Category: Yale

Categories
Economic History Exam Questions Syllabus Yale

Yale. American Economic History. Topics and final exam. Parker and Joskow, 1972

 

If my extremely fuzzy recollection of the graduate course in American economic history taught at Yale in the spring semester of 1972 by William Parker and Paul Joskow is to be trusted, many if not most of the readings came from these two texts:

  • American Economic Growth: An Economist’s History of the United States, Lance E. Davis, Richard A. Easterlin and William N. Parker (editors). New York: Harper & Row, 1972.
  • Robert W. Fogel and Stanley L. Engerman (eds.). The Reinterpretation of American History. New York: Harper & Row, 1971.

The topical outline and final examination questions for the course are transcribed below. 

One of the graduate students taking the course was the brilliant Willem Buiter who left a deep impression (that was probably reinforced and made permanent by Robert Solow having taught the Cowles Foundation Discussion paper by Tobin and Buiter (1974) to my cohort at M.I.T.). 

Careful readers will note the distinctly Yale custom of not displaying academic rank. We addressed our professors with Mr./Miss/Mrs./Ms. [it was a transition time for gender honorifics].

William Parker had a well-honed wit. His Adam-Smith inspired lyrics to the tune of the evergreen spiritual “Rock of Ages” has been posted earlier here at Economics in the Rear-view Mirror.

________________

Economics 133b—American Economic History
Spring 1972

Mr. Parker
Mr. Joskow

Schedule of Topics

  1. Establishing the National Economy
    1. The colonial economy.
    2. Problems of colonial and early national policy
    3. Regional economies to the Civil War
  2. Natural Sources of National Wealth
    1. Relations between Resources and Technology
    2. Population Growth and Organization of Labor Force
  3. The Process of Extensive Expansion
    1. Westward Movement and Agrarian Expansion
    2. Extension of Transportation and its Effects
  4. The Growth of Manufactures
    1. Expansion and Transformation of Light Industries
    2. Heavy Industry: Shifts in Location and Scale
  5. Economic Organization within the Market Economy
    1. Money, Finance and Controls over Investment
    2. The U.S. in the International Economy
    3. Economic Fluctuations through the Great Depression
  6. Non-market Organization and Controls
    1. Large Organizations in the American Economy
    2. Political Issues and Public Policies

 

Economics 133b
Final Examination
May 17, 1972

Take any three questions including at least one from each Part of the examination.

I.

  1. Trace the major developments in the economic history of one of the three major regions of the United States from 1750 through the 1830’s.
  2. What problems appear in measuring the economic growth of the United States before 1860? Distinguish between problems of source materials and problems of definition and concepts. What do the data most probably show about the growth rate between 1800 and 1850?
  3. The major sources of growth of agricultural productivity are: (1) Westward movement to new lands, (2) regional specialization deriving from market growth and transport improvements, (3) technical change. Discuss the influence of any one of these sources on agricultural productivity in 19thCentury United States.
  4. “Government policy toward the economy before 1860 was not controlled by the philosophical issue of laissez-faire vs. intervention, but by the political issue of federal-state relations.” Discuss with reference to specific policy areas (land policy, banking, tariffs, public works, etc.)
  5. Slavery and cotton go together in the sense that neither could have flourished in the South without the other. Do you agree? Explain.
  6. “The relative scarcity of labor in the American economy in the first half of the 19thCentury gave a labor-saving bias to the technology invented and introduced in that period.
    Analyze and discuss this statement, giving specific examples.

II.

  1. “The efficiency of a monetary and banking system can be judged by several criteria, notably: (1) elimination of the risk of individual losses, (2) variety of monetary and credit instruments available to supply individual preferences with respect to wealth holding, (3) effects on the volume of investment, (4) effects on the trend of prices and the stability of such a trend.
    Evaluate the American monetary and banking institutions with respect to these criteria over some 25-30 period in American history.
  2. What do you consider to be the main factors causing the increase in scale of firm in manufacturing industry between 1840 and 1890?
  3. Describe the major changes in the evolution of the balance of payments of the United States between colonial times and 1929. Do you think that phases in the growth process in the United States can be dated from turning points in the relation of the various items in the balance to one another.
  4. “The railroad is the mother of trusts.” Explain. Is this true for the United States?
  5. “Large organizations developed not just in manufactures, but in all sections of American economic life after 1880. The phenomenon therefore cannot be simply derived from the economies of large scale manufacture and the technological changes which produced them.” Do you agree? Discuss with specific reference to one industry and to one type of non-industrial organization (Labor, government, politics etc.)
  6. Increased government regulation of the economy between 1887 and 1914 was a response to the concerns of progressive elements in the country regarding the increasing concentration of American industry. Discuss the validity of this statement by looking at the causes and effects of several attempts by the federal government to regulate industrial structures or practices.

 

Source:  Irwin Collier, personal papers.

Image Source: Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, Vol. 151, No. 2, June 2007.

Categories
Berkeley Carnegie Institute of Technology Chicago Columbia Cornell Duke Economist Market Harvard Illinois Indiana Iowa Johns Hopkins M.I.T. Michigan Minnesota Northwestern Princeton Salaries Stanford UCLA Virginia Wisconsin Yale

Economics Faculty Salaries for 15 U.S. universities. Hart Memo, April 1961

 

Here we have a memo written by member of the Columbia University economics department executive committee, Albert G. Hart, that presents the results of what appears to be his informal polling of the chairpersons of 21 departments. Fifteen of the departments provided the salary ranges at four different ranks. No further details are provided, this one page memo was simply filed away in a folder marked “memoranda”. Maybe there is more to be found in Hart’s papers at Columbia University. Up to now I have only sampled Hart’s papers for teaching materials and perhaps next time, I’ll need to look into his papers dealing with departmental administrative affairs.

For a glance at salaries about a half-century earlier:  Professors and instructors’ salaries ca. 1907. 

________________

AGH [Albert Gailord Hart] 4/21/61

CONFIDENTIAL information on economic salaries, 1960-61, from chairmen of departments

Institution

 Professors Associate professors Assistant professors

Instructors
Harvard

$12,000-22,000

 $9,000-12,000 $7,500-8,700

$6,500
Princeton

$12,000-…?…

 $9,000-11,500 $7,000-8,750

$6,000-6,750
California

$11,700-21,000

 $8,940-10,344 $7,008-8,112

$5,916-6,360
MIT

$11,000-20,000

 $8,000-11,000 $6,500-9,000

$5,500-5,750
Minnesota

$11,000-18,000

 $8,500-11,000 $6,800-8,400

?
COLUMBIA

$11,000-20,000

 $8,500-10,000 $6,500-7,500

$5,500-5,750
Northwestern

$11,000-…?…

 $8,000-11,000 $6,800-7,500

?
Duke

$11,400-16,000

 $8,200-10,000 $7,200-8,200

$5,800-6,500
Illinois

$11,000-15,000

 $7,500-10,000 $6,900-8,600

$6,500-7,100
Cornell

$10,000-15,000

 $8,000-10,000 $6,500-7,500

$5,500-6,500
Indiana

$10,000-14,800

 $8,300-10,000 $6,500-7,500

?
Michigan

$10,000-…?…

 $8,700-..9,500 $6,600-8,000

$5,000
Virginia

$..9,800-15,000

 $7,800-..9,800 $6,600-7,800

?
Wisconsin

$..9,240-16,150

 $8,000-..9,000 $6,550-8,460

$5,250-5,450
Iowa State (Ames)

$..8,500-13,000

 $7,500-..8,500 $6,700-8,000

$4,700-6,600

[…]

Note: The following institutions for which data were not included in the source materials are believed to pay their economists at scales at or above the Columbia level:

Carnegie Tech
Chicago
Johns Hopkins
Stanford
Yale
UCLA

[…]

 

Source:  Columbia University Archives. Columbia University, Department of Economics Collection. Carl Shoup Materials: Box 11, Folder: “Economics—Memoranda”.

