Categories
Economics Programs Johns Hopkins

Johns Hopkins. Ten-Year Projects and Outlook for Department. 1968-1978

The following ten-year plan (1968-1978) proposal for the department of political economy of Johns Hopkins was most likely drafted by senior members of the department, though the precise author(s) is not clear from the document itself. The bottom line of this plan is a request to be allowed to expand the deparment’s faculty and graduate student body by by half and by two-thirds, respectively. Otherwise the department feared  the loss of its national reputation due to having a reduced scope and scale.

The plan is at least as interesting for its obiter dicta regarding e.g., air-conditioning, computer terminals, secretarial staff, etc. 

_______________________

TEN-YEAR PROJECTS AND OUTLOOK FOR
DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL ECONOMY
[Draft, 1967]

I. Introduction and Summary

The Department of Political Economy, like the rest of the University, has concentrated on small numbers and high quality in its research and instructional programs. It is our intention to continue that tradition.
During the early postwar period, this Department produced as large a group of outstanding young economists as almost any university in the country. Its small faculty included several of the country’s most eminent economists. Between 1958 and 1961 the Department was plagued with resignations of senior faculty. At the same time resources available at other universities were growing rapidly. As a result the Department lost its former status as a major producer of research and scholars. Since 1961, the Department has steadily been rebuilt and is again able to attract its share of outstanding faculty and graduate students. But the Department still suffers to some extent from the factors responsible for its earlier troubles: its small size and limited resource base.
The Department now consists of 11 faculty and 45 resident Ph.D. candidates.
The program outlined in subsequent sections is designed to strengthen the Department by increasing Its size and financial base, while still permitting it to reap the advantages of its relatively small size.
During the next decade, the Department should grow to about 18 faculty members, or about 50%. Its Ph.D. candidates should grow to about 75, or by about two-thirds. Such growth is essential to add stability to the research and instructional programs, and to permit us to cover the growing number of specialties in the subject.
Growth will be expensive. Faculty salaries and graduate fellowships will continue to rise. And no university can retain excellence, let alone improve its position, without substantial budgetary increases. Within a decade, the Department’s budget for salaries and fellowships should almost triple.

II. Immediate Needs and Plans

A. In 1967-68, the Department has ten full-time faculty members, one joint appointment with Operations Research, and one faculty member whose major appointment is in the School of Public Health. (A second joint appointment with Public Health was made in Spring 1967, but the appointee will be in Pakistan for two years.) We have two vacancies. One is a professorship, and results from the Department’s having been permitted to replace Professor Evans prior to his retirement. We have appointed a visiting Professor to this post for 1968-69. The other vacant post is an Assistant Professorship, created in the spring of 1967.
The Department’s full-time faculty ought to expand to about 18 during the next decade. Three purposes would be served by such an expansion. First, it would provide the Department with more depth in the central specialties of economic theory and quantitative methods, so that a resignation or leave of absence would not disrupt the instructional program. Second, it would permit us to make appointments in important specialties not adequately covered by existing faculty. The inevitable increase in specialization through time makes gradual expansion necessary. Third, it would enable us to discharge our obligations to the instructional programs in international relations more adequately.
The Department is now actively seeking funds for the establishment of a Center for International Economic Studies within the Department. This Center would provide a focus for graduate instruction and research in the areas of international trade and economic development. The Center would provide a major substantive focus for the Department in addition to its present focus on economic theory and quantitative methods. In addition, it would help to fill a pressing social need, since the development of poor countries is perhaps the most pressing social problem of our time. Finally, it would permit us to exploit the unique advantages of the University’s proximity to Washington.
Although we are now strong in international economics, we are weak in economic development. Hence, a specialist in economic development is our most pressing need in terms of our proposed Center, our own graduate program, and our participation in the international relations programs. Our next highest priority is in the area of industrial organization, in which we now offer only one course in alternate years. Other fields in which we need additional strength are economic growth, public finance, private finance, econometrics, managerial economics, and Soviet-type economics.
Our needs are not equally urgent in all these areas. And not every specialty requires a separate appointment. Individual scholars often have interests in two or more specialties. Finally, the importance of particular specialties, and the interests of individual faculty members change gradually through time.

B. The most important research facilities for the Economics Department are the library and computational facilities. In both cases, the special needs of the Department will make it increasingly important in the coming decade to supplement the facilities available to the University as a whole.
For many years the Department has felt the need for a workroom where copies of major journals and reference books could be kept. In an important sense, the technical journals and data sources play the role in economics that the laboratory plays in an experimental. science. The movement of the library from Gilman Hall has imposed a major burden on faculty in the Department. In addition, faculty and graduate students in economics are now sufficiently numerous that duplicate copies of major journals are essential. We have made a small beginning toward meeting our library needs by establishing a workroom in our new quarters. A very limited number of journals is being purchased from research funds. In the coming years it will be important to expand the number of journals in our workroom, and to add major reference and data volumes. If a new social science building is constructed, or if the Department is able to expand its quarters as a result of the construction of a humanities building, a departmental library should be a major planning item.
The Department now has 6 desk calculators for use by faculty and students. Most are old and should be replaced with more modern machines within a few years. In the next decade we should at least double the number of calculators available. Some of our faculty now make frequent use of one or more of the real time-saving consoles located around the University. Within a short time, it will be important for the Department to have one or more such consoles in or near the Department area.
The Department now has two full-time and one half-time secretary. The half-time secretary is financed from research funds. Within a year or two she will need to be full time. Within a decade we will probably need five full-time secretaries. We need one additional electric typewriter this fall, and at least three modern tape recorders. During the coming years wo will need several additional typewriters and recorders, and other minor items of office equipment.

C. In the spring of 1967, we substantially revised both our undergraduate and graduate curricula. At the undergraduate level, the major change was to permit most courses to be taken after only two semesters economic theory rather than three as was previously required. This opened up, several courses in the Department to international relations majors and others outside the economics major. At the graduate level, the major change was to provide a more concentrated and integrated program in economic theory for first-year Ph.D. candidates.
During the last few years, the number of undergraduate registrations in economics courses has grown much more rapidly than the undergraduate student body. This is shown in the following table of selected registrations.

1963-64 1964-65 1965-66 1966-67
18.1 241 339 351 358
18.2 50 85 121 107
18.3 50 79 94 108
18.301-302 51 56 52 74
Total 392 559 618 647

This has necessitated our giving some courses each semester which were previously given in alternate semesters. Presumably, future growth in undergraduate registrations will more nearly approximate the growth in the student body. During the next few years our major need at the undergraduate level is to add a few specialized courses that will be available to students with a limited background in economics. Planned economics and urban economics are examples of such courses.
Our Ph.D. program is now too small. We do not have enough students to justify graduate courses in specialties which should be covered in a high quality graduate program, and we do not have enough faculty to offer the courses. We thus need to expand the graduate enrollment and the faculty simultaneously in order to be able to fill gaps in our graduate program in areas such as economic development, fiscal policy and industrial organization.

D. This Department is far smaller than any other major graduate department in economics. The next smallest, Princeton, is approximately the size that our projections indicate we will be in 10 years. Others are much larger.
We do not aspire to match the size and growth of most of the departments with which we compete for faculty and graduate students. We are firmly convinced of the advantages of smallness. But until very recently our size was almost below that required for viability. And we see clear advantages in some further growth, which would still retain the benefits of our relatively small size.

III. In this section I will discuss the undergraduate and graduate instructional programs, and faculty research activities in that order.

