?

  1. The competitive private enterprise form of economic organization is regarded by some economists as a sort of ideal which it would be desirable to approximate in practice.
    1. On a purely theoretical level, use the tools of economic analysis to explain to a skeptic precisely in what way(s) and why the competitive private enterprise form is optimal.
State whatever assumptions and define whatever terms you require, and state explicitly the criteria of excellence that you are using.
    2. Are there any conditions under which the competitive organization form may fail to produce the results promised above?
    3. What other important economic problems of a modern state, if any, may still be unsolved despite the fact that perfect competition has been achieved? Explain in each case why the problem is important and why perfect competition does not solve it, or explain why there are no unsolved problems.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Papers of Zvi Griliches. Box 129. Folder “Preliminary Examinations, 1957-1965”.

Categories
Chicago Cowles Economist Market Economists Stanford

Cowles Commission. Arrow declines offer for joint appointment of research director and professor of economics. 1953

 

Tjallings Koopmans declared his intention to resign his research directorship of the Cowles Commission for Economic Research at the University of Chicago effective June 30, 1954, having served in that position for six years. This necessitated a search for an economist who could satisfy the needs of both the Cowles Commission and the Chicago Department of Economics. Kenneth Arrow, a Cowles alumnus so-to-speak, was the first target of the search. In this post you will find transcriptions of some of the relevant correspondence in the matter. Arrow was offered a salary of $12,000 (approximately $140,000 at today’s prices) which was equal to that of Koopmans and $1000 less than that of the more senior Jacob Marschak.

For a history of the Cowles Commission and Foundation for Research in Economics, see Robert W. Dimand’s Cowles Working Paper (November 2019).

Plot-spoiler: Arrow declined the offer, “The activity of administration represents for me, I feel, a violation of the principle of comparative advantage, especially if one takes account of my strong subjective preferences,” to which Economics in the Rear-view Mirror can only add, “Good Choice!”

Postscript: Economics in the Rear-view Mirror has appended the September 30 announcement of Arrow’s being appointed executive head of the Stanford economics department. OK, so the comparative advantage argument could have played a role in his Chicago decision, assuming he believed a move would have increased the productivity of both the Stanford and Chicago faculties! Now I’ll  bet that having experienced winters in Chicago and Stanford, the family simply decided to stay in California.

Posted earlier: a mini c.v. for Arrow as of 1951.

________________________

COWLES COMMISSION
FOR RESEARCH IN ECONOMICS

THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO
CHICAGO 37, ILLINOIS

July 21, 1953

Professor T. W. Schultz
c/o Hotel Maury
Casilla Correo 1385
Lima, Peru

Dear Mr. Schultz:

                  The Central Administration and the Board of Trustees have now approved our recommendation with respect to Arrow. Please find enclosed a copy of my letter to Arrow. I presume that Dean Tyler will send you a copy of his letter. May I ask you, if you can find time, to write to Arrow to support this offer, and to indicate the participation the Economics Department? In case you have secretarial assistance, may we have a carbon of your letter?

                  It may be winter in South America just now, but here it is mid-summer, with all that that means. Hoping that you find your trip interesting and profitable,

Sincerely yours,
[signed]
Tjalling C. Koopmans

TCK:lb

Enclosure

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

[COPY]

July 21, 1953

Professor Kenneth J. Arrow
c/o The RAND Corporation
1700 Main Street
Santa Monica, California

Dear Ken:

                  In this letter, which will reach you simultaneously with a letter from Dean Tyler, I am writing to express the gratification of the Cowles Commission research staff in general, and of myself in particular, at the action of the University and of the Executive Committee of the Commission, in extending to you an invitation to join our staff as Director of Research. The Executive Committee has acted on the unanimous recommendation of our faculty, which reflects our great confidence in you as an intellectual leader. We believe that, above all others in the field, you are the person capable of giving the Commission the research leadership it needs during the years just ahead. Needless to say, we hope that you will decide to accept.