Categories
Economists Germany Yale

Yale. John Christopher Schwab. Taught Political Economy 1890-1905

 

In tracking down faculty who taught economics at U.S. universities in the past we sometimes have to rummage in the dimmer corners of pretty obscure history of economics. From the following items we see that John Christopher Schwab was among the first German-trained cohort of economists. He worked his way up to a professorship in political economy at Yale and then went on to become the Yale University librarian. It could turn out that his greatest legacy to economics is to be found in his student notebooks.

RESEARCH TIP:  “The papers of John C. Schwab include his student notebooks both in the United States and in Germany, with half of one notebook (1887-1888) devoted to the lectures of the historian Heinrich von Treitschke.”

___________________________

SCHWAB, John Christopher, 1865-

Born in Fordham Heights, N. Y., 1865; graduated at Yale, 1886; studied political science in the Graduate Department the succeeding year; at the University of Berlin, 1887-88; at Göttingen, 1888-89; and history in New York, 1890; Lecturer at Yale, 1890-91; Instructor, 1891-93; Assistant Professor of Political Economy to 1893; advanced to full Professorship the latter year.

JOHN CHRISTOPHER SCHWAB, Ph.D., Professor of Political Economy at Yale, was born in Fordham Heights, Westchester county. New York, April 1, 1865, son of Gustav and Catherine Elizabeth (Von Post) Schwab. He was named for his paternal great-grandfather, a Privy Counsellor of Stuttgart, Germany, of which city his grandfather Gustav Schwab, the poet, and his father were also natives. His maternal grandfather was Laurence Henry von Post, a native of Bremen, and a merchant of New York. He is a great-grandson on the maternal side of Caspar Meier, also a native of Bremen and a New York merchant, who married a daughter of John Christopher Kunze, D.D., of New York, and the latter’s wife was a daughter of Henry Melchior Muhlenberg, of Pennsylvania. Having pursued his preliminary studies under private tutors, and in Messrs. Gibbens and Beach’s School, New York, he entered Yale, Class of 1886, and after taking his Bachelor’s degree he took a year’s course in political science under Professors Sumner and Hadley in the Graduate Department. The succeeding two years were devoted to the same line of study at the Universities of Berlin and Gottingen, from which latter he received the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in 1889, having been awarded that of Master of Arts by Yale the previous year, and his professional preparations were concluded with a year’s historical research in the libraries of New York City. Returning to Yale as Lecturer on Political Science in 1S90, he acted as Instructor in Political Economy from 1891 to 1893, when he took the Assistant Professorship, and in 1898 was advanced to the Chair of that subject. Professor Schwab has been one of the Editors of the Yale Review, since 1892, and is the author of historical articles on the Confederate States; Revolutionary History of Fort Number Eight; and an article on Finance, contributed to Johnson’s Encyclopaedia. He is a member of the Century Association and the Reform Club, of New York, and of the Graduates’ Club of New Haven. On October 5, 1893, he married Edith Aurelia Fisher of the last named city.

Source: General Joshua L. Chamberlain (editor-in-chief), Universities and Their Sons, Vol. II. Boston: R. Herndon (1899), p. 545.

___________________________

Who’s Who in New England

SCHWAB, John Christopher, librarian; b. New York, Apr. 1, 1865; s. Gustav and Eliza Catharine (von Post) Schwab; brother of Gustav Henry Schwab; A.B., Yale, 1886, A.M., 1888; U. of Berlin, 1887-8; A.M., Ph.D., Göttingen, 1889; m. Edith A. Fisher, of Cincinnati, O., Oct. 5, 1893; 2 children, Katherine F., Norman von P. Instr. Polit. economy, 1890-3, asst. prof., 1893-8, prof., 1898-1905, librarian, 1905—, Yale U. Editor Yale Review, 1892—. Mem. Am. Econ. Assn., British Econ. Assn., Mass. Hist. Soc. (corr.), A.L.A., etc. Mem. Co. F, 2d Regt., Conn. N.G., 1891-4. Episcopalian. Clubs: Century (New York), Graduates’ (New Haven). Author: History of New York Property Tax, 1880; The Confederate States of America, 1901. Contbr. to hist. revs. and mags. Recreations: traveling. Address: 310 Prospect St., New Haven, Conn.

 

Source:   Who’s Who in New England, (2nd ed.). Chicago: A. N. Marquis & Company (1916), p. 950.

___________________________

Yale Obituary Record

JOHN CHRISTOPHER SCHWAB, 1865-1916; B.A. 1886

Born April 1,1865, in New York City
Died January 12, 1916, in New Haven, Conn.

John Christopher Schwab, son of Gustav Schwab, of the firm of Oelrichs & Company, was born April 1, 1865, in New York City, being named for his great-grandfather, a privy counsellor of Stuttgart, Germany. His paternal grandparents were Gustav Schwab, a German poet of note, and Sophie (Gmelin) Schwab. His mother was Catherine Elizabeth, daughter of Laurence Henry and Henrietta Margaretta (Meier) Von Post. Through her, he was descended from Heinrich Melchior Mühlenberg, the chief founder of the Lutheran Church in America.

He was fitted for Yale under private tutors and at Gibbons’ and Beach’s School in New York City. He received several prizes in English and Latin composition, High Oration appointments, and was a member of Phi Beta Kappa in college. As a Sophomore, he sang on his Class Glee Club, and the next year he was a member of the Second Glee Club. He was an editor of the Courant in his Senior year.

He remained at Yale for a year of post-graduate study in political economy after taking the degree of BA, in 1886, and during this period was also an instructor in German at the Hopkins Grammar School. In July, 1887, he went to Europe, and after spending the summer in travel, entered the University of Berlin. His studies for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy were completed at the University of Göttingen in 1889, and he then returned to the United States and spent some time in historical research in the libraries of New York City. He had received an M.A. in course at Yale in 1888. In the fall of 1890, he took up his work as lecturer in political economy at the University, being made an instructor in that department in the following year. He was promoted to an assistant professorship in 1893, and to a full professorship five years afterwards.

In 1905, after seven years of service in that capacity, Professor Schwab was chosen University librarian, and the remainder of his life was devoted to the upbuilding of the Library. A member of the University Council since his appointment as librarian, he had served for some years on the Council’s Committee on Publications, in connection with the work of the University Press. In 1901, he supervised the arrangements for the Yale Bicentennial as chairman of the committee in charge of the celebration. He was a frequent contributor to historical journals and magazines, and at one time was editor of the Yale Review. “The Finances of the Confederate States of America,” published by Professor Schwab in 1901, is considered a valuable addition in the field of economic history. He was elected Secretary of the Yale Class of 1886 in 1905, and held that office until his death. To the work of civic betterment in New Haven, professor Schwab gave much of his attention, and at the time of his death he was serving as secretary and treasurer of the social settlement known as Lowell House. He was also president of the Model Housing Association of New Haven. He was on the board of trustees of the New Haven Public Library and a member of St. Paul’s Protestant Episcopal Church, of whose Sunday school he was at one time superintendent, and for several years served in Company F, Second Regiment, Connecticut National Guard. He was a trustee of Mount Holyoke College, and in 1913 was on the committee which arranged the pageant held in celebration of the seventy-fifth anniversary of its founding. He was a member of the American and British Economic associations, the Connecticut Academy of Arts and Sciences, the American Library Association, and of the Century Club of New York. In 1911, he received from Mühlenberg College the honorary degree of LL.D.