Undergraduates can either concentrate or major in economics. Although there is some tendency for better students to major rather than concentrate, some very able students choose the less intensive program. A stronger tendency is for those whose goal is a Ph.D. program in economics to major, and for others to concentrate.
An average senior class contains about 15 concentrators in economics. Some of these graduates take jobs, but many go to graduate school in business, law and economics.
An average senior class contains about 10 majors in economics. Although a few majors take jobs upon graduation, most attend graduate school in economics or business. And the program is designed with this group in mind. In recent years, our majors have undertaken successful graduate study at Chicago, Stanford, M.I.T., Johns Hopkins and other leading institutions. The Department’s requirements of a major include four semesters of economic theory, economic history, a year of statistics, a year of mathematics, a senior essay, and work on one or more advanced fields. We feel that our majors are as well prepared for graduate study as those at any university in the country.
For many years, the goal of our Ph.D. program has been to provide thorough training in economic theory, quantitative methods, and a small number of substantive fields to a small group of high quality students, most of whom intend to enter teaching and research posts. In the years 1950-1966, 63 people received the Ph.D. for work in this Department. This comes to 3.7 per year, but there is a slight upward trend, and we have given about five per year in recent years. Among them are some of the leading academic economists of the postwar generation. Our graduates hold posts at Yale, Chicago, Minnesota, Northwestern, Purdue, Wisconsin and other leading United States universities. They also hold major academic posts in the U.K., Israel, Japan and Australia.
In the early postwar period, Johns Hopkins had among its Ph.D. candidates more than its share of the best students who studied economics. This resulted from the high quality of the faculty, the small and personal nature of the Ph.D. program, and the ability of the Department to offer fellowships that were larger than those offered by competing institutions. In the late 1950’s, this situation changed, partly because of the loss of most of the Department’s senior faculty. Since 1981, the Department has been substantially rebuilt; and is again among the leading economics departments in this country. We have greatly improved the quality of the student body, and are now getting about our share of the best graduate students, but we have not regained our former edge. To do so is the goal of the plans outlined in other sections of this report.
In the Political Economy Department, as elsewhere in the University, most faculty research is basic rather than applied. Within that framework, however, a wide spectrum of subjects and techniques is encompassed. Some of the research is purely theoretical, employing mathematical and logical tools to improve our understanding of economic phenomenon. Most of the research, however, is quantitative, employing not only economic theory but also statistical methods and data.

IV. Relationship to the Hopkins community

A. At the undergraduate level, the enrollment in economics courses has grown rapidly in recent years. Nearly every undergraduate now takes at least one economics course. And for several years we have had more than a hundred students per year in each of our second and third courses in economic theory. About 50 students per year enroll in our course in current economic problems. In 1967-68, the Department will offer 11 semester courses at the 0-99 level, and 13 semester courses at the 300-level, all of them open to undergraduates who are not economics majors.
At the graduate level our Ph.D. candidates frequently take courses in the Departments of Mathematics, Statistics, and Operations Research. Less frequently they take courses in the Departments of Political Science, History, Geography, and Social Relations. Frequently, 300- and 600-level courses in economics are taken by Ph.D. candidates in Operations Research, Environmental Sciences, Statistics, and Geography. Less frequently, they are taken by students in History, Social Relations and Political Science. Sometimes, students from SAIS take our courses in international economics and economic development.
In recent years, there has been a considerable increase in the exchange of graduate students between this Department and others for course work. We expect this trend to continue and feel that it should be encouraged.

B. The Center for International Studies will be established within the Department of Political Economy. However, many problems within the Center’s purview require interdisciplinary study, and we hope to use the Center as a vehicle for joint teaching and research programs. SAIS is the most natural partner for such ventures, but we hope to explore possibilities with Homewood departments also.

C. The Department takes an active part in the A.B.-M.A. and Ph.D. programs in international relations. We give year courses in international economics and economic development mainly for students in these programs. In our curriculum revision last spring, we reduced the prerequisites for these courses to make them more accessible to international relations specialists. We are generally pleased with our success in staffing the economics part of the international relations program. However, we feel a need for a major appointment in economic development before we can be fully satisfied with our contribution.
The Political Economy Department has one joint appointment with the Operations Research Department. In addition, wo have two faculty members in the Department whose major appointments are in the School of Public Health. The Department has no fixed policy regarding joint appointments. Those that wo have are successful because of special circumstances in which such an arrangement is in the interests of all parties. We expect that such circumstances will arise again. But we think it unwise to plan for certain numbers or kinds of joint appointments.

V. Instructional Program

A. The following table summarizes the Department’s instructional program in 1967-68:

Course Number No. of Courses Hours Per Week Credit Hours No. of Courses Hours Per Week Credit Hours No. of Courses Hours Per Week Credit Hours
0 – 99 5 14 14 6 17 17 11 31 31
300-399 7 15 22 ½ 6 13 19 ½ 13 23 42
600-699 11 23 12 24 23 47
Total 23 52 24 54 47 106

Each full-time faculty member except the chairman teaches two courses per semester. The chairman teaches three courses per year. All faculty attend the weekly Department seminar. Most faculty members will attend our dissertation seminar several times a year.
All courses numbered 0-99 are open to all qualified undergraduates, whether they are economics majors or not. All 300-399 numbered courses are open to qualified undergraduates and to graduate students from other departments. A few are not normally taken by Ph.D. candidates in economics. 600-699 numbered courses are open to graduate students in this and other departments.
It is difficult to predict future growth of undergraduate enrollment since, as stated above, we expect it to grow about as fast as the undergraduate student body, which we do not control. However, even in the absence of substantial growth in enrollments, there are several courses that should be added either at the 0-99 or the 300-399 level. These include comparative economic systems, corporation finance, public finance, and economic growth. Some other courses, now given only in alternate years, should be given every year. These include industrial organization, economics of education, and urban economics. Substantial growth in enrollments would require that we offer additional sections of some courses and that we offer some courses every semester rather than once a year.
At the graduate level, our intake of students has been between 10 and 15 for several years, resulting in a body of about 35 students in residence. We have now embarked on a conscious program of increasing the size of our graduate program; in 1967-68, 18 students entered and our student body is 45. Our intake should increase gradually over the coming decade to about 25, with a resulting student body of about 75. Seventy-five is the present graduate enrollment of the next smallest of major graduate programs in economics in other universities. Others are considerably larger. We feel that this growth is necessary to enable us to offer the range of courses now required for proper coverage of our subject matter.
Unless a major expansion of the international relations program is undertaken, we should not have to devote more faculty resources to it, once we have made the appointment we are now seeking in economic development.
Expansion of the faculty from 11 to 18 would permit the addition of 28 semester courses in the Department. The exact nature and level of the courses to added will depend on the interests of faculty members recruited, the interests of undergraduate and graduate students, and developments in the subject matter. However, we expect to continue the policy of devoting roughly half the Department’s teaching resources to courses numbered 0-99 and 300-399, and the other half to 600-level courses.

B. The Department completely reorganized both its undergraduate and graduate curricula in the spring of 1967. This reorganization permitted us to identify clearly the gaps in our program referred to in Section II. We feel that our only pressing curriculum need is now to fill these gaps. Major curriculum reform becomes necessary periodically in a developing discipline, but we have no plans for further reform.

VI. Resources Outside the University

The Department has no formal relationship with organizations outside the University. The Department does, however, benefit from proximity to Washington in several ways. First, proximity to Washington is an attraction to some actual and prospective faculty members. They may obtain data, attend meetings and seminars, and occasionally undertake paid consulting at U.S. Government agencies, international organizations, or private research Institutions. Second, Washington is an attractive source of summer jobs for our graduate students, and a few of our graduates take permanent posts there.

