Category: Fields

Categories
Exam Questions Fields M.I.T.

M.I.T. General exams for international economics, 1959

Charles Kindleberger, ca 1950

 

It seems safe to assume that Charles Kindleberger was the principal author of these general exams for the field of international economics (i.e. international trade and finance) since the exams come from his papers at the M.I.T. archive. I don’t know whether he had been the sole author. Maybe Samuelson contributed an international trade question or two, but that is much more speculative than Kindleberger’s likely authorship.

The general exams in international economics for 1950-51 have been transcribed and posted earlier.

_____________________

INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS
February 16, 1959

Part I

Write an essay on any two or three of the following topics.

  1. The gains from trade.
  2. The effect of foreign trade on the distribution of income.
  3. Structural disequilibrium in the balance of payments.
  4. What determines the commodities and services a country will export and import?
  5. Elasticity conditions in international trade.

Part II

Answer any two or three of the following questions.

  1. A distinguished economist has stated that an underdeveloped country which is not developing balance of payments trouble, is not trying very hard to develop. Explain this view and discuss it critically.
  2. The New York Times recently had an article explaining that the present favorable position of the British and other West European balances of payments was really a bad sign because it was accompanied by a reduction in the volume of world trade. In particular, the improvement in the British balance of payments was due to a sharp improvement in the terms of trade which could not help worsen the situation after a few months.
    What have favorable or unfavorable terms of trade to do with the matter?
  3. What is the purpose of two of the following. How well have they filled, or are they filling, that purpose?
    1. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development.
    2. The International Monetary Fund.
    3. The Colombo Plan.
    4. The Marshall Plan.
    5. The European Payments Union.
  4. The following is a real quotation from a distinguished economist: “Under a system of free trade there would be conflicts in interests neither among different nations nor among corresponding classes of different nations.”
    Discuss critically.
  5. “If all countries pursued full employment policies and at the same time avoided inflationary pressures, the balance of payments would present no problem.” Discuss theoretically.
  6. “There is no reason why a country could not pursue any domestic policy it liked provided it did not care about exchange stability.”
    “A country could have any fixed exchange rate it chose provided it pursued the correct domestic policy.”
    Discuss these quotations critically.
  7. Write an essay on the advantages and disadvantages of aiding underdeveloped countries through private capital movements, governmental loans and gifts on a bilateral basis or through multilateral aid.
  8. “It is frequently stated that aid should be given ‘with no strings attached.’ And this is a meaningless statement, because you can’t just send an anonymous check and say: do what you want.”
    What is meant by such a statement? What conditions could be attached to aid to make it effective?
  9. Write an essay on the instruments of commercial policy and discuss the effectiveness of each.

 

*  * *  *  * *  *  *  *

General Examination in International Economics
May 20, 1959

Answer any five questions

  1. Discuss the relevance of the factor-price equalization theorem to the observed facts of international trade.
  2. It has been said that the theory of international trade is peculiarly static and that this vitiates its applicability to the problems of growing economies. Do you agree or disagree? Discuss.
  3. Analyze the relevance of international trade (and tariffs) to wages and employment in as many contexts as are significant.
  4. What differences exist between internal trade in a single country, economic integration between sovereign countries, and international trade between unintegrated countries? Is there more content to economic integration than customs union?
  5. Discuss the relative roles of income and price in international adjustment, not in theoretical models, but as they have operated in the real world as observed by historians, by econometricians, or by casual empiricists. What generalizations, if any, can be drawn from this experience regarding the efficacy of exchange depreciation in producing adjustment?
  6. Argue for or against central bank intervention in the forward exchange market.
  7. What can the economist say about foreign aid?
  8. Compare and contrast the impact of foreign trade and lending on economic stability in a developed country and in an export economy? What monetary and commercial policy devices are available to the latter to promote stability?
  9. Write brief didactic essays setting forth the “correct view” (conventional wisdom) of international trade economists on two of the following subjects:
    1. the long-run terms of trade facing underdeveloped countries;
    2. the persistent surplus in the German balance of payments;
    3. the regional vs the universal approach to commercial policy and intergovernmental lending;
    4. commodity price stabilization;
    5. multiple exchange rates: blessing, menace, crutch for the feeble?
  10. Argue the case for modifying the Articles of Agreement of the International Monetary Fund, or its procedures under the present articles, or for leaving both Articles and Procedures alone.

 

Source: M.I.T. Libraries. Institute Archives and Special Collections. Papers of Charles Kindleberger, 1934-99. Box 22, Folder “Examinations. International Economics, 1959-75”.

Image Source: M.I.T. Yearbook Technique, 1950.

Categories
Chicago Exam Questions Fields History of Economics

Chicago. History of Economic Thought, Ph.D. preliminary exam. Summer, 1989

 

The previous post provided the transcribed questions for the 1974 version of the Chicago prelim exam for the history of economic thought. Here we have the questions for a fifteen year younger exam Presumably both these sibling exams were authored by George Stigler in whose archived papers they can be found.

______________________

History of Economic Thought Prelim Exam
Summer 1989

Answer Question 1 or Question 2, not both:

  1. Sam Hollander argues that David Ricardo’s Principles is really a neoclassical analysis (such as Marshall’s), although written in a different style and laying different amounts of emphasis upon various parts of the theory (for example, more emphasis on cost, less on demand).
    1. If this is true of Ricardo, why not also of Adam Smith? How do these two differ?
    2. What is neoclassical (Marshallian) or not neoclassical about Ricardo’s treatment of wages on average, or of wages in individual occupations?
  2. In his recent review of Samuel Hollander’s study of J. S. Mill, Pedro Schwartz argued that Hollander failed to see that J.S. Mill had a very different view of the scope of economics than Smith or Ricardo. Mill “treated (economics) as a limited science whose rationale is irreconcilable to the guiding principles of ethics and politics.”

From your knowledge of Mill’s Principles, defend Schwartz or Hollander.

Answer all of the remaining questions:

  1. Do people know what is good for them? Show how Smith and J.S. Mill draw their conclusions on this question.
  2. Arguments have often persisted for long periods over what an economist really meant. Ricardo is a favorite example, but there is hardly an economist of note who has escaped this sort of dispute. Compare the roles of…
    1. …a careful analysis of what the economist meant (relying on his writings, letters, etc.)…
    2. …a careful analysis of what his contemporaries and immediate successors thought he meant…

…in resolving such disputes. Which is the more important basis of judgment, and why? Apply both techniques to Malthus’ use of the arithmetic and geometric ratios.

  1. “Every individual is continually exerting himself to find out the most advantageous employment for whatever capital he can command…the study of his own advantage naturally, or rather necessarily leads him to prefer that employment which is most advantageous to the society.
    First, every individual endeavors to employ his capital as near home as he can, and consequently as much as he can in the support of domestic industry.
    Thus, upon equal or nearly equal profits, every wholesale merchant naturally prefers the home trade to the foreign trade. …In the home trade his capital is never so long out of his sight as it frequently is in the foreign trade…yet for the sake of having some part of his capital always under his own view and command, he willingly submits to this extraordinary charge (double charge of loading and unloading as well as to the payment of some duties and customs).”

In this passage, famous for arguing free trade, Smith seems to make a case (a) for preferring domestic industry to foreign trade, and (b) to define the advantage of “society” as that of one’s own nation. Is Smith not an advocate of free trade?

  1. Read all the way through this question before beginning your answers.
    1. In explaining the advance of knowledge in a science, one must choose between:
      1. The Kuhnsian view of revolutions, which says that wholly new paradigms (incommensurable with earlier paradigms) work major revolutions such as that of Marginal Utility, and
      2. All science is basically cumulative (which Kuhn believes is true only of “normal” science within a paradigm).
        Appraise these alternatives.
    2. Again, in explaining progress in a science one must choose between:
      1. A “great man” theory, in which a genius (he’s one by definition) makes a fundamental contribution and lesser scholars fill in the details, and
      2. The science has a main direction that is the product of the whole community of scholars. If a theory needs to be invented or discovered, one or more scholars will do so (Robert Merton).
        Again, appraise these alternatives.
    3. In both parts above, try to illustrate your argument by an episode in economics—preferably from this century. Thus, the theory of the firm, statistical study of economic functions, oligopoly theory, Keynes’ General Theory, monetarism, etc., are examples.

 

Source: University of Chicago Archives. George Stigler Papers, Addenda. Box 33 (2005-16), Folder “Misc. Course Materials. History of Economic Th[ought].”

Image Source: Posted by Glory M. Liu on her personal research webpage (next to the abstract for her article “Rethinking the Chicago Smith Problem: Adam Smith and the Chicago School, 1929-1980” published in Modern Intellectual History.

Categories
Chicago Exam Questions Fields History of Economics

Chicago. History of Economic Thought Ph.D Field Exam. Summer, 1974

 

The following examination consisting of six questions (answer five) comes from George Stigler’s papers at the University of Chicago Archives. It is safe to assume that Stigler penned these questions. 

The questions from the 1989 prelim on the History of Economic Thought are found in the following post.