Professor Schwab’s death occurred unexpectedly at his home in New Haven, January 12, 1916, after a brief illness from pneumonia. He was buried in Grove Street Cemetery in that city.

On October 5, 1893, he was married in New Haven to Edith Aurelia, daughter of Samuel Sparks Fisher, upon whom Yale conferred an honorary degree in 1851, and Aurelia Safford (Crossette) Fisher. She survives him with their two children: Katharine Fisher, a student at Vassar, and Norman Von Post. He leaves also two brothers and three sisters, one of the latter being the widow of Henry Charles White (B.A 1881, LL.B. 1883, M.L. 1884). Another brother, Laurence Henry, graduated from the College in 1878. Gustav Schwab (B.A. 1902) and Laurence Von Post Schwab (B.A. 1913) are nephews.

Source:  Yale University Archives. Guide to the John Christopher Schwab Family Papers.

 

Image Source: John Christopher Schwab. General Joshua L. Chamberlain (editor-in-chief), Universities and Their Sons, Vol. II. Boston: R. Herndon (1899), p. 545.

 

 

Categories
Bibliography Chicago Columbia Yale

Chicago. French/German/Italian Public Finance Bibliography. Bloch, ca. 1944

 

The backstory to the following list of French, German, and Italian works on public finance that was given to students at the University of Chicago sometime in the early to mid-1940s is illustrative of the forensic effort to prepare such posts. 

Henry Simon Bloch (1915-1988)  was born in Kehl (Germany) and emigrated to the U.S. in 1937 after having received his doctorate from the University of Nancy for a dissertation on Carl Menger.  I ran across two bibliographies he had put together in the files of Robert M. Haig at Columbia University. Both cover letters were written by Bloch on University of Chicago economics department stationary. The bibliography transcribed for this post came without a date, but the course number and senior faculty member,  Simon Leland, were easy to confirm. Still, Bloch only appears once or twice in the departmental list of faculty (at the rank of instructor), but never actually listed as an instructor for Economics 360 “Government Finance”.    

Bloch left Chicago in 1945 about the same time that Oskar Lange did. Because Bloch wrote in the cover letter to the bibliography below that it hardly seemed as though four years had passed since he had visited New York and his other bibliography had been mailed in January 1940, it seems reasonable to assume that the today’s list was sent in 1944.

Last speculation: in the New York Times obituary linked above it mentions that Bloch was honorary associate fellow of Berkeley College of Yale University. Robert Triffin  was master of that residential college at Yale from 1969 until 1977. This likely connection is perhaps related to Bloch’s honorary doctorate from the Universite Libre de Bruxelles?

__________________

 Partial timeline
of Henry Simon Bloch

1915. Born April 6 in Kehl, Germany.
1937.  Dr. en Droit (Econ) at the University of Nancy with the dissertation La théorie des besoins de Carl Menger.
1937. Emigration to the United States.

University of Chicago

1938. Research assistant.
1941-42. Lecturer, Institute for Military Studies.
1943. Instructor economics, Institute for Military Studies.
1943-45. Research supervisor, Civil Affairs Training School (CATS) for Army and Navy Officers.

1945. Consultant, Foreign Economics Administration.
1945-46. Economist, Treasury Department.
1946. Member Treasury delegate for tax treaty negotiations, Treasury Department, France, United Kingdom, Benelux.
1947-49. Section chief, United Nations.

[gap to be filled]

1955. Visiting professor economics Yale University.
1955-62. Director fiscal and financial branch, United Nations.
1958-1959. Acting director, Bureau Economics Affairs.
1959-1962. Director, Bureau Technology Assistance.
1961-1962. Deputy commissioner for technical assistance, Bureau Technology Assistance.
1962-1966. President, Zinder International Ltd.
1967-1970. Vice-president, director, Engineer of Mines Warburg & Company, Inc.
1970-1975. Senior vice president, Engineer of Mines Warburg, Pincus & Company, Inc.
1976-1981. Executive vice president, Engineer of Mines Warburg, Pincus & Company, Inc.
1982-1988. Managing director, Engineer of Mines Warburg, Pincus & Company, Inc.
1988. Died in Manhattan, February 28.

Columbia University

Lecturer, 1955-1963.
Adjunct Professor law and international relations, 1963-1985.
Professor emeritus, 1985-1988.
Member international advisory board School International and Public Affairs, 1986-1988.

Source:   From the Henry Simon Bloch page at the Prabook website of biographies of professionals.

__________________

Budget and Appointment Recommendations 1944-45
February 21, 1944
Economics Department
Item 16

It is recommended that the appointment of Henry S. Bloch as instructor [10/1/1943-9/30/44, $3,600] be renewed [10/1/44 to 9/30/45, $3,600]. Bloch at present is devoting his time exclusively to the CATS program, where his salary is charged. Should that training program be liquidated, Bloch’s services can be transferred immediately to Departmental teaching, research, and assistance in advising students. During the past year such needs have arisen, but because of the demands of the miitary program Bloch has not been able to assist the Department in its civilian program. Attention is called to the fact that Bloch’s salary is on a four-quarter basis.

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

___________________

Course Description 1944-45

[Economics] 360. Government Finance. A survey course covering the main topics dealt with in standard treatises, but emphasizing analysis of the economic effects of various fiscal practices. Prereq: Two years’ work in the Division of the Social Sciences, or equiv. But: MWF 8; Leland.

Source:  Annual Register of the University of Chicago. Announcements: The College and the Divisions, Sessions of 1944-45. Volume XLIV, No. 8 (May 15, 1944), p. 279.

___________________

The University of Chicago
Department of Economics
Oct 1

Dear Professor Haig,

I thought this might be of interest to you. It is just a list for our students.

It seems as if I had seen you only yesterday and when I was out at Riverdale it seemed as if there had not been more than 4 years interval. It was so nice.

I assume that you met Oscar Lange in the meanwhile.

Regards,

Henri.

___________________

Economics 360
SELECTED LIST OF FRENCH, GERMAN AND ITALIAN WORKS ON PUBLIC FINANCE

by
S. E. Leland and H. S. Bloch

Authors of the French language group

Allix, E. Traité élémentaire de science des finances et de législation financière française, 4th ed., 1921. Paris, 1931.

Allix, E., and Lecerclé, M. L’impôt sur le revenu. Paris, 1927.

Colson, Clément. Les finances publiques et le budget de la France. Cours d’économie politique, vol. v (2d rev. ed.). Paris, 1931.

De Greeff, Guillaume. L’économie publique et la science des finances. Bruxelles, 1907.

Denis, M. H. L’Impôt sur le revenu. Brussels, 1881.

Garnier, Joseph. Traité de Finance, 3d ed. Paris, 1872.

Jèze, Gaston. Cours élémentaire de science des finances et de législation financière française. Paris, 1912.