VII. Space requirements

In the spring of 1967 the Department moved into new quarters on the fourth floor of Gilman Hall. These quarters are an important improvement over those previously available to the Department. The new quarters consist of 12 faculty offices, a departmental office, a calculator room, 11 small cubicles for graduate students, a seminar room, and a workroom where recent technical journals are kept.
In terms of space needs, however, the now quarters are already inadequate. We now have 13 faculty posts in the Department, but only 12 offices. In fall 1968 we expect to have all 13 posts filled, and we will have the Hinkley Professor in the Department. We will thus be two offices short. In addition, we recently hired a part-time secretary. The Department office is adequate for only the two secretaries now occupying it and we have to house the new secretary in the calculator room. Within the next year the part-time post will have to be made full time, and the housing problem will be acute.
The ten-year projection for the Department will require major additions to the Department’s space facilities. Faculty offices will have to expand from 12 to 18. The secretarial force will have to expand to at least five, and that will require at least two rooms entirely devoted to secretarial use. The Department now has one seminar room. Virtually all our 300- and 600-level courses are held there and it is in use more than 35 hours per week within a short time it will be necessary to have an additional seminar room. Within ten years it will be important to have a third room that can be used for seminars, conferences and other meetings. Within the next few years we will need a larger calculator room. We already need additional calculators, and this need will grow as the faculty and graduate student body grows. In addition, we will shortly need one or more real time sharing consoles in the Department area.
It is clear that a building to house either the social or behavioral sciences is already overdue at Johns Hopkins. Despite all the building on the campus in the last decade, the social sciences and humanities – as well as statistics and various ancillary facilities are still all housed In Gilman Hall. It is virtually the only building on the campus that is not fully air conditioned. And the removal of the main library has worsened the situation.
The nature of this Department’s space needs would make it difficult, but not impossible, to satisfy them by regrouping the Gilman facilities if some other departments were to be housed in other buildings. A social or behavioral science building – which would include economics ought to be a major part of the 10-year fund raising program.

VIII. Tables and Graphs

A. The following table shows the undergraduate concentrators and majors in Political Economy for 1967-68:

Concentrators Majors
Juniors 5 10
Seniors 16 9

This table does not include the BIM students.
In 1967-68 the Department has 18 entering and 27 returning graduate students. We have no post-doctoral students.

B. Faculty

Edwin S. Mills – Professor and Chairman

Age: 39
econometrics, statistics, microeconomics
Research projects: [blank]

Bela Balassa – Professor

Age: 39
International trade, economic theory, comparative systems, economic development
Research projects: [blank]

Carl F. Christ – Professor

Age: 44
econometrics, macroeconomics, money
Research projects: [blank]

G. Heberton Evans, Jr. – Professor

Age: 67
economic history, history of economic thought, private finance
Research projects: [blank]

Herbert E. Klarman – Professor

Age: 51
economics of health, public finance
Research projects: [blank]

Peter Newman – Professor

Age: 39
economic theory, mathematical economics, economic development
Research projects: [blank]

Jürg Niehans – Professor

Age: 48
economic theory, money
Research Projects: [blank]

Frederick T. Sparrow – Associate Professor

Age: [blank]
operations research, microeconomic theory, managerial economics
Research projects: [blank]

William Oakland – Assistant Professor

Age: 28
public finance, money, economic theory
Research projects: [blank]

John Owen – Assistant Professor

Age: 35
labor, economic theory, education
Research Projects: [blank]

William Poole – Assistant Professor

Age: 30
money, macroeconomics, international trade
Research projects: [blank]

H. Louis Stettler, III – Assistant Professor

Age: 29
economic history, economic theory, statistics
Research projects: [blank]

C. As was stated above, the Department should grow from its present size of 12 faculty members to 18 during the next decade. We feel that the current division by rank — about half the faculty are professors — is about right. The following table shows a feasible growth pattern to meet the projected goal:

1967-68

1968-69 1969-70 1970-71 1971-72 1972-73 1973-74 1974-75 1975-76 1976-77

1977-78

Prof.

6 7 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 9
Assoc. Prof. 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

2

Asst. Prof.

4 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 7 7 7
Total 11 13 14 14 15 15 16 16 17 17

18

Our priorities among specialties were indicated in Section II. Beyond that, it is not possible to indicate which appointments should be made in which years and at which levels. Much depends on the availability of particular faculty in whom we are interested and on combinations of zfields in which prospective faculty are interested.

D. The Department is not persuaded that there is an important place for postdoctoral studies in economics during the next decade. Promising graduate students now obtain well-paid posts at universities with graduate programs and with relatively light teaching loads. Our impression is that it would be difficult to entice them to post-doctoral fellowships, and that there is little merit in doing so. Nor are we persuaded that there is a substantial group of young economists at small colleges who could produce significant books and papers if given a year off from heavy teaching duties. The only promising possibility seems to be to find a small number of young foreign scholars who have the Ph.D. or its equivalent, and who could spend a year here with mutual benefit to themselves and to us. The Department is not prepared to urge such a program at this time.

E. The accompanying table shows a projected ton-year budget for the Department of Political Economy. The personnel item includes base salaries and fringe benefits of faculty, secretaries and junior instructors. It assumes that faculty salaries will rise by 7% per year over the next decade. It also takes account of the faculty expansion projected in Section E.
The fellowship budget includes graduate fellowships, tuition and stipends, from whatever source. At present, some is University money, some is U.S. Government money funneled through the University (NDEA, NSF), some is fellowship money obtained by students with Department recommendations, and some is money obtained by students (mostly foreigners) entirely on their own (from foreign sources, U.S. State Department, foundations). This budget assumes that fellowships per student will rise by about 5% per year during the next decade. The table also assumes that the number of entering students will rise from 18 to 25, and the total graduate student body from 45 to 75, over the next decade.
The third line projects a growth of the Department’s incidental and telephone accounts by about 5% per year over the decade.
Excluded from the table are research funds for supplemental faculty salary, research assistants, or computing. No attempt has been made to project funds available from sponsored research or from University sources such as the faculty research grants fund.

1967-68

1968-69 1969-70 1970-71 1971-72

1972-73

Personnel

233,640 250,000 306,400 340,700 356,500 395,500
Fellowships 159,500 186,000 207,100 229,700 254,100

280,400

Telephones, Supplies

4,000 4,200 4,400 4,600 4,900 5,100
397,140 440,200 517,900 575,000 615,500

681,000

1973-74

1974-75 1975-76 1976-77 1977-78
Personnel 453,200 484,900 535,800 573,800

653,400

Fellowships

308,600 339,000 371,600 401,200 432,800
Telephones, Supplies 5,400 5,600 5,900 6,200

6,500

767,200

829,500 913,300 981,200

1,092,700

Source: Johns Hopkins University. The Eisenhower Library. Ferdinand Hamburger, Jr. Archives. Department of Political Economy [Records], Box 5, Folder “Planning Documents: 1938, 1965, 1967”.

Categories
Chicago Funny Business

Chicago. A Mikado parody number. Probably 1949.

 

Among the papers of Alfred Rees at the Economists’ Papers Archive at Duke and of Milton Friedman at the Hoover Institution Archives, one finds stapled copies of a skit written by graduate students at the University of Chicago with the title “Alice in Stationary State”. The cover page includes a list of 18 contributors to the skit either as librettist and/or as a performing member of the cast/chorus. Carl Christ who was to leave Chicago and join the faculty of the Department of Political Economy at Johns Hopkins University in 1950 was named as a member of the cast/chorus. The mimeographed manuscript bears no date, but in Christ’s paper “The Cowles Commission’s Contributions to Econometrics at the University of Chicago, 1939-1955 (Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. XXXII, March 1994, pp. 30-59) two songs from the manuscript are quoted by Christ, one to the tune of “The American Patrol“. Since he dates the skit to about 1949 and we know his whereabouts for 1950, I think it is safe to trust his memory as to the 1949 date he mentions. Note the slight discrepancies with presumably a later, recycled version of the lyrics.