________________________

History of Economic Thought
Summer, 1974

WRITE IN BLACK INK

WRITE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION ON THE FIRST PAGE OF YOUR EXAMINATION PAPER:

— Your code number and not your name
— Name of examination
— Date of examination

Write only on one side of each page.

Write the following information on each following page of your examination paper:

— Top left: code number
— Top right: number of page

When you fold your paper at the end of the exam, write your code number on the back of the last page, and indicate total number of pages.

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

 

Write on five of the following questions.

  1. John Stuart Mill is undergoing a rehabilitation of reputation after long being viewed as a pallid synthesizer of classical doctrines. Is this improved reputation deserved?
  2. Precisely how is the product-after-deduction-of-rent divided between labor and capital in the Ricardian system? Is the short run division different from the long run division? Is the system in equilibrium?
  3. Jevons is the founder of quantitative economics. What is the basis for this claim? Why did this type of work appear as late (or early?) as the 1860’s?
  4. Smith rated some forms of investment as socially preferable to others. What was his ranking of agriculture, manufactures and trade? Was his analysis valid?
  5. John A. Hobson, N. Lennin [sic], and others have authored theories of imperialism, which, in spite of various differences, have in common the proposition that modern expansionist wars and diplomatic entanglements are a consequence of the economic structure and dynamics of capitalism. Against this point of view, it has been argued that aggressive expansionism is much older than modern capitalism, and that economic interests have been used as a pawn of the political ambitions of statesmen. What kind of evidence would you regard as valid to evaluate the appropriateness of either type of theory on the relationships between economic change and war.
  6. Malthus’ gloomy prediction that the standard of living could not rise above a subsistence level proved wrong with respect to the Western world. List as many reasons as you can to account for this. Also, state as precisely as possible how Western population trends of the past two centuries can be related to (a) the law of diminishing returns and (b) shifts in production-possibility frontiers.

 

Source:  University of Chicago Archives. George Stigler Papers, Addenda. Box 33 (2005-16), Folder: “Exams & Prelim Questions.”

Image Source:  George Stigler page at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business website.

Categories
Cal Tech Columbia Fields M.I.T. Michigan Princeton Stanford

Columbia. Memo advocating the establishment of an Industrial Relations Section. Wolman, 1944

 

 

The following brief memo written by Leo Wolman was commissioned in 1943 by an informal committee to provide a case for establishing an Industrial Relations Institute at Columbia. Besides identifying the existing centers of industrial relations research and teaching in the U.S. and Canada, Wolman also points to the key role played by “C. J. Hicks, the dean of American industrial relations men, adviser to the Rockefellers on policies and problems in this field and, until his retirement some 15 years ago, the director of labor relations for the Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey.”

_____________________

Leo Wolman, Biographical Note

1890, Feb. 24. Born, Baltimore, Md.
1914. Ph.D. in political economy, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md.
1916. Published The Boycott in American Trade Unions. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press
1918. Appointed head of section on production statistics, War Industries Board
1919. Attached to American peace mission, Paris, France
1919-1928. Member, faculty, New School for Social Research, New York, N.Y.
1920-1931. Director of research, Amalgamated Clothing Workers Union
1920-1934. Editor, Journal of American Statistics Association
circa 1925. Became freelance researcher for the National Bureau of Economic Research, formally joining the staff in 1931 and later becoming director-at-large for research. NBER publications by Leo Wolman.
1931-1958. Professor of economics, Columbia University, New York, N.Y.
1933. Appointed to staff of National Recovery Administration
1936. Published Ebb and Flow in American Trade Unionism. New York: National Bureau of Economic Research
1961, Oct. 2. Died, New York, N.Y.

Source: Library of Congress. Leo Wolman Papers. Biographical Note.

_____________________

COPY TO DR. FACKENTHAL

October 23, 1944

Dean George B. Pegram,
201 Low Memorial Library.

Dear Dean Pegram:

I enclose a copy of a statement prepared by Professor Wolman on “Industrial Relations Sections or Departments in American Universities”. This was prepared in compliance with the recommendation made by the informal committee that met last year to consider the possibility of our setting up an Industrial Relations Institute at Columbia. I have had some two dozen copies of this statement mimeographed. These will be available for distribution if you plan to call another meeting to explore this matter further.

Faithfully yours,

_____________________

Industrial Relations Sections or Departments

During the past 15 years, a number of American universities, and one Canadian, have organized sections or departments of industrial relations. The earliest of these was the Industrial Relations Section of Princeton University. Since 1930, similar sections have been established at the University of Michigan, Stanford, California Institute of Technology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Queens University, Canada. These sections are integral parts of the graduate departments of the several institutions. The moving spirit in initiating and finding financial resources for the sections, already established, was C. J. Hicks, the dean of American industrial relations men, adviser to the Rockefellers on policies and problems in this field and, until his retirement some 15 years ago, the director of labor relations for the Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey.

The purposes of this departure were several—to keep members of the faculty and students abreast of the very rapid developments in this important area of private and public policy, to make available to employers, managers, labor, and public officials comparative data as to practices, rules, procedures and policies, to enable students desiring to specialize in labor, labor relations and related subjects to observe and study the practical workings of industrial relations, to push forward the boundaries of knowledge through research, and to establish a closer relation between the scientific activities of universities and the problems of industry, labor, government, and the public. In carrying out these purposes, the various sections have built up libraries of current materials, have published studies dealing with current developments, such as the reemployment of veterans, or of historical importance, such as labor banking in the United States, have trained graduate students, and have held conferences, annual as a rule, for persons working in labor relations.

Depending on their location, age, and industrial environment, the sections now in operation have emphasized different practices. California Technology, operating in a region where large-scale industry is relatively new and personnel men are scarce, has devoted much of its time and resources to bringing to bear the knowledge and experience of other parts of the country on the problems and needs of Southern California. The Massachusetts Institute, operating in an area concerned with unemployment and industrial contraction, has concentrated on research in wages, labor mobility, unemployment, and the like. But all of the sections study, teach, and write about the large issues of private and public policy.

The funds for these enterprises come largely from business, usually in the form of annual contributions pledged for periods of 3 or 5 years. Occasionally a specific piece of research is financed by one of the Foundations but this source of funds has not been counted on for current expenses. Contributions by labor unions have been only a small fraction of total income, though they generally participate in the conferences, and make use of available materials.

There can be little question that the establishment of an industrial relations section at Columbia (associated with the faculties of Political Science and Business) would confer many benefits upon the University. It would make available to students in this field facilities, publications, and contacts with labor and industry which they now lack. It would open up for graduate students new opportunities for employment. It would make available to the university facilities and funds for research. It would create for interested numbers of the faculty, working in the related areas of labor economics, theory, public law, sociology, and labor law, the occasions for using the materials, experience, and problems of industry, labor, and government, not now available to them. It would enable the University to enlarge the range of its public service by serving some of the needs of the enormous and variegated industry, located in this city and the surrounding industrial area of New Jersey, Connecticut, and New York State.

The funds for such an undertaking are probably available in industry. At any rate the other universities had no difficulty raising money. What is needed at Columbia is endorsement of the idea by the faculty, administration, and trustees and the appointment of a small committee instructed to make the plans, raise the funds and find the man capable of directing a section of industrial relations at Columbia.

Leo Wolman

Source: Columbia University Libraries, Manuscript Collections. Columbiana. Department of Economics Collection. Faculty. Box 2, Folder “Department of Economics—Faculty. Beginning Jan. 1, 1944”.

Image Source: Detail from a faculty group picture (early 1930’s). Columbia University Libraries, Manuscript Collections. Columbiana. Department of Economics Collection. Box 9, Folder “Photos”.

Categories
Fields M.I.T. Syllabus

M.I.T. International Economics Syllabus for General Exam. Bhagwati and Dornbusch, 1977

 

 

In 1976 there was a graduate-student-faculty discussion concerning a reform of procedures for the general examinations at MIT’s department of economics. I have only been able to locate the field syllabus for international economics of the three fields mentioned in my classmate’s report:

“As a compromise intended to make everyone feel better without rocking the boat, a syllabus will be made up in each of three fields. The syllabus is intended to give some guidance as to what topics might show up on a general. The three fields chosen for the experiment are econometrics, industrial organization, and international trade.”

Source:  Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Institute Archives. MIT Department of Economics Records (AC 394). Box 2; Folder “Gen Exams”. Dick Startz, “Final Report on Generals’ Reform”, November 21, 1976.

__________________________

January 1977
Bhagwati & Dornbusch

INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS
Syllabus

This syllabus is designed to provide some guidance in regard to the field requirements in international economics. It is not exhaustive but does indicate the broad areas in which the students will be required to be knowledgeable.

The syllabus is divided into the traditional areas of international monetary theory and policy, on the one hand, and the pure theory of trade, on the other. However, most public policy issues, with which the students will be expected to be familiar, require a skillful adaptation of both strands of analysis (as should be obvious from the writings of the best trade economists on policy matters such as the effect of the oil price increases). Thus, the students will be expected to integrate the two sets of insights as appropriate, in addressing themselves to policy questions. In this regard, the students will also be expected to have reasonable familiarity with the central issues of current concern, e.g. SDRs, GATT rules, the New International Economic Order problems, etc. Acquaintance with earlier historical writings, chiefly in the 1930s, should also prove to be rewarding since it emphasizes the integration of policy and theory. Here, the writings of economists such as Haberler, Ohlin, Iversen and Hawtrey are particularly recommended.