__________. Cours de science des finances (Théorie de l’impôt). 1936/37.

__________. Cours de finances publiques. Théories générales sur les phénomènes financiers, les dépenses publiques, le crédit public, les taxes, l’impôt. Paris, 1931.

__________. Théorie générale du budget. Paris, 1922.

__________. Cours élémentaire de science des finances et de législation financière française. Paris, 1932.

__________. Cours de science de finances et de législation financière française. Technique du Crédit Public. Paris, 1923.

__________. «Le rôle du ministre des finances dans une démocratie, » Revue de Science et de Législation Financières, Vol. XXVII (1929), pp. 7-24.

__________. Le remboursement des emprunts publics d’état. Paris, 1927.

Jèze-Boucard, M. Éléments de la science des finances et de la législation financière française, 2 vols. 1902.

Leroy-Beaulieu, Paul. Traité de la science des finances. 2 vols. 1899.

Marion, Marcel. Histoire financière de la France, depuis 1715, 6 vols. Paris, 1914/1931.

Marquis de Mirabeau. Théorie de l’impôt. 1760.

Say, Jean Baptiste. Cours complet d’économie politique pratique. 1828-9.

Say, Léon. Les finances. Paris, 1892.

__________. Dictionnaire des finances, 2 vols. Paris : Nancy, 1891/1894.

__________. Les Solutions démocratiques de l’impôt. 1886.

Stourm, R. Cours des finances. 1906.

__________. Le budget. Tr. in English—The Budget. 1917.

Trotabas, L. Précis de science et législation financières. Paris, 1936.

Vauban. Dixme royale. 1707.

Walras, L. Théorie critique de l’impôt. Paris, 1861.

 

Authors of the German language group

Büsch, Johann Georg. Abhandlung vom dem Geldumlauf in anhaltender Rücksicht auf die Staatswirtschaft und Handlung. Hamburg, 1780. [2nd edition, 1800]

Cohn, Gustav. Finanzwissenschaft, 1889. The Science of Finance (tr. by T. B. Veblen). Chicago, 1895.

__________. System der Finanzwissenschaft. 1889.

Colm, G. Volkswirtschaftliche Theorie der Staatsausgaben. Tuebingen, 1927.

Eheberg, Karl. Finanzwissenschaft, 18th ed. Berlin, 1930.

Földes, B. Finanzwissenschaft. 1920.

Gerloff, W. Steuerwirtschaft und Sozialismus. Leipzig, 1922.

Gerloff, W., and Meisel, F. Handbuch der Finanzwissenschaft. Tübingen, 1926.

Goldscheid, Rudolf. Handbuch der Finanzwissenschaft. Tübingen, 1926.

Hock, Karl V. Öffentliche Abgaben und Schulden. 1862.

Jecht, Horst. Wesen und Formen der Finanzwissenschaft. Jena, 1928.

Jèze-Neumark, F. Allgemeine Theorie des Budgets. 1927.

Lindahl, E. R. Die Gerechtigkeit der Besteuerung. Lund, 1919.

Lotz, W. Finanzwissenschaft. 1917.

Mann, Fritz Karl. « Steuerpolitische ideale, » Finanzwissenschaftliche Forschungen. Jena, 1937.

__________. Deutsche Finanzwirtschaft. Jena, 1929.

Moll, Bruno. Lehrbuch der Finanzwissenschaft. Berlin, 1930.

Nebenius, Karl Friedrich. Der öffentliche Kredit. 1820.

Neumark, Fritz. Reichshaushaltplan. 1929.

Rau, Karl. Lehrbuch der politischen Oekonomie. 1826-37.

Ritschl, Hans. Theorie der Staatswirthschaft und Besteuerung. Bonn, 1925.

Sax, Emil. Grundlegung der theoretischen Staatswirtschaft. Vienna, 1887.

Schaeffle, Albert, E.F. Die Steuern. Leipzig, 1895.

Roscher, Wilhelm. System der Finanzwissenschaft. 1886.

Schanz, G. V. Der Einkommensbegriff und die Einkommensteuergesetze, Finanzarchiv. 1896.

Stein, L. V. Lehrbuch der Finanzwissenschaft, 4 vols. 5th ed. 1885/1886.

Sultan, H. Die Staatseinnahmen: Versuch einer soziologischen Finanztheorie als Teil einer Theorie der politischen Oekonomie. 1932.

Tehralle, Fritz. Finanzwissenschaft. Jena, 1930.

Teschemacher, Hans. Handbuch der Finanzwissenschaft. Tübingen, 1927.

Wagner, A. Finanzwissenschaft. 1889.

Wicksell, K. Finanztheoretische Untersuchungen. Jena, 1896.

 

Authors of Italian language group

Barone, Enrico. Principii di economia finanziaria. Rome, 1920.

Conigliani, Carlo. De diritto pubblico nei sistemi finanziari; Studi di teoria finanziaria; e’indrezzo teorico nella Scienza finanziaria. Turin, 1903.

__________. Le leggi scientiche della finanza. 1903.

Cossa, L. “Scienze delle finanze”—Translated excerpts, by H. White. Taxation: Its principles and methods. New York and London, 1893.

Del Vecchio, Gusatavo. Lezioni di scienze delle finanze, 2d ed. Padua, 1923.

De Viti de Marco. Il carattero teorico della economia finanziaria. 1890.

De Viti de Marco, Antonio. Principii di economia finanziaria. Turin, 1934. Translation: First Principles of Public Finance, by Edith Pavlo Marget. New York, 1936.

Einaudi, L. Corso di scienza della finanza, 3rd ed. Turin, 1914.

__________. Principii di scienza della finanza. Turin, 1932.

Fasolis, G. Scienza delle finanze e diritto finanziario. 1933.

Flora, F. Manuale della scienze delle finanze, 6th ed. 1921.

Graziani, A. Istituzioni di scienza delle finanze. Torino, 1897.

Griziotti, B. Considerazioni sui metodi; limiti e problemi della Scienze pure delle Finanze. 1912. Pp. 39.

__________. Principii di politica, diritto e scienza delle tinanze. 1929.

__________. Studi di diritto tributario. 1931.

Loria, Achille. The Economic Synthesis: A study of the laws of income. Tr. by Eden Paul. London, 1914.

Mazzola. Dati scientifica della finanza pubblica. 1890.

Murray, Roberto. Principi fondamentali di scienza pura delle finanze. 1914.

Nitti, F. S. Principi di scienze delle finanze, 5th ed. Rome, 1922.

Pantaleoni, Moffea. Teoria della pressione tributaria. 1887.

Pareto, Vilfredo. “I debiti pubblici dopo la guerra,” (Rivista di Scienze Bancaria—February-March, 1916), Fatti e Teorie, p. 57-62. Firenze, 1920.

Pugliese, Mario. L’imposizione delle imprese di carattere internazionale. 1930.

Ricca-Salerno, G. Scienza della finanze. 1888.

__________. Storia delle Dottrine Finanziane in Italia. Translated. Rome, 1881.

__________.History of Fiscal Doctrines in Italy. Translated. 1890.

Rignano, Eugenio. Social Significance of the Inheritance Tax. Translated by Wm. J. Shultz. New York, 1924.

Rignano, Eucenid. Una Riforma socialista del diritto successorio. Bologna. 1920.

Roncali, A. Corso elementari di scienza finanziaria. Parma, 1887.

Tangorra, V. Trattato di Scienza delle Finanza.