Other parodies of Gilbert and Sullivan that have been transcribed for Economics in the Rear-View Mirror include:  “When I was a Lad“, “The Major General’s Song” and “I’m Called Little Buttercup” . Non-Gilbert-Sullivan material  transcribed from the skit are the Song for an Entrepreneur (to the tune of “Jingle Bells”) and “First Epistle unto the entering students” .

Here is a link to a YouTube clip from the Mikado for those of us whose familiarity with Gilbert and Sullivan lyrics is not quite up to mid-20th century Chicago levels.

_____________________

DECONTROL SONG
(to the tune of “My Object all Sublime from Patience (sic*))

*Actually from Gilbert and Sullivan’s Mikado.

A more humane economist never
Did in Chicago exist;
To nobody second,
He’s certainly reckoned,
A true philanthropist.
‘Tis his most human endeavor
To make to some extent
Each individual
Tenant pay the
Equilibrium rent.
A more humane Mikado never
Did in Japan exist,
To nobody second,
I’m certainly reckoned
A true philanthropist.
It is my very humane endeavor
To make, to some extent,
Each evil liver
A running river
Of harmless merriment.
CHORUS:

His object all sublime
He might achieve in time,
Convict the planners of their crime,
The planners of their crime.
Make those of Leftist bent
Unwillingly represent
A source of innocent merriment, of innocent merriment.

CHORUS:

My object all sublime
I shall achieve in time —
To let the punishment fit the crime —
The punishment fit the crime;
And make each prisoner pent
Unwillingly represent
A source of innocent merriment!
Of innocent merriment!

The addle-pated
Who aggregate the unrelated data
And find instead of
The alpha they seek
A beta even greater.
The Keynesians and all their ilk
Who seek to find
Nirvana…He’ll fix them all,
He’ll fix them all,
He’ll ship them to Urbana!
All prosy dull society sinners,
Who chatter and bleat and bore,
Are sent to hear sermons
From mystical Germans
Who preach from ten till four.
The amateur tenor, whose vocal villainies
All desire to shirk,
Shall, during off-hours,
Exhibit his powers
To Madame Tussaud’s waxwork.
CHORUS:

His object all sublime
He might achieve in time,
Convict the planners of their crime,
The planners of their crime.
Make those of Leftist bent
Unwillingly represent
A source of innocent merriment, of innocent merriment.

CHORUS:

My object all sublime
I shall achieve in time —
To let the punishment fit the crime —
The punishment fit the crime;
And make each prisoner pent
Unwillingly represent
A source of innocent merriment!
Of innocent merriment!

Source: Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book & Manuscript Library, Economists’ Papers Archive. Albert Rees Papers, Box 1, Folder “Personal”. Identical copy also found at The Hoover Institution Archives, Milton Friedman Papers, Box 79, Folder 6 “University of Chicago Miscellaneous.”

_____________________

Second, revised version

MEMBER OF THE FACULTY:
(to the tune of “My object all sublime” from the MIKADO)

A more humane economist never
In Chicago did exist;
To nobody second,
I’m certainly reckoned,
A true philanthropist.
It is my most human endeavor
To make to some extent
Each individual
Tenant pay the
Equilibrium rent.
A more humane Mikado never
Did in Japan exist,
To nobody second,
I’m certainly reckoned
A true philanthropist.
It is my very humane endeavor
To make, to some extent,
Each evil liver
A running river
Of harmless merriment.
My object all sublime
I might achieve in time,
Convince the planners of their crime,
The planners of their crime.
Make those of Leftist bent
Unwillingly represent
A source of innocent merriment
Of innocent merriment.
My object all sublime
I shall achieve in time —
To let the punishment fit the crime —
The punishment fit the crime;
And make each prisoner pent
Unwillingly represent
A source of innocent merriment!
Of innocent merriment!
The addle-pated
Who aggregated unrelated data
And found instead of
The alpha they sought
A beta even greata.
The Keynesians and all their ilk
Who seek to find
Nirvana…I’ll fix them all,
I’ll fix them all,
I’ll ship them to Urbana!
All prosy dull society sinners,
Who chatter and bleat and bore,
Are sent to hear sermons
From mystical Germans
Who preach from ten till four.
The amateur tenor, whose vocal villainies
All desire to shirk,
Shall, during off-hours,
Exhibit his powers
To Madame Tussaud’s waxwork.

Source: The Hoover Institution Archives. Milton Friedman Papers, Box 79, Folder 6 “University of Chicago Miscellaneous.”

Categories
Economists Johns Hopkins

Johns Hopkins. Economics Faculty, ca. 1950-ca.2008

 

Every so often I stumble upon a convenient chronology or list that is a useful reference tool for the history of a particular economics department. Rather than selfishly leave a copy on my hard disk, it is just as easy to provide the information here. Another service for you from Economics in the Rear-view Mirror!

_______________________

Faculty and Visitors at JHU Economics

The following list of permanent and visiting faculty was compiled in the Fall of 1996 by Christine Barbey and Robert Moffitt, with the assistance of Carl Christ. The list contains the names of all faculty who were in the department from 1950 to the present. Information was taken from the files of the Department of Economics, from archived files at Milton S. Eisenhower library, and from the personal records of Professor Carl Christ, and has been periodically updated by Joe Harrington. Particularly for the early years, there may be inaccuracies and areas of incompleteness. Anyone with information to add or correct to this list should contact Robert Moffitt in the Department.