A. INTERNATIONAL MONETARY THEORY AND POLICY

International Macroeconomic Issues:

  1. National Income Accounting in the Open Economy. Balance of Payments Accounting. Reform of Balance of Payments Accounting in the US.
  2. Keynesian Macroeconomics in the Open Economy and the Current Account: The foreign trade multiplier, multipliers with repercussions. The transfer problem and income adjustment.
  3. Keynesian macroeconomics under capital mobility: Monetary and fiscal policy. The policy mix. Financing versus adjustment.
  4. Price and output adjustment in a Keynesian framework.
  5. Exchange rates and the current account: Elasticity, absorption and monetary approaches.
  6. Internal and external balance: The role of home goods.
  7. Flexible exchange rates: The income adjustment process. The terms of trade and saving.
  8. Flexible rates and capital mobility: Asset market theories of exchange rate determination. The role of expectations. The transmission of disturbances.
  9. Purchasing power parity.
  10. Portfolio balance theories of macroeconomics in the open economy: Capital flows and the structure of the balance of payments.
  11. The social cost of foreign exchange.
  12. Stabilization policy, the budget and trade policy.

International Financial Issues

  1. International monetary standards and international reserves.
  2. The Euro-dollar market.
  3. Interest arbitrage and forward markets.
  4. Intermediation, the pattern of world payments and lending, and the balance of payments.
  5. International Investment.

B. THE PURE THEORY OF TRADE

  1. General equilibrium analysis of the traditional value-theoretical model of trade theory, involving two primary, non-traded factors producing two traded commodities; theories of comparative advantage: Ricardo and Heckscher-Ohlin; empirical verification; new directions in explaining comparative advantage.
  2. Tariff analysis: effects of tariffs on internal and external terms of trade; equivalence of tariffs and quotas; transfer problem; growth and trade.
  3. Trade and welfare; trade vs. autarky; optimality of free trade; restricted trade vs. autarky; distortions and ranking of policy interventions; measurement of gains and losses from alternative policies; theory of non-economic objectives; preferential tariff reductions and customs union theory.
  4. Extension of the positive and welfare analysis of alternative models: (1) models involving use of imported factors of production; (2) models with non-traded goods; (3) models with putty-clay characteristics.
  5. Comparative advantage and uncertainty; analysis of illicit trade in general equilibrium; project analysis and trade theory.

 

Source: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Institute Archives. MIT Department of Economics Records (AC 394). Box 2; Folder “Gen Exams”.

Image Source:  Jagdish Bhagwati (left), Rudiger Dornbusch (right). MIT Museum legacy website.

Categories
Chicago Fields Suggested Reading Undergraduate

Chicago. Recommended public finance textbooks. Viner’s list, 1924

 

The original memo sent to Jacob Viner asking for the names of a few textbooks suitable for college class in the field of public finance is a carbon copy of a common memo, except for the name “Mr. Jacob Viner” and field “Public Finance” that are both clearly typed onto the carbon copy. It appears that the chairman L. C. Marshall might have been surveying his Chicago colleagues to assemble a list of college textbooks by field. There might be other such inquiries with responses, but judging from where I found this memo to Viner, one would have to plow through the Chicago economic department records where the memos are filed by recipients. I’ll keep my eyes open.

The first textbook listed by Viner was written by the 1926 Chicago Ph.D., Jens Peter Jensen, whose dissertation was on the general property tax.

Obituary:  In Memoriam: Jens P. Jensen, 1883-1942 by John Ise in The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Vol. 2, No. 3 (Apr., 1943), pp. 391-392.

____________________

From the Preface of Jens P. Jensen’s (Department of Economics, University of Kansas) Problems of Public Finance, p. ix.

“Professors Roy G. Blakey of the University of Minnesota and H. A. Millis of the University of Chicago were my teachers in public finance, and through them my interest in the field was aroused and quickened. Dr. J. Viner of the University of Chicago has carefully read the manuscript and suggested many redeeming changes.”

____________________

The University of Chicago
The School of Commerce and Administration

Memorandum to Mr. Jacob Viner from L.C. Marshall
October 2, 1924

Will you please jot down on this sheet the names of two or three texts suitable for college class use in the field of Public Finance?

LCM:OU

*  *  *  *  *  *

Viner’s reply

Jens [Peter] Jensen. Problems of Public Finance.  Crowell [1924]

C. J. Bullock. Selected Readings in P. F. Ginn & Co. [2nded., 1920]

W. M. Daniels, Elements of Public Finance [including the Monetary System of the United States]. Holt & Co. [1899]

H. L. Lutz has a good text in press [D. Appleton and Company, 1924;  fourth edition, 1947]

J.V.

Source: University of Chicago Archives. Department of Economics. Records. Box 35, Folder 14.

Image Source: Jacob Viner (facing camera) playing bridge with Mr. Grabo, Mr. Prescott, and Ralph Sanger, instructor of Mathematics. University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf1-08487, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.

Categories
Curriculum Economics Programs Fields Harvard Statistics

Harvard. Report on statistics and national income courses. Crum and Frickey, 1945

Crum Frickey

 

William Leonard Crum and Edward Frickey taught Harvard’s economic statistics courses in the 1930s and 1940s.  Paul Samuelson recounted his second semester (Spring 1936) as a graduate student following his previous semester’s worth of Crum: “…I was able to learn genuine modern statistics from E. B. Wilson, bypassing Edwin Frickey (who with Leonard Crum taught at Harvard courses against modern statistics!)” [On this, Roger E. Backhouse’s Vol I: Becoming Samuelson, 1915-1948, p.101].

Reading the following intradepartmental report on economic statistics courses and how to integrate national income and product accounting into the graduate curriculum that was written by a committee of two (Crum and Frickey), one discovers that even a decade after Samuelson’s experience, the proper preparation of “ink charts” was a subject that warranted faculty discussion.  Harvard Ph.D. Robert Solow later went to Columbia to play catch-up ball with respect to statistical analysis before starting his M.I.T. contract.  Harvard economics was a full generation behind the times with respect to statistical method at mid-20th century.

A 1947 Crum/Frickey  joint memo regarding preparation for taking the comprehensive field exam in statistics has been posted earlier.

______________________

6 March 1945

Report on the course offerings in Statistics, and in National Income

At the Department meeting of 13 February, 1945, the undersigned were named a committee to study course offerings and proposed offerings in Statistics and in National Income, discuss their findings with the Chairman, and report to the Department. Attached are the two reports: I, on Statistics; II, (page 10) on National Income.

W.L. Crum
Edwin Frickey

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

I. The Offering in Statistics

At the meeting of the Harvard Economics Department on 13 February, 1945. W. L. C. and E. F. sought opinions from colleagues as to additional instruction needed in statistics and as to changes needed in existing instruction. The following is in part a report of the informal discussion, in part an indication of what W. L. C. and E. F. think can advisedly be done. The present statement is preliminary; a more definitive report will be prepared, after consultation with H. H. B., for submission to the Department at a later meeting.

  1. Opinion was expressed that many of our graduate students show conspicuous lack of ability to present statistical material in the form of chart or table, for example, in theses. Instruction in statistics here has for several years relied upon capacity of students to learn by emulation—they have abundant opportunity to acquaint themselves with good statistical presentation, both tabular and graphic, in our courses in statistics and in the source materials of other courses. In course 21a, some instruction is incidentally given in orderly tabulation of limited sorts, but we make no attempt to teach students to prepare ink charts. Apparently, something more is needed; and three suggestions, perhaps all to be followed together, are made:
    1. By compressing some other parts of the work, we can include a small amount of instruction on presentation in course 21a. This should help put those graduate students who are required to take that course here on the right track.
    2. For students not required to take 21a, because they have had the “equivalent” elsewhere, one possibly helpful device is to require in course 121b a written report involving presentation in tabular and graphic form. Such report could be graded if sufficient funds are available to cover the grading, and the instructors could make a moderate effort to advise particular students about defects in their reports. The reports would presumably be required of all students in 121b, whether or not they had had 21a.
    3. The Department’s specialists in statistics could advise any graduate student, whose thesis involved matters of statistical presentation, concerning such matters. When the Department acquires a general research laboratory, with a regular supervisor, the supervisor could give such advice. In the meantime, the instructors in statistics could stand ready to give such advice in appropriate cases. The undersigned emphasize that this advice should be understood to concern presentation of statistical materials: they do not feel but they should be called upon ordinarily to advise such as student about sources of statistics for his thesis, or about the methods of analyzing the statistics, or about their interpretation. They have often given advice on such matters in certain cases, and will continue to do so, but take the stand that they should not be regarded as under the obligation to give such advice to all comers. The point is that; if the candidate proposes to write a statistical thesis in any field of economics, a vital part of his job is to obtain, analyze, and interpret his data. We see no reason why faculty specialists in statistics should make an extraordinary contribution to a thesis which happens to have quantitative aspects.
  2. Little emphasis appeared, in any opinions expressed, on the need for laboratory instruction in statistics in our graduate offering. Some suggestion was advanced that the “homework” type of problem task could helpfully be employed. W. L. C. and E. F. have a little faith that much could be accomplished in this way – the great advantage of the supervised laboratory is that the supervisor can get students actively started on the task and can catch and clear away difficulties as they arise. (We assume, of course, any problem work of this sort, in graduate courses, should be on an advanced – not elementary – level.) To meet this suggestion, we propose only that point A2 above be put into effect, and that the following change in present operations be considered. At present, course 121a includes two home-work problems, which stretch over several weeks, but are not graded and are not used as bases for specific advice to individual students. The proposed change is that these problems be handed in, and treated like the problem described in A2. (In these cases, as in that case, grading of the reports would be feasible if funds are available for the purpose.)