Vanoni, Ezio. Natura ed interpretazione delle leggi tributarie. 1932.

 

Source: Columbia University Archive. Robert M. Haig Papers. Box 16, Folder “Bibliography”.

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

Categories
Chicago Columbia Economists Yale

Yale. James Tobin on Freedom to Friedman in 1964

 

The last paragraph of this letter from James Tobin to Milton Friedman could have been written yesterday (by someone with a good memory for history). While it is fair to say that Friedman’s team has managed to control the ball longer on the clock over the past half-century, Tobin’s team is better at keeping points on the scoreboard. 

___________________

Yale University
New Haven, Connecticut

DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS
Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics
Box 2125, Yale Station

December 7, 1964

Professor Milton Friedman
Department of Economics
Columbia University
Fayerweather Hall
New York 27, New York

 

Dear Milton:

As you urged in your letter of November 11, I shall read Federal Bulldozer [Sample review of Martin Anderson’s book]. The only redevelopment I am at all familiar with is the one here in New Haven. I think it has, in some net balance, enlarged freedom. Eminent domain no doubt infringes on one dimension of freedom and is subject to abuse. But there are surely aspects of freedom other than freedom from government coercion.

The discussion would be advanced if you would recognize that some government actions might enlarge the scope for individual choice and action for some individuals by diminishing the environmental constraints upon them.

I think also it is useful to distinguish between expansion of the public sector as a purchaser and user of resources and increases in specific and direct governmental controls and regulations. I don’t think that “modern liberals” who favor the former favor the latter. Certainly I don’t. I would not have a minimum wage law, or a Davis-Bacon Act, or the agricultural mess. And, when I want more money for education, I don’t like to be accused of wanting an NRA [National Recovery Administration]. But this confusion is what happens by the indiscriminate use of the term “Big Government.”

It is on the question of freedom of expression that I find the most difficulty understanding you. My reading of history and of the contemporary scene would be that the main threats to freedom of dissent have almost nothing to do with the economic size of government in our kind of society. The main threats have come from the know-nothings, Mitchell Palmers, McCarthys  [cf. a review of the Anderson book on Joseph McCarthy by Alonzo L. Hamby], Klu Kluxers, and the like. It is not the big Federal government that intimidates librarians, textbook writers, broadcasters, civil rights advocates in the South, etc. I do not know of cases where a democracy has crept into totalitarianism by gradually increasing the size and scope of government activity. But I do know of cases, like the Weimar republic, where the failure of conservative governments to use their powers for social and economic ends has delivered the whole country to a totalitarian dictator.

Sincerely,

[signed: “Jim”]

James Tobin

JT:lah

 

Source: Hoover Institution Archives. Milton Friedman Papers. Box 34, Folder 13 “Tobin, James”.

Images Sources:   1962 photo of James Tobin ; 1968 file photo of Milton Friedman.

Categories
Economists Harvard Yale

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

 

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

_______________________________________

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

Image Source: Harvard Business School Yearbook 1938-39.

_______________________________________

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

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

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

_______________________________________

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

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

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

 

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

_______________________________________

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

_______________________________________

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

_______________________________________

Nancy Dunlap Ruggles
Radcliffe Ph.D., 1948

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

_______________________________________

About Patricia Ruggles at the NORC website

[2018]

Pat Ruggles
Senior Fellow
Economics, Justice, and Society

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

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

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

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

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

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

Source:NORC experts webpage for Patricia Ruggles  .

 

[2013 NORC announcement of appointment of Patricia Ruggles]

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

6/12/2013, Bethesda, MD.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Source:  NORC press release.

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

Categories
Chicago Economists Harvard Yale

Harvard. Mason, Domar and Samuelson at Metzler Memorial Service, 1980

 

These memorial remarks for Lloyd Metzler come from Evsey Domar’s papers. Edward S. Mason and Evsey D. Domar’s remarks have been transcribed in full. I have only provided excerpts of those by Paul Samuelson that were published later in Vol. V of his Collected Scientific Papers. The common denominator of all three remembrances is that Metzler was an outlier among economists both with respect to his analytical abilities and contributions to economics as well with respect to his uncommon utter decency. It appears even back then, nice guys in economics attracted as much attention as an albino moose today. Samuelson’s speculative remark regarding Metzler’s assignment to the “Burbank ghetto” is priceless as is his recounting of Keynes’ less than sage advice to Sidney Alexander.

___________________

LLOYD A. METZLER
1913-1980
by Edward S. Mason

We are here to celebrate the life of Lloyd Metzler who gave comfort and pleasure not only to his family but to a host of friends. In the six short years he was at Harvard, he made a name for himself as a scholar of promise and a man to whom others turned for help and companionship.

Lloyd took his first degree at the University of Kansas and studied under a man who was my own teacher and who taught John Lintner and a number of others who later came to Harvard. I’d like to say a word about this man, John Ise, who left his imprint on Lloyd, on me, and on all those who passed through his hands. Ise was one of five children who grew up on the Kansas prairies just after the Sod House days that he later wrote about. All of these children went through the University and all made their mark in life. He was a strong man who fought for his unpopular opinions and encouraged his students to strike out for themselves. I know he impressed Lloyd as much as he did me.

After teaching two years at Kansas, Lloyd came to the Graduate School at Harvard in 1936. It was an interesting period in Cambridge and in the Department of Economics. The old guard was leaving the Department and a new crew coming in. Taussig, Carver, and Bullock retired; Ripley died; and Gay left for the Huntington library. These were the stalwarts who had dominated the Department since 1900. Early in the 1930s, Schumpeter, Leontief, and Haberler joined the Department and, later, Hansen, Schlichter, and Black. They were a vigorous crew. Lloyd early discovered his major interest in international trade and worked, in particular, with Hansen and Haberler. Harvard economics was also fortunate in attracting during that period a number of exceptional graduate students, a number of whom are here with us today. I am sure that Lloyd learned as much from them as from his teachers and, in the process, gave as much as he took.

The 1930s were also a period of upheaval in the country and in the University. In some respects it resembled the late 1960s though the protagonists and antagonists were not as strident or violent. It was a period when new ideas percolated the environment and questions of public policy were much to the fore. The influence of Keynes dominated the last few years of the decade, and Lloyd soon found himself in the middle of Keynesian controversies.

After leaving Harvard in 1942, he spent a year as a Guggenheim Fellow and then joined the Office of Strategic Services for a year. Although OSS had a good stable of economists, I am sure that he felt more at home at the Federal Reserve Board where he served from 1944 to 1946. After that a brief period at Yale, and then the University of Chicago where he was a distinguished member of the Economics Department for the rest of his life.

I leave it to others to comment on his considerable scholarly accomplishments, but want to say something about how Lloyd impressed me as a young man. He was obviously much more than an economist, with deep interests in music and literature. He was a cultivated man who in some respects reminded me of Allyn Young who also had a great interest in music and who, for a brief moment in the 1920s, shed his light on Harvard. Young looked more like a poet than an economist though I admit it is difficult for me to describe just what an economist is supposed to look like. Lloyd was a sensitive gentleman with a gift for friendship. Everyone who knew him like him and all of us join Edith in deeply mourning his departure.

 

ON LLOYD METZLER
by Evsey D. Domar

Last Sunday, The New York Times reviewed another book on President Truman. He is a gold mine for historians. A man of modest ability, yet a good president. Well, perhaps not quite so good… On the other hand, by comparison with our presidents in the recent past and, may I add, expected in the near future, a giant indeed… Many contradictions in his character and performance and so on. Could you find a better man to write about?