Name Position Dates
Adelman, Irma Assoc. Prof. 1962-1966
An, Mark Visitor 2002
Anderson, Gary Visitor 2006
Anderson, Robert M. Visitor 1993
Arroyo, Cristino Visitor 2002
Ascheim, Joseph Asst. Prof. 1960-1963
Axtell, Robert Visitor 2000
Balassa, Bela Prof. 1966-1991
Ball, Laurence M. Prof. 1994-Present
Barbera, Rob Visitor 2004 – Present
Barnett, William Visitor 1980-1981
Barnow, Burt Joint Appointment 1993-Present
Bates, Charles Asst. Prof. 1984-1991
Bell, Clive Visitor 1985-1986
Bennett, Elaine Visitor 1990-1991
Berkowitz, Jeremy Visitor 2000
Bertrand, Trent J. Asst., Assoc., Prof. 1969-1978
Besley, Tim Richard Ely Visiting Professor 2008 Spring
Binmore, Kenneth Richard Ely Visiting Professor Fall 1998
Bishai, David Joint Appointment 2005 – Present
Bizer, David Asst. Prof. 1988-1991
Blackman, James Russian Project ca 1949-1955
Blough, Steven R. Asst. Prof. 1987-1993
Blundell, Richard Richard Ely Visiting Professor 2003 Fall
Boggess, Scott Visitor 2000 – Present
Burnside, Craig Visitor 2000
Carrington, William Asst. Prof. 1989-1997
Carroll, Christopher Asst., Assoc. Prof. 1994-Present
Chakrabarti, Subir K. Visitor 1992-1993
Chakravarty, Sukhamoy Visitor ca 1960
Chan, Jimmy Asst. Prof. 1998-2005
Chander, Parkash Visitor 1998
Chang, Myong-Hun Visitor 1995-1996
Chen, Yongjun Fulbright Scholar 2004-2005
Chew, Soo Hong Asst. Prof. 1984-1990
Christ, Carl F. Asst., Assoc., Prof. 1950-1955; 1961-2005
Copeland, Adam Visitor 2006
Cross, Philip Visitor 2002
Croushore, Dean Visitor 1994
Davidson, Sidney Asst., Assoc., Prof. 1949-1958
de Lima, Pedro Asst., Assoc. Prof. 1992-1999
Devereux, Michael Hinckley Visiting Professor 2003
De Vries, Barend A. Part-time, Visitor 1965-1967
Detragiache, Enrica Asst. Prof. 1988-1995
Devaney, Barbara Asst. Prof. 1977-1980
Dey Matthew Visitor 2005
Diebold, Francis X. Visitor 1995-1996
Domar, Evsey Asst., Assoc., Prof. 1948-1958
Driscoll, John Visitor 2004 – Present
Dynan, Karen Visitor 1998
Eason, Warren Russian Project, Lecturer, Research Assoc. ca. 1949-1955
Epstein, Larry Hinckley Visiting Professor 1988-1989
Erceg, Christopher Visitor 2000-2003
Evans, George H. Asst., Assoc., Prof. 1924-1970
Faust, Jon Prof. 2006 – Present
Flinn, Christopher Visitor 2003, 2004
Fohlin, Caroline Joint Appointment 2003 – Present
Fratantoni, Michael Visitor 2001
Gaddy, Clifford Visitor 2000, 2002
Gaynor, Martin Joint Appointment 1991-1995
Gersovitz, Mark Prof. 1994-Present
Ghezzi, Piero Asst. Prof. 1997-Fall, 1998
Gillmore, Curry W. Instructor ca. 1950-1953
Goldware, Faye Russian Project ca 1949-1955
Goodman, Allen Part-time 1978-1985
Gordon, Lincoln Prof. 1967
Gorman, W.M. (Terence) Hinckley Visiting Professor 1977-1978
Graham, Carol Visitor 2002
Graham, Edward Visitor 2006
Grant, Simon Visitor 2000
Haltiwanger, John Assoc. Prof. 1986-1987
Hamilton, Bruce W. Asst., Assoc., Prof. 1973-2001
Hanke, Steve H. Joint Appointment 1971-Present
Harberger, Arnold Asst., Assoc. 1949-1953
Harrington, Joseph Asst., Assoc., Prof. 1984-Present
Hatta, Tatsuo Asst., Assoc., Prof. 1978-1985
Heckman, James Richard Ely Visiting Professor 2005 Spring
Herk, Leonard Visitor 1990-1992
Hulten, Charles R. Asst. Prof. 1971-1978
Iversen, Carl Visitor ca. 1952-1953
Jaszi, George Visitor, Part-time 1961-1962
Karni, Edi Prof. 1979-Present
Kasdan, Saul Russian Project ca 1949-1955
Kawai, Masahiro Asst. Prof. 1978-1986
Khan, M.Ali Asst. Prof., Prof. 1973-1984, 1988-Present
Kindahl, James Asst. Prof. 1958-1963
Kirman, Alan Asst. Prof. 1965-1972
Klarman, Herbert E. Joint Appointment 1961-1969
Klemens, Ben Visitor 2004,2005
Knapp, J. Barkley Visitor 2004 – Present
Kotowitz, Yehuda Asst. Prof. 1961-1963
Krasnokutskaya, Elena Asst. Prof. 2003
Krause, Michael Visitor 2003
Krishna, Pravin Joint Appointment 2005- Present
Kuh, Edwin Lecturer 1953-1955
Kuperberg, Mark Visitor 2000
Kuznets, Simon Prof. 1954-1960
Kyle, Albert “Pete” Richard Ely Visiting Professor 2007 Spring
Lagunoff, Roger Visitor 2003
Laibson, David Richard Ely Visiting Professor 2006 Spring
Lancaster, Kelvin J. Prof. 1962-1966
LeBaron, Blake Richard Ely Visiting Professor 2001/2002
Lenstra, Andries Visitor Fall 1998
Levin, Dan Visitor 1992-2004
Levine, Ross Visitor 1995-1996
Levy, Robert Lecturer 1991-Present
Long, Clarence D. Prof. 1947-1965
Lord, William Visitor 1995-1996
Lubik, Thomas Asst. Prof. 1999-Present
Lyall, Katherine C. Joint Appointment 1973-1984
Lysy, Frank J. Asst. Prof. 1979-1984
Maccini, Louis J. Asst., Assoc.,Prof. 1969-Present
Machlup, Fritz Prof. 1948-1960
Mallar, Charles Asst. Prof. 1974-1981
Marris, Robin Visitor 1975-1976
Matthew, Shum Asst., Assoc., Prof. 2000-2008
McClelland, Rob Visitor 2002 – 2005
Meiselman, David Visitor 1963-1966
Miller, Charles L., Jr. Asst. Prof. 1980-1983
Miller, Frederick H., Jr. Asst. Prof. 1980-1984
Mills, Edwin S. Asst., Assoc., Prof. 1957-1969
Minhas, Bagicha S. Visitor 1977-1978
Mishan, Ezra Visitor 1971
Moffitt, Robert Prof. 1995-Present
Mohring, Herbert Visitor 1974
Mongin, Phillipe Richard Ely Visiting Professor 2002
Morgan, Barbara Adjunct Asst. Prof. 2003, 2004
Mueser, Peter R. Asst. Prof. 1983-1985
Mukhopadhyay, Badal Asst. Prof. 1970-1972
Musgrave, Richard Prof. 1959-1963
Nagy, Andras Visitor 1968
Newman, Peter Prof. 1966-1990
Ng, Serena Assoc. Prof. 2001-2003
Niehans, Jurg Prof. 1966-1977
Oakland, William Asst., Assoc., Prof. 1964-1975
Orphanides, Athanasios Visitor 1995-1996,2002
Owen, John M. Asst. Prof. 1963-1968
Pagan, Adrian Hinckley Visiting Prof. (1996), Ely Visiting Prof. (2000) 1996, 2000
Pakes, Ariel Richard Ely Visiting Professor 2001
Palander, Tord Russian Project ca 1950
Patinkin, Don Visitor 1965
Penrose, Edith Lecturer 1953-1961
Perlman, Mark Asst., Assoc. Prof. 1955-1962
Pomfret, Richard Visiting Scholar 1987-1988
Poole, William Asst. Prof. 1963-1969
Postan, Michael Visitor 1960-1961
Potter, Simon Visitor 2001, 2002
Pritsker, Matthew Visitor 2006
Reid, David J. Visitor 1968-1970
Ridder, Geert Visitor
Professor
Fall 1997
1998 – 2000
Rodin, Nicholas Russian Project ca 1949-1955
Rogers, John Visitor 2001, 2002
Rose, Hugh Prof. 1970-1986
Safra, Zvi Visitor 1985-1986, 1995-1996
Salkever, David S. Joint Appointment 1972-Present
Schmeidler, David Visitor 1987
Shore, Stephen Asst. Prof. 2007-
Shum, Matthew Asst., Assoc., Prof. 2000-2008
Sirageldin, Ismail Joint Appointment 1967-1995
Smith, Julie Visitor 2004
Smyth, David J. Visitor 1972-1974
Sommer, Martin Visitor 2006
Sparrow, Frederick, T. Asst. Prof. 1962-1980
Srinivasan, T. N. Visitor 1977-1979
Stettler, H. Louis III Asst. Prof. 1963-1964
Stevens, John Visitor 2005
Stone, J. Richard N. Visitor 1953-1954
Thomas, Brinley Visitor 1967-1969
Thorbecke, Erik Visitor 1967
To, Theodore Visitor 2006
Triest, Robert Asst. Prof. 1987-1988
Turner, Mark Joint Appointment 2001-2004
Turvey, Ralph Visitor ca. 1952-1953
Uselding, Paul Asst. Prof. 1970-1972
Velde, Francois R. Asst. Prof. 1992-1997
Vishwanath, Tara Visitor 1993-1994
Walters, Alan A. Prof. 1973-1991
Weiss, Frank Visitor 1998-Present
Weymark, John A. Hinckley Visiting Professor 1992
Williams, Elliot Visitor 2006
Wright, Jonathan Prof. 2007-
Woutersen, Tiemen Asst. Prof. 2004 – Present
Wymer, Clifford Visitor 1980-1981
Yaari, Menahem E. Visitor 1988
Young, Eric Visitor 2006
Young, H. Peyton Prof. 1994-2007
Zadrozni, Peter Visitor 2001
Zaman, Asad Visitor 1991-1993
Zame, William R. Prof. 1990-1993
Zamir, Shmuel Visitor 2006
Zilcha, Itzhak Visitor 1983-1985