An emphatic suggestion was made that graduate students have the use of laboratory equipment, and be made welcome in the laboratory. We do not believe this can be managed with the laboratory facilities of course 21a. We note, however, that a moderate chance now exists that the University will presently provide the Department with a research laboratory in statistics, adequately equipped, and under competent supervision. If and when this is done, no difficulty will arise in making ample place for work by graduate students on any statistical tasks in which they may properly be interested. We remark that the arguments in favor of a general research laboratory in statistics are much more likely to bring conviction in responsible quarters that the argument, however strongly put, in favor of facilities merely for the occasional use of graduate students.

  1. Supposing we are to give an additional half graduate course in statistics, opinions pointed toward three alternatives:
    1. A course in theory, intermediate between course 121a and Prof. Wilson’s course 122b. This does not appear a good use of our manpower, for the election in such a course would inevitably be small, especially as the mathematics prerequisites would necessarily be much more severe than those – almost nil – on which we now limp through 121a.
    2. A further course was suggested – beyond 121b and perhaps alternating with it – in topics in the application of statistics to economic fields. Economics 121b now includes a selected list of such topics, which varies moderately from year to year; but it is by no means a comprehensive coverage of all even of the major possibilities. We could readily prepare an additional half course to be called 121c of further topics in the applied fields, and many students would probably like such a course. Such a course can be described as follows:

Economics 121c will be a half-course which might be entitled Topics in Applied Economic Statistics. Economics 21a or its equivalent will be a prerequisite. Properly qualified undergraduates may, with the consent of the instructor, be admitted to economics 121c.

Economics 121c will deal with statistical problems arising in connection with the use of basic statistical data in a selected list of economic topics. (As compared with 121b this course will lay more emphasis on the basic material and less emphasis on statistical theory.)

On each topic each student will be expected to familiarize himself with the immediate and the basic sources of the main materials, through actual examination of such materials, and to present a critical appraisal of these fundamental statistics. The instructor will give a succinct historical background – an outline of the principal work which is already been done on the topic. The instructor and the class will work out together conclusions as to what are the leading issues involved, and will consider what it is that statisticians are trying to measure and what they should be trying to measure.

Such topics as the following will be included:

Consumption
Commodity prices
Cost-of-living
Employment and unemployment
Wages
Money and Banking
Production and Trade (certain phases)
Balance of international payments
Public Finance

        1. The subordinate suggestion that, in this case, basic preparation for the oral exam and also the write-off field might consist of 121a and either 121b or 121c, was advanced. A strong objection to this appears in the fact that 121b, although made up largely of topics in applied statistics, now includes – and should continue to do so – certain topics which need to be covered by every general economist (we do not here have in mind the statistical specialist) who is to have “literacy” in the field of economic statistics today. Several of the “applied” topics now in 121b include in fact fundamental matters of statistical theory needed by all economists, and not elsewhere covered in our instruction. These include, for example: the theory of index numbers, statistical deflation, secular trends in business cycles, the basic theory of measuring production and income, and at least demand and cost curves not to mention more sophisticated matters of econometrics. These essentially theoretical topics in statistics should remain part of the basic graduate year course in statistics. (This goes also for our present topic of national income: even if the Department offer a course in that subject, the course will not be taken by all students, and all should have at least the brief survey now in 121b). For the foregoing reason, we emphatically urge that 121a and 121b stand as the basic year course in the field, and that the new course 121c be regarded as an additional – but not an alternative–half course.
        2. The subordinate suggestion at 121b and 121c be given in alternate years appears to fall for the same reason given in C2a.

 

    1. Instead of the course described under C2 suggestion was made that we introduce a course in administrative (we use this word provisionally, for want of a better) statistics – mainly, but not exclusively, governmental statistics. We have not outlined such a course in full, but can suggest its nature by indicating that it would emphasize the problems encountered in actually doing statistical work in government or private agencies. Such topics as the preparation and use of index numbers of prices and production; the compilation and use of data on employment and the labor force; statistics of farm production and operation; the gathering of and analysis of facts concerning trade, both foreign and domestic; financial data such as are developed by the treasury, the S. E. C, the F. R. B., and private agencies; statistics used in the analysis of particular enterprises; the rapidly developing field of quality control in industry, suggest themselves for inclusion. The nature of the course can also be indicated by somewhat loose contrast with the course described under C2 above: in that course, the point of view is of the user (economist, or other analyst) of statistics, and attention is given to the origin of the statistics only in so far as it is needed to guide and inform the user. In this course, the point of view is of the maker of statistics, and attention is given to the use of the statistics only in so far as it is needed to guide the maker in his work. This course would go far toward meeting the contention that our students, while well founded in statistical theory, are not ready to handle the kind of statistical tasks which they encounter in government or other research agencies.

At the moment we are not ready to choose between the courses described under C2 and C3, the former (and obviously the latter) being understood as in addition to, and not alternative to, 121b.

 

  1. No opinion was expressed concerning course 122b, and we think it should continue to be given in alternate years.

No opinion was offered concerning the content of course 121a. We have in mind some compression of one of the topics know given. This, plus the longer term under the peace-time schedule, will enable us to give more satisfactory attention to the topic of small samples.

We were commissioned to report also on national income. This is covered in a separate memorandum.

 

  1. We layout now, in tentative form and subject to revision by the Department, our recommendation as to the entire offering in statistics in the early post-war years.

21a. Substantially as at present, but with the change outlined in A1.

121a. Substantially as at present, but with the change outlined in B and the change noted in D.

121b. Substantially as at present, but with the change outlined in A2.

(Courses 121a and 121b to be regarded as the core of the preparation in the field of statistics, and to be recommended to the candidates for the general oral in statistics as the most helpful unit in their preparation.)

121c. A new half course, either that described under C2 or that under C3. To be open to graduate students who have had 21a or by consent of the instructor to those who have had the equivalent of 21a, and by consent of the instructor to properly qualified undergraduates who have had 21a.

122b. Substantially as at present, and to be given in alternate years as at present.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

II. Offering in National Income

The suggestion is made that a half course, at the graduate level, in National Income be offered. The main purpose of such a course would be to give our students an extensive factual basis for their use of national income concepts and data in a wide range of our theoretical and applied fields. The course by itself could provide only a beginning for specialization the subject of national income for its own sake, and we do not understand that the Department contemplates recognizing the field in that subject.

While the course should be concerned primarily with the facts of national income, we understand that some attention could properly be given to the interpretation of those facts into their economic and social implications. Moreover, even to handle properly the factual side, the course would need give much attention to matters of definition and concept, matters which actually stand at the root of most of the “problems” of measuring national income and its chief constituents.

The core of the course would consist of the presentation, discussion, and criticism of the existing statistical facts on the national income and its constituents. These materials would presumably be limited to the United States; although some of the critical portions of the course, dealing with concepts and the like, would necessarily make large drafts on studies in certain other countries. Emphasis would be on the problems of measurement, the effectiveness and validity of the methods used, and the appropriateness of the results obtained as answers to questions posed by the economist.

In addition to the over-all aggregate of national income, viewed in real and money terms and in its variations over time, the course would examine the chief constituents of national income. These would include:

  1. Contributions to national income by various types of economic activity.
  2. Contributions from various geographical regions (much less is known on this.)
  3. Allocation, so far as it is known, to the several factors of production.
  4. Distribution according to size of income (money income) received by individuals.
  5. Distribution of income according to use: consumption expenditures of individuals (perishable, semi-durable), consumption through government, savings (by individuals, by enterprises, by government).
  6. Capital formation, and its relation to savings.
  7. Relation of taxes and public expenditures to the flow of income.

Your committee makes no recommendation as to the personnel to be assigned the task of conducting such a course. It does recommend: that the course be limited to graduate students, and to those advanced concentrators who receive permission from the instructor(s); that all students who take the course be required to have completed one half year course at the graduate level in economic theory and in statistics; that the course be given each year, rather than in alternate years; that the course be considered as a pro-seminar in statistics for the purpose of excuse – under our existing rules for reducing the oral examination to three fields – from the oral examination in statistics.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Department of Economics, Correspondence & Papers, 1902-1950. Box 23. Folder “Course Announcement 1945-46”.