Lloyd Metzler does not offer such wonderful opportunities. As I look back over nearly forty years since I first met him, I don’t find contradictions either in his character nor in his actions; what stands out is a man of rare intellectual ability, remarkable modesty and much kindness.

Over my lifetime I have known a number of very bright people, including some economists; and a number of very modest and kind people, also including some economists. But I have never met one who could excel Lloyd in the combination of ability, modesty and kindness.

This was true at Harvard where he was finishing his thesis when I first met him in 194’ [sic]. If a visitor asked then, “Who is your brightest graduate student?” the answer, without any hesitation was “Lloyd Metzler, of course.” If the question was, “Who is your nicest graduate student?” the answer was once again, “Lloyd, of course.” Ant the same was true at the Federal Reserve where he spent a couple of years during the War. It was true in his office, in the cafeteria, in the afternoon math class which he gave for the staff, and outside of that marble building which has lately appeared several times on TV. (Hard to believe now that in those days the interest rate of government securities was something like 2½ per cent.)

As Solzhenitsyn said, he “was the one righteous person without whom, as the saying goes, no city can stand. Neither can the whole world.”

 

LLOYD METZLER
(April 3, 1913—October 26, 1980)
by Paul A. Samuelson

[Excerpts]

That we should hold this memorial service in the Harvard Yard is fitting. Widener Library was Lloyd’s first stamping grounds after he came to Harvard in 1937 from Kansas. Later, when the Littauer building was new, he switched his battleground to the other side of where we now meet. In my mind’s eye, I can still see Lloyd Metzler walking across the Harvard Yard, with his little dachshund in tow, engaged in animated badinage with Bob Bishop or Dan Vandermeulen. A young resident of Winthrop House, destined to be president of the United States [John F. Kennedy], used to be disturbed in his studies by our revels in Lloyd’s Winthrop House tutorial suite.

…To be near K.U., the family finally moved to Lawrence, Kansas. There the spellbinder populist, John Ise, rescued Lloyd from the swamp of the business school. Just as Ise had done with Ed Mason, and as he was to do with John Lintner, Challis Hall, and a host of other sons of the middle border, Ise sent Metzler on to his old graduate student at Harvard.

Harold Hitchings Burbank, noting the Germanic “z” in Lloyd’s name and recognizing his egregious talent, probably mistook him for a Jew…Like other able people Burbank didn’t favor, Lloyd was put in the galleys of Frickey and Crum, to serve as assistant in the undergraduate courses in statistics and accounting. Since I never had that honor, I can with good grace report that the cream of the graduate school, those who have won the Wells Prizes and top honors of our profession, all came from this Burbank ghetto.

…What is in order is to speak of Wassily Leontief and E.B. Wilson We few mathematical economists at Harvard were blessed by these great teachers…Wilson spotted Metzler’s genius. One of President Conant’s few stupid decisions was to retire Wilson at the earliest possible age, and this in a period of teacher shortages, thereby depriving the post-Metzler generations of the consumers’ surplus that Metzler, I, Bergson, Tsuru, Alexander, and some other happy few enjoyed.

That, however , was par for the critics of mathematical economics. In the year that Metzler came to Harvard, Sidney Alexander was Keynes’s last tutee at Cambridge University. Keynes seriously advised Alexander not to waste his time with mathematical economics…

…All in all, Lloyd Metzler added enormously to economic science. And that sense of humor and sweet nature lives on in our happy memories.

Note: Samuelson’s complete remarks at the memorial service were published in The Collected Scientific Papers of Paul A. Samuelson, Vol. V (Kate Crowley, ed.) pp. 827-830. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1986.

 

Source: Duke University. Rubenstein Library. Papers of Evsey Domar, Box 6, Folder “Correspondence: Lloyd Metzler etc.”

Image Source: “Lloyd A. Metzler/Fellow: Awarded 1942/Field of Study: Economics”John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation. Webpage .

Categories
Columbia Economic History Economists Harvard Illinois Johns Hopkins Minnesota Yale

Columbia. Seligman Recommends Three Harvard Colleagues for English Visiting Professorship, 1925

 

The Sir George Watson Chair of American History, Literature, and Institutions was administered by the Anglo-American Society for a distinguished visiting professor to lecture in several English universities. The inaugural lecture was given in 1921 by Viscount Bryce. That lecture, “The Study of American History” was published along with an account of the establishment of the Sir George Watson Chair. The first full course of lectures, “Economic Problems of Democracy” was given the following year by the economist and President-Emeritus of Yale University, Arthur T. Hadley. 

From the following exchange of letters between the president of Columbia University and economist, E.R.A. Seligman, we harvest Seligman’s ranking of four economics professors (three from Harvard and one from Johns Hopkins) regarded by Seligman to dominate the leading specialists in American economic history for this prestigious visiting position in “American History, Literature, and Institutions”. I have been unable at this time to determine who was actually appointed in 1925 or 1926

______________________________

Columbia President Butler Requests E.R.A. Seligman to Propose Names of Distinguished Economists for a British Chair in American History

Columbia University
in the City of New York
President’s Room

January 6, 1925

Professor E. R. A. Seligman
Department of Economics

My dear Professor Seligman

The electors to the Watson Chair of American History in British Universities contemplate acting upon a suggestion of mine and naming in the not distant future a competent American scholar to present the subject of our economic history and development. The topics that I have in mind include the migration West and the settlement of the large land areas there, the development of government aid in internal improvements, the building up of the railway and other transportation systems, the struggles over the tariff, the development, both industrially and geographically, of our manufacturing system, and the growth and character of foreign trade. There would, of course, also have to be treatment, although in general fashion, of the high points of our financial history.

Can you out of your wide acquaintance with American economists suggest a few names that I might send to the electors for consideration when they come to make their choice? The man ought to have enough standing at home to make his appointment abroad significant. He ought to be a good lecturer before a general academic audience and he ought to have a sufficiently philosophic cast of mind to avoid plunging into a morass of facts and statistics when what is needed is philosophic exposition of principles, happenings and trends of events.

With cordial regards an all the compliments of the season, I am

Faithfully yours
[signed]
Nicholas Murray Butler

______________________________

Copy of Seligman’s Response to Butler’s Request

January 7, 1925.

President Nicholas Murray Butler,
Columbia University.

My dear President Butler:

In reply to your letter of January 6th I would say that the professed economic historians are not of the very first rank. The best of them are Clive Day, of Yale, who is, I am afraid, a bit ineffective as a speaker; E. L. Bogart, of Illinois, who is a much more impressive personality and who is a fine fellow, although not a scholar of the first rank; and, finally, Professor Gras, of Minnesota, who is a younger man. It would be far better, it seems to me, to choose some prominent economist, many of whom either give courses in economic history as an incidental matter or who may be assumed to have a competent knowledge of American history. In this rank I should put first Professor E. L.(sic) Gay, of Harvard, with whom no doubt you are acquainted, and who was formerly editor of the Evening Post; then either Ripley or A. A. Young, of Harvard, would do very well, as they are both men of distinction and personality. Other men, like Hollander of Johns Hopkins, occasionally gives courses similar to the one that I give every few years, on economic and fiscal history. Taking it all in all, the order of my choice would be Gay, Young, Ripley, Hollander.

If you desire more detailed information about any of these and their characteristics or standing, I should be glad to talk it over with you.