                  I well remember your statement this April that you wished not to be considered for a position which like this one has administrative aspects. As illustration you mentioned that you did not wish to become chairman of your department at Stanford either.  The fact that you are now taking another view of the latter task gives us the courage to ask you to reconsider your attitude toward the former. The administrative aspects of this position are adjustable in terms of your own preferences. I think you will find Ross Cardwell capable of discharging those administrative functions which you may wish to avoid. He brings to this a real understanding and sympathy for the objectives of the group.

                  Mr. Schultz will write to you concerning the participation of the Economics Department in this offer. Since he is currently in South America, some time will go by before his letter can reach you. Let me say only that the Department is likewise unanimous in its support for a joint offer, and hopes that you will regard participation in its teaching and other activities an compatible with your primary responsibility with regard to the Commission. A tentative ratio, two-thirds Commission, one-third Department, is proposed for your consideration.

                  I am writing to Jascha [Jacob Marschak], who is currently at the Institute for Numerical Analysis, to inform him that this offer has now been approved. Please feel free to discuss the matter with him and to regard him as an additional source of information. We also hope that you will find it possible to visit Chicago some time in September so that you may inform yourself fully with regard to the opportunities and challenge of this position. The best timing of this visit depends somewhat on Mr. Schultz’ plans, on which I am not fully informed.

                  In conclusion, I want you to know that I look forward with great anticipation to the prospect of a reintensified contact with you, both in research and in a personal way. We all hope that our proposal is challenging enough to you to earn your serious consideration and, ultimately, your acceptance.

                  Please give our best regards to Selma. We hope that she will look with sympathy on our trying to get you both back to Chicago.

Cordially yours,

Tjalling C. Koopmans

cc: Executive Committee (A. Cowles, R. L Cardwell, T. W. Schultz, R. W. Tyler)
J. Marschak

________________________

COPY

The University of Chicago
Chicago 37, Illinois
The Division of the Social Sciences

Office of the Dean

July 21, 1953

Professor Kenneth J. Arrow co The RAND Corporation
1700 Main Street
Santa Monica, California

Dear Mr. Arrow:

                  I take great pleasure in inviting you to become Professor of Economics of the University of Chicago and Director of Research in the Cowles Commission. This is a regular tenure position as a full professor at a salary of $12,000 per year effective for 1954-55, on a 4-E contract. As you may have heard, the provisions of the 4-E contract have recently been liberalized so that the faculty member retains his earnings from royalties, from occasional lectures, and other occasional short-term assignments.

                  The interest in your appointment is indicated by the fact that you were the unanimous selection of the Executive Committee of the Cowles Commission, as well as the research staff of the Commission and the faculty of the department of economics. We are all anxious to have you join us and feel sure that we can provide you with excellent conditions for making an important intellectual contribution. We hope that you will come to Chicago at our expense sometime in September to look into the situation as fully as you wish and to work out conditions that are satisfactory, including the time when you would be able to join our staff.

Sincerely yours,
[unsigned copy]
R. W. Tyler
Dean

RWT:rk

________________________

[COPY]

August 24, 1953

Professor Kenneth J. Arrow
c/o The RAND Corporation
1700 Main Street
Santa Monica, California

Dear Mr. Arrow:

                  I have returned from my field work in Peru and Mexico and learned with great pleasure from Dean Tyler and Professor Koopmans that the Chancellor has approved our recommendation to invite you to come to the University of Chicago as Professor of Economics and Director of Research in the Cowles Commission. Dean Tyler has already formally extended to you this invitation and Professor Koopmans has written to you at some length. May I convey to you the fact that this invitation is rare in that it is the unanimous view and wish of the members of the Department of Economics. This expresses in the strongest possible terms our own very high regard for your professional achievements as an economist and our firm wish to have you become one of us.