Image Source: Crum and Frickey in the Harvard Class Album, 1942 and 1950.

Categories
Curriculum Fields Harvard

Harvard. Mathematical Economics Recognized as Subfield of Theory. E.B. Wilson, Crum, and Schumpeter, 1933

 

What I find particularly striking in the following report of the Committee on Instruction in Mathematical Economics at Harvard (note the  first named of the trio is E. B. Wilson) is the forecast that economics graduate students will need to acquire tools of mathematical economics and statistics already in the mid 1930s because they will need them later, 1953-63, when they will be “at the height of their activity” and by which time (implicitly) the “rapidly increasing importance of theoretical and statistical work involving higher mathematics” will have caught up with them. I have appended the course names for the statistics and mathematics courses referred to by number in the report.

Related postings: 

_____________________

Meeting of the Committee (Wilson, Crum, Schumpeter) on
Instruction in the Mathematical Economics
Tuesday, May 9 [1933]

In view of the rapidly increasing importance of theoretical and statistical work involving higher mathematics, and of the possibility that a considerable number of economists may have to be adequately familiar with both mathematical theory and statistical procedure twenty to thirty years from now, that is, when many of our present students will be at the height of their activity, the Committee (Wilson, Crum, Schumpeter) agreed on the following recommendations to be submitted to the Department which they believe to be both necessary and sufficient in order to provide facilities for events to work in mathematical theory as applied to economics:

(1) Any student who may wish to do so should be allowed to offer mathematical economics as his special field within the requirements for the Ph.D. This would involve but a slight alteration of existing practice which permits students to choose some branch of economic theory as a special field. The committee’s suggestion is merely that mathematical economics should be added to the other special subjects in economic theory which a student may select.

It seems desirable, moreover, to permit that any such student may select mathematics or rather some branch of pure or applied mathematics in place of one of the two remaining fields he has to offer.

(2) Advanced work in mathematical economics should conform to modern tendencies by stressing equally the mathematical side of economic theory and mathematical statistics. No student who elects mathematical economics as his special field should be allowed to do the one without the other. Especially courses 31a and 32b should be required also from students mainly interested in pure theory.

(3) Work in the Department of Mathematics through Math 5 should be considered as the minimum requirement as to mathematical training. Credit should be given only for Math 5, but not for any of the still more elementary course preparatory to it, which most of the students taking up mathematical economics will have had anyhow in their undergraduate period.

(4) No further steps should be taken at present. It seems best to see what the response will be before attempting to organize a special graduate course. The mathematical aspect of our subject is being dealt with in some courses already, and any Ph.D. candidates who may present themselves in case the rules be altered as recommended could easily be taken care of individually.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Copy of Letter from Harold H. Burbank to Joseph Schumpeter

October 3, 1933

Dear Joe,

I have read and approved without qualification the report of the Committee on Instruction in Mathematical Economics.

I think this report should be brought before the Department on the evening of Tuesday, October 10.

Very sincerely yours,

Prof. J. A. Schumpeter
2 Scott Street

HHB:VS

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Graduate Instruction in the Mathematical Economics
Department Vote, October 10, 1933

In view of the rapidly increasing importance of theoretical and statistical work involving higher mathematics, and of the possibility that a considerable number of economists may have to be adequately familiar with both mathematical theory and statistical procedure twenty to thirty years from now, that is, when many of our present students will be at the height of their activity, the Committee (Wilson, Crum, Schumpeter) agreed on the following recommendations to be submitted to the Department which they believe to be both necessary and sufficient in order to provide facilities for events to work in mathematical theory as applied to economics.

The Department voted to accept the recommendations stated as follows:

(1) Any student who may wish to do so should be allowed to offer mathematical economics as his special field within the requirements for the Ph.D. This would involve no alteration of existing practice, which permits students to choose some branch of economic theory as a special field. The committee’s suggestion is that mathematical economics should be admissible.

(2) Any students using mathematical economics as his special field should be allowed to offer some branch of pure or applied mathematics as an allied field.

Work in the Department of Mathematics through Math 5, or the equivalent, should be considered as the minimum requirement as to mathematical training. Credit should be given only for Math 5, but not for any more elementary course preparatory to it.

(3) Advanced work in mathematical economics should conform to modern tendencies by stressing equally the mathematical side of economic theory and mathematical statistics. Therefore courses 31a and 32b should be required of anyone in electing mathematical theory as his special field.

(4) No further steps need be taken at present. It seems best to see what the response will be before attempting to organize a special graduate course. Any individual cases calling for special attention can be dealt with, under the proposed regulation, as our courses now stand.

Source:  Harvard University Archives. Department of Economics, Correspondence and papers 1930-1961. (UAV349.11), Box 13.

_____________________

Statistics Courses offered in the Department of Economics
at Harvard, 1934-35

Economics 31a 1hf (formerly Economics 41a). Theory of Economic Statistics, I

Half-course (first half-year). Mon., Wed., Fri., at 9. Professor Crum and Asst. Professor Frickey.
Economics 1a, or its equivalent, is a prerequisite for this course.

Economics 31b 2hf (formerly Economics 41b). Theory of Economic Statistics, II

Half-course (second half-year). Mon., Wed., Fri., at 9. Professor Crum and Asst. Professor Frickey.
Economics 1a, or its equivalent, is a prerequisite for this course.

Economics 32b 2hf (formerly Economics 42). Foundations of Statistical Theory

Half-course (second half-year). Tu., Th., 3 to 4.30. Professor E. B. Wilson.
Economics 31a and one year of Calculus are prerequisites for this course.

Source: Announcement of the Courses of Instruction offered by the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, 1933-34(second edition), Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. XXX, No. 39 (September 20, 1933), p. 128.

_____________________

Undergraduate Mathematics Courses
at Harvard, 1934-35

Mostly Freshmen

[Mathematics] A. Professors J. L Coolidge et al. — Analytic Geometry; Introduction to the Calculus.

Mostly Sophomores

[Mathematics] 2. Professors Graustein et al. — Differential and Integral Calculus; Analytic Geometry.

Mostly Juniors

[Mathematics] 5a1hf. Professor Morse. — Differential and Integral Calculus (advanced course), Part I

[Mathematics] 5a2hf. Professor Morse. — Differential and Integral Calculus (advanced course), Part II

 

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1934-35, p. 86.

 

Images:  Left to right: William Leonard Crum, Joseph A. Schumpeter, Edwin Bidwell Wilson. From the 1934 (Crum) and 1939 (Schumpeter and Wilson) Harvard Class Albums.

 

 

Categories
Chicago Exam Questions Fields

Chicago. Industrial Organization Prelim. 1977

 

The following five questions come from what appears to be a draft of the prelim exam in industrial organization for the Spring of 1977 that is found in the George Stigler papers at the University of Chicago. The draft clearly has the title “Industrial Organization Prelim” but the date is a handwritten addition. Also there is no explicit “University of Chicago”  to be found, though given the location in George Stigler’s papers, this identification seems rather certain.

___________________

[handwritten note:  5-2-77]

Industrial Organization Prelim

Answer all questions:

  1. It is sometimes alleged that periods of economic depression are more conducive to the growth of economic regulation than prosperity. Develop a theory which elaborates the link between the level of economic activity and the propensity to regulate. Include a discussion of whether the goals of regulatory agencies (old as well as new) are likely to differ with the level of economic activity.
  2. Sales of some firms are occurring at prices below average variable cost. Suppose there were no legal restrictions on merger. Under what conditions, if any, would the firms in the industry prefer merger as a means of reducing industry output?
  3. A recent treatise on antitrust law lists the following as among the factors favorable to collusion in an industry.
    1. No fringe of small buyers.
    2. Inelastic demand at competitive price.
    3. Entry takes a long time.
    4. Many customers.
    5. A standardized product.
    6. High ratio of fixed to variable costs.

Discuss for each factor the effect, if any, it has on probability of collusion.

  1. What problems for profit maximizing collusion among the firms in the book publishing industry would arise because of each of the following conditions:
    1. There are two classes of books, fiction and nonfiction. Publishers generally publish both types although some publishers specialize in nonfiction.
    2. Sales and profits from n fictional books behave like n independent random variables drawn from the same distribution. Sales of a given fictional book in a given year are independent of the sales in the previous year. There is a positive probability of sales coming to a halt in a given year and remaining zero thereafter.
    3. Nonfiction is of two types, textbooks and “how-to-do-it” books. The expected number of years of positive sales for a nonfiction book is greater than for a fiction book.
    4. Retail outlets and mail order sales are the only channels of distribution to the final users of books.
    5. The cost function of a book publisher is proportional to the number of titles and the quantity printed of each title.
    6. Every title has the protection of a copyright. Assume that the Xerox machine and similar devices do not exist.
    7. Anyone can arrange to have a book printed by a printing company and can arrange for its distribution.
  2. How do you explain the following empirical findings for manufacturing industries?

Let

Nit= number of companies in the 4-digit industry i in year t
Cit= 4-firm concentration ratio, industry i, year t.
Qit= index of real output industry i, year t
Rit= measured rate of return of all firms in industry i, year t.