Faithfully yours,
[E.R.A. Seligman]

 

Source: Columbia University Archives. Edwin Robert Anderson Seligman Collection, Box 37, Folder “Box 100, Seligman, Columbia 1924-1930”.

Image Source: E.R.A. Seligman portrait in  American Economic Review, 1943.

Categories
Berkeley Chicago Columbia Cornell Harvard Michigan Minnesota Princeton Regulations Stanford Wisconsin Yale

Harvard. Memo on Master’s degree requirements in ten other departments, 1935

 

The following memo was found in the papers of the Harvard department of economics outlining the formal requirements for the award of a master’s degree in economics for ten other departments ca. 1935.  Harvard requirements for 1934-35 have been previously posted here at Economics in the Rear-View Mirror.

____________________

REQUIREMENTS FOR A.M. IN ECONOMICS

University of Chicago
—Catalogue Vol. XXV, March 15, 1935—
No. 7, p. 293.

“The specific requirements for the Master’s degree are:

  1. A minimum of 8 courses, or their equivalent (of which at least 6 must be in Grades II and III above*). Either in his undergraduate or graduate work the candidate should cover the substantial equivalent of the requirements for the Bachelor’s degree in economics…(May be shown by examination.)
  2. A thesis involving research of at least semi-independent character.
  3. A final examination (either oral or written at discretion of the department). The examination is on the thesis and its field and on one other field chosen by the candidate.
  4. All candidates…are expected to show ability to think clearly…on abstract economic questions, and familiarity with terms and common concepts of economic science.

No language requirement for A.M. apparently.

No set time limit, but (p. 282) they seem to regard three of work in economics (either as graduate or as undergraduate) as “normal preparation” although “exceptionally capable” students may do it in less time.

* Grade II and III being respectively survey and problem courses (II), and Research, reading and seminar courses (III). Grade I includes intermediate courses.

 

Stanford University

  1. One academic year of graduate work (A “normal time” but also minimum).
  2. Thesis
  3. Examinations (general or final and at discretion of department).

 

Cornell University

  1. At least one full year of residence at Cornell.
  2. “No student may be admitted to candidacy for any of the degrees of A.M., M.S.,…, or Ph.D. whose training has not included work in a foreign language equivalent to three units of entrance in one language or two in each of two languages.
  3. A thesis or (at departmental discretion) an essay.
  4. Written or oral (at departmental discretion) final examination.

He must show a knowledge of:

Three special fields, such as: in Economic Theory and History:

(1) Good general knowledge of history of economic thought, including classical school and contemporary.
(2) Familiarity with economic analysis and controversial area of economic thought.
(3) A background knowledge of social and intellectual history.

or in Monetary Theory:

One requirement:
(1) A detailed understanding of the theory and history of money; monetary system of the United States, theory and history of banking; banking system of United States, foreign exchange, monetary aspects of cyclical fluctuations.

No specific course requirements as far as I can see.

 

University of Minnesota

  1. At least one full academic year’s work (in residence).
  2. Thesis required.
  3. Nine credit hours each quarter of graduate courses for three quarters.
  4. He must have done in three years (undergraduate) work in his major subject if it is open to freshmen, or two years otherwise.
  5. A reading knowledge of a foreign language to be determined by the department is necessary.
  6. An examination.

 

University of Michigan

  1. Residence requirement: One semester and one summer session, or three summer sessions; nine hours work a semester and six hours a summer session are minimum to establish residence at the respective sessions.
  2. A minimum of 24 hours of graduate work is required (i.e. necessary but not alone sufficient).
  3. Thesis may be required at discretion of department (apparently economics does not require it).

 

University of Wisconsin

  1. At least two semesters’ work, at least one of which to be at Wisconsin.
  2. An oral examination.
  3. A thesis may be required of students seeking to specialize in a definite line of study.

 

Princeton University

“After Commencement Day, 1935, the degree of M.A. will be awarded only to a student who has passed the general examination for the Doctor’s degree.” This implies a knowledge of French and German; and implies not less than two years graduate study. The examination may be written, oral, or both. One year of residence is required.

 

Yale University

  1. Two full years of resident graduate study required (but may be in less time in exceptional cases where unusual scholarship is demonstrated).
  2. Reading knowledge of either French or German.
  3. An essay is required of all candidates.
  4. (Apparently) A comprehensive written examination in field of concentration in Department of Economics (it is not specified for which degree so that it seems to apply to both M.A. and Ph.D.).

 

Columbia University

  1. “The candidate shall have registered for and attended courses aggregating not less than thirty tuition points, distributed over a period of not less than one academic year or its equivalent.”
  2. “The candidate shall have satisfied the department of his choice that he has satisfied requirements specified by the department for the degree.” (May include courses, examination, an essay, seminars, or “other work”.)

 

University of California

“There are required 20 semester units and in addition a thesis.”

“At least eight of the 20 units must be strictly graduate work.”

“The student must spend one year of residence.”

Rate of taking units:

“Graduate students in the regular session taking only upper division courses are limited to a program of 16 units” (a semester or a year? probably a semester).

“Graduate students…taking only graduate courses are limited to 12 units.” Mixtures are regulated in proportion thereto.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Department of Economics, Correspondence and Papers 1930-1961. (UAV 349.11) Box 13, Folder “Graduate Instruction, Degree Requirements.”

 

 

Categories
Chicago Curriculum Economics Programs Regulations Yale

Ruggles-Friedman correspondence on Draft Report on Graduate Training in Economics, 1955

 

A transcription of the complete printed Report of the Panel Discussions on Graduate Training in Economics at Yale (1956) was provided in the previous posting. A copy of the draft of that report from December 1955 can be found in Milton Friedman’s file of correspondence with the chairperson of the Yale Committee responsible for the report, Richard Ruggles, along with Ruggles’ cover letter and a copy of Friedman’s response. The first couple of pages of the draft are transcribed below because they provide a little bit of the backstory for the Report as does Ruggles’ cover letter. Otherwise the only substantive change between the two versions, aside from a rearrangement of a few sections in the Report, comes from Friedman’s reservations concerning the publication of doctoral theses in a university series. These were incorporated into the final Report. 

Fun Fact: Richard Ruggles graduated from Harvard in 1939. Classmates included his later Yale colleagues James Tobin and William Parker. The composer/conductor Leonard Bernstein was also a member of that Harvard class of ’39.

________________________

Letter from Richard Ruggles to Milton Friedman
Requesting Comments on Panel Report

 

YALE UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics
New Haven, Connecticut

Richard Ruggles

December 12th 1955

Professor Milton Friedman
Department of Economics
University of Chicago
Chicago, Illinois

Dear Milton,

At long last a preliminary draft of the report on the panel discussions held at Yale last spring has been prepared. This draft is based on notes taken on the discussions in the five panel meetings, and the draft has been gone over and revised according to the interpretations they placed upon the discussions in which they participated. Although the same agenda was followed in all the panel discussions, the amount of time spent on the various topics differed considerably.

Our intended procedure is as follows. We would like all the panel participants to send in their comments on this draft. In light of these comments one or more of three possible courses of action will be taken on each specific part of the draft. If numerous comments of the same general nature are made, the draft will be revised to present these views in the body of the text. This revision may consist either of replacing present sections or adding alternative views. In cases where only one or two individuals disagree on a particular point in the text, this disagreement may be handled by appropriate foontoe references. In instances where an individual panel member feels it desirable, he may write a section embodying his views and this will be appended to the report as a supplementary statement. It is not the object of this report to come out with an appearance of any greater degree of consensus than actually exists.