 

Source: Johns Hopkins webpage listing permanent economics faculty and visitors found at the Internet archive Wayback Machine‘s snapshop from August 15, 2011.

Image Source: Seal of Johns Hopkins clipped from the yearbook, Hullabaloo 1951.

 

Categories
Johns Hopkins Suggested Reading

Johns Hopkins. Reading List for Macroeconomic Theory course. Carl Christ, 1963

 

The life and career of Carl Christ has been honored at Economics in the Rear-view Mirror in an earlier post. His syllabus for an econometrics course he taught in 1957 at the University of Chicago has been posted as well. Today we have a new-economics themed macroeconomics course, perhaps inspired by the first year of the legendary Council of Economic Advisers under President John F. Kennedy.

_____________________

Political Economy 302:
Economic Theory (Macroeconomics)

Spring 1963
Johns Hopkins University

Dr. Christ

Reading List

  1. Texts

Bailey, Martin J., National Income and the Price Level, Appendix on Income and Chs. 1, 2, 6,8, 3.

U.S. President, Economic Report, January 1963, as assigned after publication.

  1. Other Readings

Ackley, Gardner, Macroeconomic Theory, pp. 3-120, Ch. XV, pp. 505-42 and pp. 549-53 (see next item)

Ruggles, Richard and Nancy, National Income Accounts and Income Analysis, 2d ed., pp. 1-143 (an alternative to Ackley, pp. 3-101).

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

Chs. 1,3; Ch. 6, Sec II; Ch. 7, Sec V; Chs. 8-11; Ch. 12, Secs I-II and p. 164; Chs 13-15; Ch 17, Secs I-IV; Chs 18, 2; Ch 20, Sec [II? or III?].

Samuelson, P.A., “The Simple Mathematics of Income Determination,” in L. Metzler et al, Income Employment and Public Policy

Samuelson, P.A., “Interactions Between the Multiplier Analysis and the Principle of Acceleration,” Rev. Econ. Stat., Vol. 21, No. 2 (May, 1939), pp. 75-78; also in Readings in Monetary Theory.

Patinkin, Don, “Price Flexibility and Full Employment,” in Readings in Monetary Theory.

Mitchell, W. C., “Business Cycles”, in Readings in Business Cycle Theory.

Abramovitz, Moses, “Resource and Output Trends in the U.S. since 1870; Am. Econ. Rev. Vol 36, No. 2 (May, 1956), pp. 5-23; reprinted as N.B.E.R. Occasional Paper No. 52.

Harris, S. E., P. A. Samuelson, G. Haberler, A. H. Hansen, H. C. Wallich, C. L. Schultze, O. Eckstein, and W. L. Smith, “Economic Policy for 1962: A Symposium”, Rev. Econ. Stat.Vol. 44, No. 1 (Feb., 1962), pp. 1-24.

Friedman, Milton, “A Monetary and Fiscal Framework for Economic Stability,” Amer. Econ. Rev. Vol. 38, No. 1 (June, 1948), also in Readings in Monetary Theory, also in Friedman’s Essays in Positive Economics.

 

Source:  Johns Hopkins University. Milton S. Eisenhower Library, Ferdinand Hamburger, Jr. Archives. Department of Political Economy. Series 6, Box 1, Folder 3 “Department of Political Economy, Course Outlines and Reading Lists. C. 1900, c. 1950, 1963-68.”

Image Source: Clipped from the Johns Hopkins University yearbook, Hullabaloo 1964, p. 42.

Categories
Austria Economists Exam Questions Johns Hopkins Methodology

Johns Hopkins. Final exam for Fritz Machlup’s methodology course, 1956

 

 

Besides the questions for the final exam in Fritz Machlup’s course on the methodology of economics from the first semester of the 1955-56 academic year at Johns Hopkins University, I include the following photo from the 1956 yearbook Hullabaloo (p. 15) that identifies neither the speaker nor the seminar. While this is about as generic a seminar photo as one can imagine, I have something more than a mere suspicion that we are looking at Fritz Machlup in action. Perhaps some visitor with a keener forensic eye can confirm or reject my tentative identification in a comparison of the above portrait of Machlup reading himself with the speaker in the mystery seminar. The third man on the right, counting from the speaker, sure looks like a young Evsey Domar.

My hunch is based on the following picture of almost certainly the same seminar room in 1963 from the Carl Christ memorial website at Johns Hopkins.

 

______________

THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY
METHODOLOGY
18.601

Professor Fritz Machlup
January 27, 1956

Answer five questions, one from each group.
Write on loose sheets of paper; start a new sheet for each question.
Identify each sheet by the Question Number in the left corner and your Examination Number (which you draw before the examination) in the right corner; your name should appear nowhere.
You are on your honor not to use notes or to give or accept advice.

I.

  1. According to Poincaré, “a priori propositions are irrefutable because they are really firm resolutions to carry on the scientific game according to certain rules or stipulations.” Nevertheless, Morris Cohen considers a priori principles as “methodologic or regulative principles which enable us to organize our factual knowledge” and as “expressive of the fundamental nature of things,” What light does this view throw upon the methodological discussions of Hutchison, Kaufmann, Mises, and Knight?
  2. “While the deductive method might be applicable to a simple and stationary condition of industry, it becomes valueless in face of the increasing complexity of the modern economic world.” What was John Neville Keynes’ reaction to this point of view?
  3. “Just as the same proposition may express both a universal and a historical, or both a verbal and a real judgment, so it may express both a positive and a normative judgment.” (Fraser, Economic Thought and Language). First explain each of the three sets of antonyms and then explain and illustrate the statement.

II.

  1. Contrast and compare the logical nature of introspectionism and sensationalism as expounded by Felix Kaufmann or Morris Cohen.
  2. Give a reasoned explanation of Kaufmann’s distinction between three meanings of probability, one “relating to empirical knowledge as such”, another relating “to synthetic propositions undecided in a given scientific situation,” and a third referring to “the relative frequency of an attribute” within a certain collective.
  3. Felix Kaufmann, having made a distinction between empirical laws and theoretical laws, states: “Whereas we have both types of laws in natural science, there are, as I see it, no empirical laws established in social science, and even the tendency to establish such laws is not very strong. But if we consider the significance of theoretical laws in natural science, we cannot regard this as constituting a fundamental difference between the methods of natural science and those of social science.” Explain and discuss this statement in a way intelligible to someone who has not read Kaufmann’s writings.