    1. For each t, holing log Nitconstant, Ritis an increasing function of Cit.
    2. For each t, holding Citconstant, Ritis an increasing function of log Nit.
    3. For each t, Cit and log Nitare negatively correlated.
    4. Between 1947 and 1967 the correlation between the change in Citand the change in log Nitis 0.55.
    5. Between 1947 and 1967 the correlation between the change in Citand the change in log Nitis zero. The correlation is also zero between the change in log Qitand the change in Cit.
    6. There has recently been renewed interest in the social optimality of various devices for the public regulation of pollution. Among popular proposals to deal with the problem: emission taxes, subsidies for pollution control, transferable rights to emit pollutants, maximum limits on pollution discharges from each source. Assume that the optimality conditions for public regulation have been met. Evaluate the relative efficiency of these four devices and any others you wish to add to the list.

Source: University of Chicago Archives. George Stigler Papers, Addenda. Box 33, Folder “Exams & Prelim Questions”.

Image Source:  George Stigler page at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business website.

Categories
Fields Harvard Suggested Reading Syllabus

Harvard. Consolidated undergraduate and graduate public finance syllabus. Butters and Soloway, 1954-55

 

Providing a ten page transcription of a course syllabus is a daunting task. It does have the useful side-effect of forcing me to read the syllabus closely and I still labor under the hope that something of potential future significance will lodge itself somewhere in my subconscious, ready to go if ever summoned. Of course having a digitized transcript allows us to easily search the growing sample of course syllabi already transcribed at Economics in the Rear-view Mirror. 

Harvard economics Ph.D.’s on the economics department faculty in the mid-1950’s, J. Keith Butters and Arnold M. Soloway, are listed on the public finance syllabus below that was distributed as a consolidated reading list for the undergraduate and graduate versions of the course taught in 1954-1955. I am not sure what to make of the fact that only Butters’ name appears in the enrollment report included with the annual report of the President of Harvard College.

P.S. The mid-year (January) and end-year (May) final exams have been transcribed and posted in a later post.

_______________________

Course Enrollments

[Economics] 151. Public Finance. Associate Professor Butters. Full course.

(W) Total 30: 15 Seniors, 9 Juniors, 1 Sophomore, 4 Other Graduates, 1 Other
(S) Total 27: 14 Seniors, 11 Juniors, 1 Sophomore, 1 Other Graduate

[Economics] 251 Public Finance. Associate Professor Butters. Full course.

(F) Total 19: 7 Graduates, 8 Other Graduates, 1 Radcliffe, 3 Special
(S) Total 16: 6 Graduates, 7 Other Graduates, 1 Radcliffe, 2 Special

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College 1954-1955, pp. 90, 93.

_______________________

Economics 151 and 251
PUBLIC FINANCE
Fall Term, 1954-1955

Professors Butters and Soloway

NOTE: Readings under the heading “Required” are required for Economics 151. Students in Economics 251 are required to read the asterisked assignments and to be generally familiar with the substance of the material covered in the other required assignments for Economics 151.

The following general studies and texts are suggested for reference throughout the course. Specific assignments on various topics are made from some of these sources.

General Texts and Treatises on Public Finance:

Blough, Roy, The Federal Taxing Process

Brownlee, O. H. and Allen, E. D., Economics of Public Finance, (Second Edition)

Due, John F., Government Finance

Groves, H. M., Financing Government (Third Edition) [Fifth edition]

Groves, H. M., Viewpoints on Public Finance

Hicks, U. K., Public Finance

Pigou, A. C., A Study in Public Finance

Poole, K. E., (Editor), Fiscal Policies and the American Economy

Schultz, W. J. and Harriss, C. L., American Public Finance [Third edition, before Harriss]

Somers, H. M., Public Finance and National Income

 

Serial Publications and Periodicals:

Annual Reports of the Secretary of the Treasury

Budget Messages of the President

Economic Reports of the President and Economic Reviews of the Council of Economic Advisers

Proceedings of the National Tax Association

National Tax Journal

Taxes, The Tax Magazine (Published by Commerce Clearing House, Inc.)

The loose-leaf tax services published by Commerce Clearing House, Inc. and Prentice-Hall, available in the Law Library

 

September 28: Nature and Scope of Government Finance

Required

*Brownlee and Allen, Economics of Public Finance, Second Edition, pp. 3-22

*Colm, Gerhard, “Why Public Finance,” National Tax Journal, Sept. 1948, pp. 193-206

*Due, Government Finance, Ch. 1, pp. 1-16

Suggested

*Hicks, Public Finance, Ch. 1, pp. 1-16

Groves, Financing Government, Ch. 1, pp. 1-8

 

September 30 – October 2: Concepts of Justice

Required

*Due, Government Finance, Ch. 7, pp. 114-133

*Simons, Henry, Personal Income Taxation, Ch. 1, pp. 1-40

*Blough, The Federal Taxing Process, Ch. 15, pp. 382-408

Suggested

Pigou, A. C., “Some Aspects of Welfare Economics,” American Economic Review, June 1951, pp. 287-302

*Pigou, A Study in Public Finance, Part II, Chs. 1-7, pp. 40-93

*Robbins, L., “Interpersonal Comparisons of Utility,” Economic Journal, December 1938, pp. 635-641

*Wright, D. Mc., “Income Redistribution Reconsidered,” Income, Employment and Public Policy, edited by Metzler, L. Pp. 159-176

Blum, W. J., and Kalven, Harry, The Uneasy Case for Progressive Taxation

Shehab, F., Progressive Taxation: A Study in the Development of the Progressive Principal in the British Income Tax

 

October 5 – October 16: The Budget

Required

Groves, Financing Government (Third Edition), pp. 509-527

Schultz and Harriss, American Public Finance, pp. 131-151

*Smithies, Arthur, The Determination and Control of Federal Expenditures (mimeographed volume), Chs. I-VI (128 pages)

*Smith, Harold D., The Management of Your Government, Chs. 5-7, pp. 54-102

*March, Michael, “A Comment on Budgetary Improvement in the National Government,” National Tax Journal, June 1952, pp. 155-173. Also, “Reply to Mr. March” by Herman Loeffler, same issue, pp. 174-175

*The Budget of the United States Government for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1955, pp. M5-M104 and A3-A16. (This assignment can be scanned rather than studied carefully as to matters of detail.)

*National Income, 1951 (A Supplement to the Survey of Current Business) pp. 10-18, 21-34, 42-43, 46-49

*Tax and Expenditure Policy for 1950, Committee for Economic Development, pp. 35-41

Suggested

Hicks, J. R., The Problem of Budget Reform

Hansen, A. H., Fiscal Policy and Business Cycles, Ch. 10, pp. 186-222

Key, V. O., “The Lack of a Budgetary Theory,” American Political Science Review, Volume 34 (December 1940), pp. 1137-1144

U.S. Commission on Organization of the Executive Branch of the Government, Budget and Accounting, Parts I and II, pp. 7-31, 77-84

U.S. Commission on Organization of the Executive Branch of the Government, Task Force Report on Fiscal, Budgeting, and Accounting Activities (Appendix F), pp. 37-38

Loeffler, Herman C., “Alice in Budget-Land,” National Tax Journal, March 1951, pp. 54-64

Fieldler, Clinton, “Reform of the Legislative Budget,” National Tax Journal, March 1951, pp. 65-76

Burkhead, Jesse, “The Outlook for Federal Budget-Making,” National Tax Journal, December 1949, pp. 289-299

*Smithies, A., The Determination and Control of Expenditures, Chs. VII-XII and Ch. XVIII (Mimeographed)

Dirks, F. C., “Recent Progress in the Federal Budget,” National Tax Journal, June 1954, pp. 141-154

 

October 19 – November 6: Expenditures

Required

*Due, Government Finance, Chs. 2-6, pp. 17-113

*Musgrave, R. A. and Culbertson, J. M., “The Growth of Public Expenditures in the United States, 1890-1948,” National Tax Journal, June 1953, pp. 97-115

*”State and Local Government Receipt and Expenditure Programs,” Survey of Current Business, January 1953, pp. 11-16

*Douglas, P. H., Economy in the National Government, Chs. I-VIII, pp. 3-204

*Buchanan, J. S., “The Pricing of Highway Services,” National Tax Journal, June 1952, pp. 97-106

Studenski, “Federal Grants-in-Aid,” National Tax Journal, September 1949, pp. 193-214

*Newcomer, Mabel, “State and Local Financing in Relation to Economic Fluctuations,” National Tax Journal, June 1954, pp. 97-109

*Maxwell, J. A., “The Equalizing Effects of Federal Grants,” Journal of Finance, May 1954, pp. 209-215

*Stark, John R., “Equities in the Financing of Federal Old and Survivors Insurance,” National Tax Journal, September 1953, pp. 286-292

Suggested

*Maxwell, J. A., Federal Grants and the Business Cycle, Chs. I-IV, pp. 1-99

*Clark, C., “Public Finance and Changes in the Value of Money,” Economic Journal, December 1945, pp. 371-389