Sincerely yours,
[unsigned copy]
Theodore W. Schultz

TWS:jw

________________________

[COPY]

September 11, 1953

Professor Kenneth J. Arrow
c/o The RAND Corporation
1700 Main Street
Santa Monica California

Dear Ken:

                  This is further to my handwritten letter of about a month ago, in which I indicated that I would write again upon returning to Chicago. Let me again express the hope that you may be able to visit us at a time convenient to you. I continue to believe that this is the most effective procedure for you to obtain clarification on points such as those ou have raised in conversation with Jascha. However, in case you should prefer to seek clarification by correspondence, may I suggest that you write to Dean Tyler if you have questions relating to the Cowles Commission (with a carbon copy to me) and to Mr. Schultz for questions relating to the Department.

                  We had an interesting and fruitful meeting at Kingston, in which high temperature and a light program contributed to a relaxed atmosphere.

                  Looking forward to hearing from you.

Cordially,
[unsigned copy]
Tjalling C. Koopmans

TOK:lb

Cc: J. Marschak, T.W. Schultz, R.W. Tyler

________________________

The RAND Corporation
1700 Main St. • Santa Monica • California

15 September 1953

Professor Theodore W. Schultz
Department of Economics
The University of Chicago
Chicago 37, Illinois

Dear Professor Schultz:

Thank you very much for your letter of August 24. I am indeed thrilled by the evidence of approbation by my former colleagues at the University of Chicago.

However, for reasons set forth in the enclosed letter to Dean Tyler, I feel that I should not accept the offer. The activity of administration represents for me, I feel, a violation of the principle of comparative advantage, especially if one takes account of my strong subjective preferences.

Best regards to all members of the Department.

Sincerely yours,
[signed]
Kenneth J. Arrow

KJA: ge
encl.

________________________

[COPY]

15 September 1953

Dean R. W. Tyler
The Division of the Social Sciences
The University of Chicago
Chicago 37, Illinois

Dear Dean Tyler:

I have thought over very seriously the kind and flattering offer to serve as Research Director of the Cowles Comission. It is with a great deal of regret that I feel that I must decline.

The stimulating and vital intellectual atmosphere at the University of Chicago and the high salary offered were very strong inducements, but I feel that I am not temperamentally qualified to assume the administrative responsibilities called for. I would feel strongly the conflict between pursuing my individual research and the responsibilities of leadership, and I do not feel that I would make a satisfactory resolution. I wish to thank you again, not least, for your willingness to wait this long for me to come to a decision.

Sincerely yours,
[unsigned copy]
Kenneth J. Arrow

KJA:ge
cc: Prof. T. C. Koopmans, Prof. T. W. Schultz [checkmark]

________________________

[COPY]

The University of Chicago
The Division of the Social Sciences

Office of the Dean

September 21, 1953

Mr. Kenneth J. Arrow
The RAND Corporation
1700 Main Street
Santa Monica, California

Dear Mr. Arrow:

                  We are greatly disappointed that you feel it unwise to accept our invitation to become Director of Research for the Cowles Commission. We think you have an important contribution to make to our University. Hence, I hope we can work out some other position here that would appeal to you.

Sincerely yours,
R. W. Tyler
Dean

RWT:rk

cc:  Mr. T. W. Schultz  [checkmark], Mr. T. C. Koopmans

Source: University of Chicago Archives. Department of Economics, Records. Box 42, Folder 4.

________________________

Postscript

New Economics Executive Named

Kenneth J. Arrow, professor of economics and statistics at Stanford, has been appointed executive head of the University’s Department of Economics, President Wallace Sterling announced yesterday.

Nationally known for his work in the analysis of criteria for economic decisions, Dr. Arrow has been on the Stanford faculty since 1949. As department head he replaces Professor Edward S. Shaw, who has resigned to devote full time to teaching and research.

Dr. Arrow heads a project at Stanford supported by the Office of Naval Research to study the efficiency of economic decision-making.

As a post-doctoral fellow of the Social Science Research Council, Dr. Arrow traveled extensively in Western Europe for nine months of 1952, studying statistical problems of national economic planning.