III.

  1. Explain what Ludwig von Mises means by ”methodological apriorism”, “methodological individualism”, and “methodological singularism”.
  2. “In the history of applied Economics, the work of a Jevons, a Menger, a Bowley, has much more claim on our attention than the work of, say, a Schmoller, a Veblen, or a Hamilton.” What is Robbins driving at with this [last word cut off, “statement?” matches the spacing of the tips to the letter “t” that are still visible]
  3. Hutchison implies that pure theory may help the analyst to formulate questions to be answered by empirical studies: “The constant object of the scientist…is to compel the facts of experience to answer his questions definitely ‘yes’ or ‘no’…” Robbins appears to reverse the relationship: “Realistic studies may suggest the problem to be solved….But it is theory and theory alone which is capable of supplying the solution.” Discuss the paradox from the point of view of any of the other writers on methodology.

IV.

  1. If the description or institutional part of economics is viewed by Professor Knight as lying in the domain of cultural anthropology rather than economics proper, does this mean that in institutional inquiries sense observation assumes greater emphasis than intercommunication and interpretation? If not, why does Knight distinguish institutional from theoretical economics?
  2. “There are no better terms available to describe the difference between the approach of the natural and the social sciences than to call the former objective and the latter subjective.” (Hayek, “Scientism and the Study of Society”.) Explain the meaning of the essential terms employed and the statement as a whole.
  3. Hayek said: “It is only in so far as some sort of order arises as a result of individual action but without being designed by any individual that a problem is raised which demands a theoretical explanation.” Explain.

V.

  1. “Economics is in fact the only science which enjoys the advantage of an automatic quantification of its subject matter.” (Parsons, “Sociological Elements in Economic Thought”). Explain and discuss.
  2. Parsons distinguishes the following ideal types of criticism of abstract economic theory: (1) supplementary positivistic empiricism: (2) radical positivistic empiricism; (3) romantic empiricism; (4) supplementary non-economic sociology. Characterize each in a brief statement illustrated by examples.
  3. Discuss Veblen’s principal categories of human action—especially the “pragmatic” versus the “workmanlike” type—and compare them with the general “rational” type and the narrower “economic” type used in the abstract theories of traditional economics.
  4. On what grounds do Professors Herskovits and Knight reject and defend, respectively, the concept of the “economic man” as a useful tool of economic analysis?

 

Source:  Johns Hopkins University. The Ferdinand Hamburger, Jr. Archives. Department of Political Economy, Series 6. Box 3/1. Folder: “Department of Political Economy, Graduate Exams, 1933-1965”.

Image Source:  Johns Hopkins University yearbook, Hullabaloo, 1957, p. 28.

Categories
Chicago Economic History Economist Market Economists Fields

Chicago. Report of the Bailey-Christ-Griliches Committee, 1957

 

Today’s artifact provides a collection of suggestions from three young faculty members of the University of Chicago department of economics in 1957 regarding (inter alia) thesis writing, linkages with business/law/statistics faculty, long-term staffing, and the creation of a working-papers series. After reading the report, I guess one should not be terribly surprised that all three of these young turks would ultimately end up spending the lion’s share of the rest of their working lives elsewhere than Chicago. Basically what we have below is a young insider’s view of how to proceed in promoting excellence at Chicago, though it does not really have the ring of a majority view of that faculty. For fans of Saturday Night Live, one might say Christ et al. wanted “less cowbell” but the “more cowbell” faction was stronger. [An alternate source for the SNL sketch]

The following report was written by Carl Christ who incorporated assessments by his fellow committee members Martin J. Bailey and Zvi Griliches.  These guys were only ca. 34, 30, and 27 years old, respectively, in 1957. One suspects that the acting chair of the department of economics at the University of Chicago, D. Gale Johnson, was hoping to tap the minds of the younger faculty members for some fresh ideas. Both Friedman and Stigler had already entered mid-life at 45 and 46 years of age, respectively. 

I have added footnotes to the text in square brackets, e.g. [1], where descriptions of the reader’s markings by T. W. Schultz are provided.

_______________________

T. S. Schultz’s handwritten notes attached to Report

I.  Christ-G-B

  1. dust off Master’s (hold)
  2. treatment of the weak
  3. rec[commend?] students with more enthusiasm
  4. more history (underway)
  5. combine workshops?

II. Business –Law-Statistics

O.K.     more cross listing of courses. List of faculties for use in assigning committees (underway)

III. Information

prong 1. Special seminar (tied to more visitors)
prong 2. more 1 & 2 year visitors
prong 3. dist our staff (2 v.G.
prong 4. reprint service (underway)

 

_______________________

copy of T. W. S.

REPORT OF THE BAILEY-CHRIST-GRILICHES COMMITTEE*

            *The committee was appointed by D. Gale Johnson, acting chairman of the Department, pursuant to a motion passed at a department meeting late in the spring quarter of 1957. The report was written by Carl F. Christ, chairman of the committee, and has been approved in substance by Martin J. Bailey and Zvi Griliches, the other two committee members.

 

The committee has met together several times. In addition, each of us has “held hearings” with colleagues on numerous informal occasions. Our original terms of reference centered on a long range view of the question of staffing the department. But in our discussions we have ranged very widely.

We have dealth [sic] with five broad topics, some of which are interconnected. The five are, loosely speaking:

  1. Instruction, training and placement of students.
  2. Relations with the business, law, and statistics faculties.
  3. Information about the department for its members, for the economics profession and for prospective students.
  4. The allocation of resources in economics research.
  5. Kinds of economists the department ought to try to hire.

On some of these topics we have concrete suggestions, on some we have vague suggestions, and on some we merely have questions. This report provides a brief account of our discussions, and in the course of it it the suggestions and questions will appear.

 

(1) Instruction, training and placement of students.

This topic has not been a major one in our discussions. However we have several points under it.

First, the M.A. degree ought to be dusted off and made more respectable and more meaningful to students, so that those who do not choose or are not able to continue for the Ph.D. can go away from here with the feeling that they have made a worthwhile investment, to our credit as well as theirs.

Second, we ought to do a better job with our relatively weak Ph.D. aspirants in two respects: First, in discouraging or prohibiting from Ph.D. work any student who, in our opinion, is not capable of success by our standards. Second, once a student has been permitted to go ahead on his thesis, in encouraging and assisting him so that he is able to finish within a reasonable period of time and to have the feeling that he has been treated fairly. The reason for mentioning this point is that we have come across reports of several students who worked long and hard on theses and went through several revisions, with the result that they felt we had been unreasonably exacting and had unnecessarily delayed their degrees. [1]  If the M.A. degree is made more respectable as suggested above, there should be less difficulty in maintaining our Ph.D. standards and at the same time avoiding long-drawn-out struggles with marginal Ph.D. students. [2]

Third, we ought to be more vigorous and more liberal in recommending our students for jobs. There appears to be some evidence that in making recommendations we typically assume that the prospective employer has standards as high as ours, and so sometimes fail to place some of our people in jobs that instead are filled by less qualified students from elsewhere. [3]

Fourth, we ought to give at least some of our students a better knowledge of history and inability to make use of it in economics. Too many of our students go away with only poor knowledge in this area. At the same time, in Earl Hamilton and John Nef, not to mention others, the department has access to some of the best historical talent that is to be found anywhere. Can it not be turned to the advantage of more students? [4]

Fifth, we ought to economize our resources a bit by combining into one the workshop appearance in the thesis seminar of those students whose workshop performances appear ex post to have served the purpose of the thesis seminar. It might also be possible to combine the Ph.D. oral examination with the seminar appearance in some cases, thus making a further saving.
Sixth, we ought to take more advantage of the resources in the business, law, and statistics faculties, and be prepared to let them do the same with us (see topic 2 below). [5]

 

(2) Relations with the business, law, and statistics faculties.