*Pechman, J. A., and Mayer, Thomas, “Mr. Colin Clark on the Limits of Taxation,” Review of Economics and Statistics, August 1952, pp. 232-242; and Smith, D. T., “Note on Inflationary Consequences of High Taxation,” Ibid., Pp. 243, 247

*Goode, Richard, “And Economic Limit on Taxes: Some Recent Discussions,” National Tax Journal, September 1952, pp. 227-233

*Pigou, A. C., A Study in Public Finance, Chs. I-V, pp. 1-34

Machlup, F., “The Division of Labor between Government and Private Enterprise,” American Economic Review, 1943 Supplement, pp. 87-104

Hansen, A. H., and Perloff, H. S., State and Local Finance in the National Economy, Chs. 2 and 8

Hicks, J. R. and Hart, A. G., The Social Framework of the American Economy, Ch. XIII, pp. 174-185

Bowen, H. R., Toward Social Economy, Ch. 18

Backman, Jules and Kurnov, Ernest, “Pricing of Government Services,” National Tax Journal, June 1954, pp. 121-140

 

November 9 – November 30: Fiscal Policy

Required

*Smithies, Arthur, “Federal Budgeting and Physical Policy,” in A Survey of Contemporary Economics (edited by Howard S. Ellis), Ch. 5, pp. 174-209

Hansen, A. H., Business Cycles and National Income, Ch. 12, pp. 195-207

(Note: Read one or two of the following four sources)

(1) Gordon, R. A., Business Fluctuations, Ch. 18, pp. 525-544

(2) Brownlee, O. H. and Allen, E. D., Economics of Public Finance, 2nd edition, Chs. VI-VIII, pp. 94-140

(3) Musgrave, R. A., “Fiscal Policy, Stability, and Full Employment,” Public Finance and Full Employment (Postwar Economic Studies No. 3, Board of Governors of Federal Reserve System), pp. 1-21

(4) Due, Government Finance, Chs. 25-26, and 28, pp. 470-505, and 524-550

*Hart, A. G., Money, Debt and Economic Activity, Second Edition, Chs. XXVII, XXVIII, and XXIX, pp. 448-495

*Hicks, U. K., Public Finance, Ch. XVII, pp. 316-336

*Committee for Economic Development, Taxes and the Budget: A Program For Prosperity in a Free Economy (November 1947), especially pp. 9-34

*Blough, Roy, “Political and Administrative Requisites for Achieving Economic Stability,” American Economic Review, May 1950, pp. 165-177

*Lerner, A. P., The Economics of Control, Ch. 24, pp. 302-322

*Pechman, Joseph A., “Yield of the Individual Income Tax During a Recession,” National Tax Journal, March 1954, pp. 1-16

Suggested

*Wallich, H. C., “Income Generating Effects of a Balanced Budget,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, November 1944, pp. 78-91

*Musgrave, R. A., and Painter, M. S., “The Impact of Alternative Tax Structures on Personal Consumption and Saving,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, August 1948, pp. 475-499

*Margolis, Julius, “Public Works and Economic Stability,” Journal of Political Economy, August 1949, pp. 277-292

Beveridge, W. H., Full Employment in a Free Society

Hansen, A. H., Fiscal Policy and Business Cycles

Terborgh, George, The Bogie of Economic Maturity

Hansen, A. H., “Some Notes on Terborgh’s ‘The Bogie of Economic Maturity,’” Review of Economics and Statistics, February 1946, and Terborgh’s reply R. E. S., August 1946

*”The Problem of Economic Instability,” A committee report, American Economic Review, September 1950, pp. 505-538 (sections pertaining to fiscal policy)

Bach, G. L., “Monetary-Fiscal Policy, Debt Policy, and the Price Level,” American Economic Review, May 1947, pp. 228-242

Bronfenbrenner, M., “Postwar Political Economy: The President’s Reports,” Journal of Political Economy, October 1948, pp. 373-391

*Clark, J. M., “An Appraisal of the Workability of Compensatory Devices,” American Economic Review, Proceedings, March 1939, reprinted in Readings in Business Cycle Theory, pp. 291-310

“Problems of Timing and Administering Fiscal Policy in Prosperity and Depression,” papers by E. E. Hagen and A. G. Hart; discussion by J. K. Galbraith, B. H. Higgins, W. S. Soytinski, and O. H. Brownlee, American Economic Review, May 1948, pp. 417-451

*Musgrave, R. A. and Miller, M. H., “Built-in Flexibility,” American Economic Review, March 1948, pp. 122-128

Musgrave, R. A., “Alternative Budget Policies for Pole Full Employment,” American Economic Review, June 1945, pp. 387-400

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

Lubell, “Efforts of Redistribution of Income on Consumers’ Expenditures,” American Economic Review, March 1947, pp. 157-170; Correction, December 1947, p. 930; Comment by J. M. Clark, p. 931

Burkhead, Jesse, “The Balanced Budget,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, May 1954, Pp. 191-216

 

December 2 – December 18: Government Debt and Debt Management

Required

Due, Government Finance, Chs. 24 and 27, pp. 445-469 and 506-523

Schultz and Harriss, American Public Finance, Chs. XXV-XXVII, pp. 615-704

*Lerner, A. P., “The Burden of the National Debt” in Income, Employment and Public Policy (Metzler, L., et al.), Pp. 255-275

*”How to Manage the Debt,” Symposium in Review of Economics and Statistics, February 1949, pp. 15-32

*Murphy, H. C., The National Debt in War and Transition, Chs. 18-19, pp. 249-288

*Thomas, Woodlief, “Lessons of War Finance,” American Economic Review, September 1951, pp. 618-631

*Abbott, C. C., The Federal Debt (Twentieth Century Fund, 1952), Ch. 6, pp. 89-112

Suggested

Abbott, op. cit., pp. 1-196

*Roosa, R. V., “Interest Rates in the Central Bank,” in Money, Trade and Economic Growth (In Honor of John Henry Williams), pp. 270-295

*Simons, H. C., “On Debt Policy,” Journal of Political Economy, December 1944, pp. 356-361, and “Debt Policy and Banking Policy,” Review of Economics and Statistics, May 1946, pp. 85-89; both reprinted in Economic Policy for a Free Society, pp. 220-239

*Musgrave, R. A., “Credit Controls, Interest Rates and Management of Public Debt,” in Income, Employment and Public Policy (Metzler, L., At all.), Pp. 221-254

Harris, S. E., The National Debt and the New Economics

Committee on Debt Policy, Our National Debt

Seltzer, L. H., “Is a Rise in Interest Rates Desirable or Inevitable?” American Economic Review, December 1945, pp. 831-850

Roosa, R. V., “Integrating Debt Management and Open Market Operations,” American Economic Review, Supplement, May 1952, pp. 214-235

Wallich, H. C., “Debt Management as an Instrument of Economic Policy,” American Economic Review, June 1946, pp. 292-310

Bach, G. L., “Monetary-Fiscal Policy Reconsidered,” Journal of Political Economy, October 1949, pp. 383-394

Tobin, James, “Monetary Policy and the Management of the Public Debt: The Patman Inquiry,” Review of Economics and Statistics, May 1953, pp. 118-127

Burgess, W. Randolph, “Federal Reserve and Treasury Relations,” Journal of Finance, March 1954, pp. 1-11

 

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Economics 151 and 251
PUBLIC FINANCE
Spring Term, 1954-1955

Professors Butters and Soloway

Note: Readings under the heading “Required” are required for Economics 151. Students in Economics 251 are required to read the asterisked assignments and to be generally familiar with the substance of the material covered in the other required assignments for Economics 151. References in Shultz and Harriss, American Public Finance, refer to the new 6thedition.

 

February 3-10: General Introduction to Taxation in the United States.

Required:

Shultz, W. J., and Harriss, C. L., American Public Finance, Chapters 7, 9, 10, 11.

Groves, Harold, Viewpoints on Public Finance, Chapter 1.

Lerner, A. P., Economics of Control, Chapter 24 (review).

Suggested:

*Bullock, C. J., Readings in Public Finance, Chapters VIII-IX.

Paul, Randolph E., Taxation in the United States (1954).

Ratner, Sydney, American Taxation, Its History as a Social Force in Democracy (1942).

Dewey, Davis R., Financial History of the United States.

 

February 10-17: Personal Income Taxation.

Required:

Shultz, W. J., and Harriss, C. L., American Public Finance, Chapters 12, 13.

*Simons, H. C., Personal Income Taxation, Chapter I (reread), Chapters II, III (passim), IV-VI, VIII, X.

Groves, H. M., Financing Government, 3rdedition, Chapter 9.

Your Federal Income Tax, Bureau of Internal Revenue.

Suggested:

*National Tax Journal, March 1955, articles by Professor Shoup, Brown, and Pechman.

*Vickrey, W. S., Agenda for Progressive Taxation, Chapters 1, 2, 4, 6 (passim), 12, 13, 14.

Fisher, I., and Fisher, H. W., Constructive Income Taxation, A Proposal for Reform, Chapters 1, 5, 7, 8, 9, and 21.