He lectured at Oxford University and the Institute of Applied Economics in Paris and was one of a small group of distinguished American economists invited to participate in a colloquium on the theory of risk. The colloquium was conducted in Paris by the National Center of Scientific Research of the French Ministry of Eduaction.

Professor Arrow was graduated by the College of the City of New York in 1940 with Phi Beta Kappa honors and as winner of the Pell medal for highest scholastic proficiency.
He served as assistant professor at the University of Chicago in 1948-49. Appointed acting assistant professor at Stanford in 1949, he became associate professor in 1950 and this year was promoted to full professor.

[Note: the promotion was announced April 28, effective September 1, 1953.]

Source: The Stanford Daily, 1 October 1953.

Image Source:  Kenneth J. Arrow as Guggenheim Fellow (1972)  John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation.

Categories
Amherst Chicago Economists

Chicago. Economics Ph.D. alumnus, George Rogers Taylor. 1929

The economics Ph.D. alumnus featured in today’s post was awarded his doctorate in 1929 by the University of Chicago. George Rogers Taylor had a long and distinguished career at Amherst College as a leading U.S. economic historian. He was the author of  the history of economics at Amherst College from 1832 to 1932 transcribed for the previous post.

Taylor was an early pioneer in the interdisciplinary field of American Studies.

__________________________

George Rogers Taylor
Life and Career

1895. Born June 15 in Beaver Dam, Wisconsin.

1914. Graduates from Wayland Academy at Beaver Dam.

Fun Fact: The school was named after Francis Wayland (1796-1865), Baptist minister, economist, and president of Brown University.

1916. Graduates from Oshkosh Normal School. “He earned his way through college by waiting on tables, mowing lawns and tending furnaces. He credits the late Prof. F. R. Clow for his life-long interest in economics, Prof. M. H. Small for getting him a job as a steward in a boarding club where he received his meals and Prof. J. O. Frank, whose furnace he tended.” Source: The Oshkosh Northwestern, May 10, 1971, p. 3.

1916-17. Principal of an Blair School with ca. five teachers at Waukesha, Wisconsin. He taught seventh grade and half of the sixth grade.

The original school was established in 1847, rebuilt at new locations in 1889 and 1966 and finally closed in June 2019. Source: Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (June 4, 2019).

1917-19. Petty Officer in the U.S. Navy, aviation operations. Assigned to wireless telephony.

1919. Summer. Worked at the post office at Beaver Dam.

1919-20. Taught eighth grade for one year at Wayland Academy.

1921. Ph.B., University of Chicago. Attended two summer school sessions plus an academic year to complete degree requirements in one year. College credit was given for some of his Navy service.

Taylor had received a four year scholarship which covered his tuition for his Chicago training. There was a long-time close connection between the Wayland Academy and Chicago. The main prize at Wayland Academy’s commencement was a four year scholarship to Chicago.

1921-22. Taught at University of Iowa. Taylor was asked by Frank Knight to go there as an instructor for a year.

Taught public speaking for part of spring term at a Hammond, Indiana high school at some point during graduate school.

1923. Taught economics at Earlham College for a semester.

1924. August 23 marries Mary Leanah Henderson in Mooresville, Indiana. He met her when she was a senior at Earlham College.

1923-24. Instructor, University of Chicago.

1924. Joins the faculty of Amherst College at the rank of instructor, coming along with Professor Paul Douglas.

1927. Promotion to assistant professor, Amherst College.

1929. Ph.D. University of Chicago.

1929. Promotion to associate professor, Amherst College.

1929-30. First semester visiting professorship at Mount Holyoke.

1930. Visiting professor at Smith College.

1930-31. Research for the International Committee on Price History.

1930. “Prices in the Mississippi Valley Preceding the War of 1812,” Journal of Economic and Business History, Vol. III, pp. 148-163.

1931. “Agrarian discontent in the Mississippi valley preceding the war of 1812,” (subject of the doctoral dissertation) Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 39, No. 4 (August 1931), pp. 471-505.