There appears to be widespread interest in the results of this inquiry. Numerous requests for copies of the final report have already been received. We had expected to publish the report here at Yale, but in view of the very great interest that has been shown, the committee has instructed me to ask the panel members whether or not they would approve of having the report published in an economic journal such as the American Economic Review. I would therefore appreciate it if, when you send in your comments about the panel report, you could also let me know whether or not you would approve of such publication.

Sincerely yours

[signed] Richard

ssk
enc.

________________________

Introduction to Draft Report of the Panel Discussions on Graduate Training in Economics

Confidential Preliminary Draft;
Not for Distribution

REPORT OF THE PANEL DISCUSSIONS ON GRADUATE TRAINING IN ECONOMICS

The program of graduate training in economics at Yale, and generally elsewhere in the United States, is the result of an evolutionary development. The changes that have occurred over the last two or three decades have taken the form of specific improvements in already existing programs. Although this approach can be expected to improve a graduate training program, it will in all probability lead to an end result quite different from, and not necessarily superior to, that which would result from a comprehensive reshaping of the program to meet the changed requirements, new objectives, and shifting substance in the field itself. Any minor change in an existing program must necessarily tie in with those parts of the program which remain unchanged; because the system as a whole has not been subjected to an overall redesign, it will be found necessary to modify any partial revisions so that consistency, equity, and flexibility will all be preserved.

Revision by such minor steps has a number of advantages. The degree of risk involved is minimized. Also, the changes undertaken can be expected to be within the capabilities of the organization which puts them into force. Finally, if changes are undertaken by small stages the existing program will usually be flexible enough to incorporate them without disruption.

A major reorganization involving the setting up of an entirely new program, on the other hand, faces many problems arising from lack of experience. Because such a system is new, it is often impossible to judge whether it can be carried out with the resources available. Finally, the implementation of the new system completely different in structural form may require flexibility on the part of those responsible for carrying it out that cannot be achieved quickly.

Thus it is no accident that change is usually of an evolutionary nature, but the possibility of setting up a completely new system should not be ignored. Evolutionary development, if not subjected to periodic overall review, can easily proceed in a direction which turns out to be sterile and unsuited to the needs of the society. Because evolutionary development is piecemeal, it tends unconsciously to take the underlying assumptions of the system for granted, and not to question the overall objectives and goals in relation to the requirements which must be met. Even if a comprehensive reorganization is never undertaken, it should be considered periodically. Even a complete failure in the attempt may breed new insights and suggest new directions that an orderly evolution should take. It was with these considerations in mind that the Department of Economics at Yale undertook to review the problem of graduate training in economics.

The monograph on graduate training published by the American Economic Association was extremely instructive with respect to the current status of economics training in the country, and the possible standards and improvements in such standards that might be established. The monograph, however, did not attempt to explore any major changes in the system itself.

Participation in an overall review should not be restricted to those who are administering the present system. Individuals concerned primarily with the substance of the field often have ideas that should receive consideration. Similarly, those who make use of the people who are trained, who may themselves be very little concerned either with substance or with training methods, will have valuable contributions to make concerning the areas of strength or weakness in the products of the training.

A considerable period of time was therefore invested in searching out new ideas from people in charge of administering programs, people interested in specialized areas of economics, people in business, and people in government and international organizations. During the fall and early winter of 1954-55, a great many interviews were conducted with representatives of these groups. These people were encouraged to discuss any portions of the overall problem they thought important, and no set questionnaire was used to elicit their responses. This procedure had two advantages. First, the influence of the preconceptions of the interviewers was kept to a minimum, and second, the interviews provided a sort of ink-blot test which was useful in assessing the kinds of problem that generally worried people in the different groups.

The material gathered from these interviews naturally lacked order and did not readily fit into any single comprehensive organization, but it was extremely useful in providing a basis for an agenda for a more orderly and comprehensive discussion. Such an agenda, together with a brief discussion of the various ideas expressed by individuals in the interviews, was therefore drawn up, and on the basis of this agenda a series of six panel discussions were held at Yale in the spring of 1955. The topics chosen for panel discussion covered only a few selected problems of graduate training in economics. In view of the limited time available for panel discussion, it was thought preferable to focus on a relatively small number of major issues. The choice of problems to be included was based on (1) their relative importance in suggesting possible new directions for graduate education, and (2) the amount of controversy they generated among the people with whom they were discussed.

The following report presents the results of the discussions of this agenda by the six panels.

[…]

________________________

Carbon copy of Milton Friedman’s Response to Ruggles

9 January 1956

Mr. Richard Ruggles
Department of Economics
Yale University
New Haven, Connecticut

Dear Dick:

Your report of the panel discussions strikes me as an excellent statement though my recollection of the discussions themselves are so vague that I would hardly feel competent to testify to the accuracy of the summary of the views expressed at the particular discussion that I participated in.

I find myself in substantial agreement with almost the whole of your report, the one point about which I have real doubts is the bottom half of page 15. While there are clearly some advantages to having a publication in the form of an annual series, it seems to me that most important of all that the better theses or redrafts of them will be worth publication in the regular professional journals and this would be much preferable. I feel that an entirely University series will not offer any substantial incentive to high quality but may well have the opposite effect.

Aside from this one point, the questions I have about the report are on a different level. My major question is whether you want to present the report as an observer’s summary of the panel discussions on the one hand or as the conclusions which the Yale committee drew from the panel discussions on the other. The present draft has more of the flavor of the first yet it seems to me that you would do better to do the second, making it explicit that the report records the judgment of the particular people in the Yale committee but is based on the discussions with the panels. This would seem to me to have two very great advantages. In the first place it avoids committing any of the panel members or giving the impression that they are responsible for or in agreement with what was said. In the second place it makes it easier to be firm and to avoid wishy-washy statements.

This choice ties in very much with the question you ask about publication. If the report takes the second form suggested, there is no need to ask panel members whether they approve of publication but only whether they are willing to have their names listed as having been participants. If the report takes the first form, I am at a loss to know what my approval signifies. I think it would be useful to publish the report. I agree generally with it but I would not want to be listed in the capacity of a co-author or as one who lists himself as fully responsible for it.

My second main question about the present report is whether it would not gain greatly by being less hypothetical and arid. What I have in mind is that there are no references at all in the report as to what is happening at any other institution except in the vaguest terms. Yet almost every suggestion that is made is now in effect in one or more institutions. The report, I think, would gain greatly in effectiveness and persuasiveness if it referred to the experiments or named institutions as evidence of the feasibility of the various changes and of their desirability. The outstanding example, it seems to me, is materially the suggestions with respect to the thesis which is here put forward as if it were an untried suggestion, whereas our experience—and for all I know that of other institutions—gives very relevant evidence on both its feasibility and desirability.

I hope you will pardon me for commenting so fully on questions not really covered in your letter. I am sure that the report of your committee will have an important influence on the course of graduate training in economics.

Sincerely yours,

Milton Friedman

MF:pan

Source: Hoover Institution Archives. Milton Friedman Papers, Box 32, Folder 16 “Correspondence: Ruggles, Richard”.

Image Source:  Richard Ruggles, noted economic statistician, dies. Yale Bulletin & Calendar Vol. 29, No. 23 (March 23, 2001).