Holt, C. G., “Averaging of Income for Tax Purposes: Equity and Fiscal-Policy Considerations,” National Tax Journal, December 1949.

*Musgrave, R. A., and Tun, Thin, “Income Tax Progression, 1929-48”, Journal of Political Economy, December 1948, pp. 498-514.

Farioletti, Marius, “The 1948 Audit Control Program for Federal Income Tax Returns”, National Tax Journal, June 1949, pp. 142-150.

Farioletti, Marius, “Some Results from the First Year’s Audit Control Program of the Bureau of Internal Revenue”, National Tax Journal, March 1952, pp. 65-78.

Blakey, R. G., and Blakely, G. C., The Federal Income Tax.

Magill, Roswell, Taxable Income.

Prentice-Hall, Federal Tax Course – 1954, Chapters 1-3.

 

February 19-24: Capital Gains Taxation.

Required:

*Seltzer, L. H., The Nature and Tax Treatment of Capital Gains and Losses, Chapters 1, 2, 4, 9, 11.

Groves, H. M., Financing Government, 3rd edition, pp. 172-177.

*Simons, H. C., Personal Income Taxation, Chapter VII.

Suggested:

*Vickrey, W. S., Agenda for Progressive Taxation, Chapter 5.

Capital Gains Taxation (A Tax Institute Symposium) (passim).

Federal Income Tax Treatment of Capital Gains and Losses (A Treasury Tax Study), 1951.

Groves, H. M., Viewpoints on Public Finance, pp. 151-158.

Prentice-Hall, Federal Tax Course – 1954, Chapters 4-6.

 

February 26-March 5: Corporation Income Tax.

Required:

Shultz, W. J., and Harriss, C. L., American Public Finance, pp. 311-320.

*Goode, Richard, The Corporation Income Tax, Chapters 1-9, 11, 18.

*Thompson, L. E., and Butters, J. K., “Effects of Taxation on the Investment Policies and Capacities of Individuals”, Journal of Finance, May 1953, Pp. 137-151.

*Smith, D. T., “Taxation and Executives”, Proceedings of the National Tax Association, 1951, pp. 232-250.

*Brown, E. C., “Business-Income Taxation and Investment Incentives”, Income, Employment, and Public Policy (Essays in Honor of Alvin H. Hansen), pp. 300-316.

Butters, J. K., and Lintner, J., Effect of Federal Taxes on Growing Enterprises, Chapters I-VII, VII and IX passim.

Suggested:

Prentice-Hall, Federal Tax Course – 1954, Chapters 21-23.

Smith, D. T., and Butters, J. K., Taxable and Business Income, Forward, Introduction, and Chapter 1.

*Slitor, Richard E., “The Corporate Income Tax: A Re-evaluation”, National Tax Journal, December 1952, pp. 289-309.

*Domar, E. D., and Musgrave, R. A., “Proportional Income Taxation and Risk-Taking”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, May 1944, pp. 388-422.

Butters, J. K., Effects of Taxation on Inventory Accounting and Policies, Chapters I, IV, V.

Butters, J. K., Thompson, L. E., and Bollinger, L. L., Effects of Taxation on Investments by Individuals, Chapters I-VI.

Smith, D. T., Effects of Taxation on Corporate Financial Policy, Chapters I, VI-IX.

*Smith, D. T., “Corporate Taxation and Common Stock Financing”, National Tax Journal, September 1953, pp. 209-225.

Brown, E. See., Effects of Taxation on Depreciation Adjustments for Price Changes, Chapters I-IV.

*Eldridge, D. H., “Tax Incentives for Mineral Enterprise”, Journal of Political Economy, June 1950, pp. 222-240.

Economic Effects of Section 102 (Tax Institute Symposium, 1951).

 

March 8-10: Integration of Personal and Corporate Income Taxation.

Required:

*Goode, Richard, The Corporation Income Tax, Chapter X.

*Simons, H. C., Personal Income Taxation, Chapter IX.

Suggested:

*The Postwar Corporation Tax Structure, U.S. Treasury Study.

How Should Corporations be Taxed?, A Tax Institute Symposium.

“Final Report of the Committee on the Federal Corporation Income Tax”, Proceedings of the National Tax Association, 1950, pp. 54-76.

Lent, G. E., The Impact of the Undistributed Profits Tax, 1936-1937.

 

March 12-15: Excess Profits Taxation.

Required:

*Hart, A. G., and Brown, E. C., Financing Defense, Chapter 7.

*Blough, Roy, “Measurement Problems of the Excess Profits Tax”, National Tax Journal, December 1948, pp. 353-365.

*”Symposium on the Excess Profits Tax”, National Tax Journal, September 1951, pp. 219-36.

Tax Institute, Excess Profits Tax, Parts 1 and 3, and pp. 119-141.

Suggested:

Oakes, E. E., “Excess Profits Tax Amendments”, National Tax Journal, March 1952, pp. 53-64.

Hicks, J. R., Hicks, U. K., and Rostas, L., The Taxation of War Wealth, Chapters 1, 4-7.

 

March 14-19: Estate and Gift Taxation.

Required:

Schultz, W. J., and Harriss, C. L., American Public Finance, Chapter 20.

*Groves, H. M., Viewpoints on Public Finance, Nos. 44, 46, 47, and 48 (all in Chapter 5).

*Butters, J. K., Lintner, J., and Cary, W. L., Effects of Taxation on Corporate Mergers, Chapters I-III and V.

Bloch, Henry S., “Economic Objectives of Gratuitous Transfer Taxation”, National Tax Journal, June 1951, pp. 139-147.

Suggested:

*Surrey, Stanley S., et al., “A Critique of Federal Estate and Gift Taxation”, California Law Review, March 1950. (Introduction by Stanley Surrey, Pp. 1-27, required for graduate students; remainder optional.)

*Federal Estate and Gift Taxes– A Proposal for Integration and for Correlation with the Income Tax. (A joint study by an advisory committee to the Treasury Department and the Office of the Tax Legislative Council, 1947) (Sections I and II and remainder, passim. Required for graduate students).

Keith, E. Gordon, “How Should Wealth Transfers Be Taxed?”, American Economic Review, May 1950, pp. 379-390.

Wedgewood, Josiah, The Economics of Inheritance, especially Chapters 9-11.

 

March 22-31: Taxes on Consumption.

Required:

Schultz, W. J., and Harriss, C. L., American Public Finance, Chapters 8, 16.

*Groves, H. M., Viewpoints on Public Finance, Nos. 58, 59, 60, 64.

Soloway, A. M., “The Purchase Tax and Fiscal Policy”, National Tax Journal, December 1951.

Suggested:

Due, John F., “American and Canadian Experience with the Sales Tax”, The Journal of Finance, September 1952.

*Due, John F., “Toward A General Theory of Sales Tax Incidents”, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, May 1953.

Pao Lun Cheng, “A Note on the Progressive Consumption Tax”, The Journal of Finance, September 1953.

Soloway, Arnold M., “Economic Aspects of the British Purchase Tax”, Journal of Finance, May 1954.

*Hicks, U. K., Public Finance, Chapters IX and X.

Hart and Brown, Financing Defense, Chapter 4.

 

April 12-23: Intergovernmental Tax Problems.

Required:

Shultz, W. J., and Harriss, C. L., American Public Finance, Chapters 23, 24, 18, 19.

*Groves, H. M., Postwar Taxation and Economic Progress, Chapter 12.

*State-Local Relations, The Council of State Governments, Report of the Committee on State-Local Relations, 1946, Parts 3 and 4; Parts 1, 2, 5, and 6 passim.

*Federal State Local Tax Correlation; Symposium of the Tax Institute, 1953. Chapters I, II, III, VII, VIII, XVIII.

Suggested:

Groves, H. M., Postwar Taxation and Economic Progress, Chapter 12.

Groves, H. M., Viewpoints on Public Finance, Chapter 2.

*George, Henry, Progress and Poverty.

Hansen and Perloff, State and Local Finance in the National Economy.

*National Tax Journal, December 1951, pp. 341-371.

 

April 26-May 5: Burden of Taxation.

Required:

*Musgrave, R. A., et al., “Distribution of Tax Payments by Income Groups”, National Tax Journal, March 1951, pp. 1-53.

*Tucker, Rufus S., “Distribution of Tax Burdens in 1948”, National Tax Journal, September 1951, pp. 269-283.

*Allen, E. D., and Brownlee, O. H., Economics of Public Finance, Chapter X.

*Tucker, R. S., “Distribution of Government Burdens and Benefits”, American Economic Review, May 1953, pp. 519-534.

Suggested:

*”Further Consideration of the Distribution of the Tax Burden”, National Tax Journal, March 1952, pp. 1-39.

Poole, K. E., Fiscal Policies and the American Economy (Chapter VIII, “The Fiscal System, The Distribution of Income, and Public Welfare” by John H. Adler), pp. 359-409.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003. Box 6, Folder “Economics, 1954-1955”.

Image Source: J. Keith Butters from Webpage of the Harvard Business School Baker Library Historical Collection “Edwin H. Land & the Polaroid Corporation: The Formative Years”.