1932. “Wholesale Commodity Prices at Charleston, S.C.,” Journal of Economic and Business History, (two parts). Vol. IV (February and August).

1932. Arrived August 3 at the port of New York aboard the S.S. Europa that sailed from Southampton.

1934-35. Second semester. Visiting professor of economics at Mount Holyoke.

1937. (with Louis Morton Hacker and Rudolf Modley). The United States: A Graphic History. New York: Modern Age Books, Inc.

1938. Senior agricultural economist, U.S. Department of Agriculture.

1939. (with Edward Albertus and Lawrence Z. Waugh). Internal Barriers to Trade in Farm Products. Department of Commerce. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

1939. M.A. (hon.) Amherst College.

1939. Promotion to professor of economics, Amherst College.

1940. Spring semester. Visiting professor, Mount Holyoke College.

1940. “State Laws which Limit Competition in Agricultural Products,” Journal of Farm Economics Vol. 22, No. 1 (February).

1941-46. Office of Price Administration and War Production Board.

1943. Adviser on price and control and rationing to the Republic of Paraguay.

1948-68. General editor of the Amherst College’s American studies program book series “Problems in American Civilization” (D.C. Heath Co.). This was a part of Amherst’s “New Curriculum” introduced in 1947. Amherst was a pioneer of the field of American Studies.

1949. Jackson versus Biddle; the struggle over the second Bank of the United States. Boston: D. C. Heath and Company.

1950. Hamilton and the National Debt. Boston: D. C. Heath and Company.

1951. The Transportation Revolution, 1815-1860. Vol. IV of The Economic History of the United States.Rinehart and Co.

1952. Visiting Professor, Columbia University.

1953. The Great Tariff Debate, 1820 to 1830. Boston: D. C. Heath and Company.

1955-60. Editor of Journal of Economic History.

1956. The Turner Thesis concerning the Role of the frontier in American History. Rev. ed. Boston: D. C. Heath and Company.

1956. (with co-author Irene Neu). The American railroad network, 1861-1890. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

1956-58. President of the American Studies Association.

1959-62. Chairman of the Council on Research in Economic History.

1959. (with Ethel Hoover) Statement at Hearings before the Joint Economic Committee: Employment, Growth and Price Levels, 86th Congress, 1st Session, April 9, 1959.

1960. “Railroad Investment before the Civil War: Comment,” Trends in the American Economy in the Nineteenth Century, National Bureau of Economic Research, Studies in Income and Wealth, Vol. XXIV.

1961. Summer. Visiting professor at the University of Hawaii.

1962-64. President of the Economic History Association.

1963. The War of 1812: Past Justifications and Present Interpretations. Boston: D. C. Heath and Company.

1963. Visiting Professor, Tokyo University.

1964. Presidential address before the Economic History Association annual meeting “American Economic Growth before 1840: An Exploratory Essay,” Journal of Economic History, Vol. XXIV (December, 1964), 427-444.

1965. Retires from Amherst College.

1964. March 12. Public lecture at the University of Delaware published in “The National Economy Before and After the Civil War,” in David T. Gilchrist and David Lewis eds., Economic Change in the Civil War Era (Greenville, Delaware, 1965).

1966. “The Beginnings of Mass Transportation in Urban America, Part I,” The Smithsonian Journal of History. Part I (Summer); Part II (Autumn).

1965-70. Senior resident scholar at the Eleutherian Mills Historical Library (Wilmington, Delaware). Taught graduate seminars in economic history at the University of Delaware.

1967. “American Urban Growth Preceding the Railway Age,”Journal of Economic History, Vol. XXVII (September).

1969. Introduction to the reprint of Introduction and Early Development of the American Cotton Textile Industry to 1860 (1863) by Samuel Batchelder. New York: Harper & Row.

1969. American Economic History before 1860 (Goldentree Bibliographies in American History, ed. Arthur S. Link) compiled by George Rogers Taylor. New York: Appleton Century Croft.

1983. Died April 11 in Northampton, Massachusetts.

Sources:

Obituary, Daily Hampshire Gazette (Northampton, Massachusetts), April 12, 1983, p. 4.

Scheiber, Harry N., and Stephen Salsbury. “Reflections on George Rogers Taylor’s ‘The Transportation Revolution, 1815-1860’: A Twenty-Five Year Retrospect.” The Business History Review, vol. 51, no. 1, 1977, pp. 79–89.

May 19, 1978 interview of George Rogers Taylor from the Amherst College Archives & Special Collections, Oral History Project.

Hugh G. J. Aitken’s memorial note in The Journal of Economic History, Vol. 44, No. 2, pp. 626-629.

Image Source: Amherst College, The Olio 1930, p. 45.

Categories
Chicago Columbia Cowles CUNY Economists Stanford

Stanford. Kenneth Arrow’s mini-cv at age thirty. 1951

This post repackages the information contained in the mini-c.v. for the Social Science Research Council fellow of 1951-52, Kenneth Arrow, then a thirty year old freshly minted Columbia economics Ph.D. and associate professor of economics at Stanford. Fellows were asked to limit their cited publications to ten. It is interesting to note that Arrow could have easily added three other items but didn’t. It is also interesting to see that he gave a citation to the French translation of a chapter he published in English. Does any one have a clue to why Arrow might have made that choice? 

The data below come from the publication Fellows of the Social Science Research Council, 1925-1951  that is simply chock-full of mid-career biographical information for other economists as well

______________________

ARROW, KENNETH (JOSEPH)
Research Training Fellow 1951-52

[Personal:]

b. New York, N. Y. August 23, 1921.
m. Selma Schweitzer 1947.

[Education:]

B.S. 1940, City College, New York;
M.A. in mathematics 1941, Ph.D. 1951, Columbia, economics.

[Employment:]

Actuarial clerk 1941, Guardian Life Insurance Company;

USAAF 1942-46, captain;

Instructor in economics, summer 1946, City College, New York;

Research associate 1947-49, Cowles Commission for Research in Economics;

Assistant professor of economics 1948-49, University of Chicago;

Acting assistant professor 1949, associate professor of economics and statistics 1950—, Stanford University, Stanford, Calif.

Home: 4 Aliso Way, Menlo Park, Calif.

Consultant:  Bureau of the Budget 1948;
Rand Corporation 1948-51.

Publications:

“On the Use of Winds in Flight Planning,” J. Meteorology 1949; in Econometrica: (with D. Blackwell and M. A. Girshick) “Bayes and Minimax Solutions of Sequential Decision Problems” 1949; “Homogeneous Functions in Mathematical Economics: Comment” 1950. “A Difficulty in the Concept of Social Welfare,” J. Polit. Econ. 1950; “L’Utilisation des Modèles Mathématiques dans les Sciences Sociales” in Les “Sciences Politiques” aux États-Unis (ed. D. Lerner and H. A. Lasswell) 1951 [Original english version (?) as Chapter 8 in “Mathematical Models in the Social Sciences” in Daniel Lerner and Harold D. Lasswell (eds.), The Policy Sciences: Recent Developments in Scope and Method (Stanford University Press, 1951)]; “Alternative Proof of the Substitution Theorem for the Leontief Model in the General Case” in Activity Analysis of Production and Allocation (ed. T. C. Koopmans) 1951; Social Choice and Individual Values 1951.

Fellowship program: study in Western Europe of statistical problems arising in economic planning.

Current research: welfare economics; foundation of statistical inference; index number theory; statistical problems in “model building”; theory of economic behavior under conditions of uncertainty.

Source: Fellows of the Social Science Research Council, 1925-1951. pp. 11-12.

Image Source: From the book ad placed by the bookstore La Memoire du Droit (Paris) at the AbeBooks website. As of this posting it is available for US$ 50.30 + shipping cost. Economics in the Rear-view Mirror is here solely for educational and research purposes and provides such information solely to satisfy the pecuniary curiosity of its visitors.