The committee met for an hour with Allen Wallis, James Lorie, and Arnold Harberger to discuss informally the probable future course of relations between the department and the school. From this it appeared that the school intends to continue to send many of its advanced students to the department for training in price theory and monetary and income theory, and also that the school will welcome students from the department who wish to study topics that are offered in the school. [6] It also appeared that the school intends to invest fairly heavily in staff in the areas of industrial and market organization in the public regulation of business (this interested us because we feel that one of the main weaknesses in the department’s coverage lies here; see topic 5 below). [7]

We discussed the fact that while relations between the department and the school have always been cordial, there has not been as much flow back and forth as desirable, and in particular that some of our students would be interested in the business school’s work fail to follow up this interest because our demands on their time are quite heavy. We concluded that if there were more cross-listing of courses in the catalog and time schedules (the business school now does a better job of this than we do), and if some of their faculty came to our seminars and oral examinations and vice versa, and if there were more preliminary examination committees and thesis committees with members from both the school and the department, then in the course of meeting their degree requirements, any interested economics department students will find it easier to draw on the resources of the business school and vice versa.[8]

A similar approach to law and statistics would appear promising.

 

(3) Information about the department for its members, for the economics profession, and for prospective students.

One of the most commonly recurring themes in our discussions with each other and with “witnesses” in our “hearings” was that we do not provide good enough information for each other and for outsiders about the kind of work that is going on here, and the advantages we believe we have. Our discussions on this point have led to one of the two major suggestions we have to offer (the other appears below in section 5).

The suggestion is to set up a four-pronged program something like the following. (We will quickly list the four prongs, and then return with some comments.) First, set up a sort of special seminar (which might be called the Economics Research Center Seminar) to meet more or less regularly about twice a month, at which the best work that students and faculty and guests are doing would be presented to the department and its guests. Second, have a larger number of one-year or two-year visitors from all over the U. S. and the world, either as post-doctoral fellows or research associates or the like, whose main responsibility here would be to work on their own research and participate in the special seminar, as well as to take part in one or more workshops and research projects. Third, distribute dittoed copies of our essentially finished work to a selected mailing list of economists in the US and abroad, as the Agricultural Economics group already does informally. And fourth, have a reprint series that would carry the best published articles and papers by our faculty, students, and guests.

It is clear that if such a special seminar is set up and no cut is made in the number of meetings of the other workshops and seminars, the faculty workload will increase. Since we feel that it is already pretty high, it seems sensible to suggest that each workshop skip one meeting each month. This should approximately compensate for the extra load created by the special seminar.*

*A crude survey of the faculty attendance at the Agricultural Economics Seminar and the Chile, Labor, Money, Public Finance, and Econometrics Workshops yields the estimate that about 40 faculty-hours (that is, about 20 man-seminars) per week go into these workshops. Assuming that about 10 faculty members would come to each special seminar, about every two weeks, this would require a weekly average of about 10 faculty-hours (or about 5 man-seminars), which would be released if the frequency of meetings of the workshops were reduced about 25%. Another economy measure in this direction is mentioned under topic (2), fifth item.

(In response to the special seminar idea, some colleagues have suggested that the important thing is to circulate advance notice of particularly good work that is about to be presented, so that interested faculty members and others can attend, and that if this can be done, there is no need to have a special seminar; the regular workshop sessions will suffice. If the idea is accepted that particularly good work ought to be publicized within the department before it is presented, then the question of whether to do this via notices of regular workshop meetings or via a special seminar can be discussed as a procedural matter.) [9]

The special seminar idea is tied in with the idea of more visitors, for one of the results we hope for is that the visitors will see our best work, and will spread the word about what kinds of things are being done here, when they leave and go elsewhere. [10]

The reprint series and the distribution of the dittoed manuscripts will, we hope, have a similar effect. Further, but dittoed manuscripts will enable some members of the profession at large to become familiar with our results many months before they can be brought out in published form. [11]

Other simpler measures that might improve the flow of information are the following: Putting out a special department circular or flyer describing the department, the workshops, the interchange of research among faculty and advanced students, and the large amount of faculty attention paid to students; returning to the practice of giving brief descriptions of courses in the catalog (and in the above-mentioned circular), instead of merely course titles as our department has been doing recently; and publishing an annual report for the Economics Research Center. [12]  The matter of job recommendations for our students, which is related to the topic of providing information, was touched on under topic (1) above.

 

(4) The allocation of resources and economics research.

The area of economics that is the most fully developed, the most systematic, the most firmly established, and probably the most reliable for understanding and controlling economic events is the more or less traditional theory of prices, distribution, and the allocation of resources, based on the tools of supply, demand, and marginal analysis. Because it’s postulates (including utility maximization, profit maximization, and a fairly widespread knowledge of market alternatives) appear to be rather unrealistic, this theory has the reputation among many people of being dry, abstract, and of little or no practical value. In the opinion of the committee and of many economists in our department and elsewhere, this theory is a powerful one and can lead to highly useful results when applied to real-world problems. Indeed, one of the most productive kinds of activity for economists appears to be to apply this theory to situations where public and private policies are inappropriate to the goals people have in mind. [13]

In our opinion, the main strength of our department lies in just this kind of activity. We have a group of people who are very devoted to and very good at discovering important, unsolved economic problems that can be solved with the aid of this kind of theory, and solving them. [14]

Our agricultural economists’ approach to the farm problem is one example. Their work on optimum storage rules and on the development of natural resources or others. Our department’s work on economic growth in a sense is another, since when we find that the growth in national product is not fully accounted for by inputs of labor and capital is usually measured, we begin to look for some missing input, either in the form of something that shifts the production function, or in the form of some quality improvements that we have missed in the labor and/or capital: knowledge in either case. This is related to work by Friedman, Becker, in the labor workshop on the value of education as an investment, and to Knight’s concept of human beings as a form of capital. Harberger’s work on depletion allowances, and on the welfare costs of the U.S. tax system, are other examples. Friedman’s and Cagan’s work on the demand and supply of money are examples too, in the sense that attention is focused on the behavior of economic units seeking to maximize their utility or profit in their holding of money and their borrowing and lending operations. Friedman’s and Reid’s consumption work is similar in that into rests on the same view of individual behavior. The whole Chile project is an example par excellence. Friedman’s suggestions for allowing the price system more scope in the fields of education, military recruiting, and the like, for which Friedman and indirectly, the department are so well known, are still others, as is Becker’s free banking scheme, though there is probably more disagreement among economists generally about questions like these that about the other work mentioned above.

While it is clear to us that applications of the familiar theory of allocation of resources very productive, it seems equally clear that the real frontiers of economics lies elsewhere. Some areas that have claimed attention so far are economic history, political science, sociology and social psychology and cultural anthropology, psychology (including learning theory), information theory, statistical decision theory, linear programming, the theory of games. It seems at least as likely that major advances in economics will come by one of these routes or some as-yet-unidentified route as they will come from applications of the familiar resource-allocation theory.

The foregoing statement is so broad that it is almost certain to be true, and almost useless as a guide to research workers interested in major advances. The committee polled itself as to where it thinks pay dirt lies, and where it does not lie, with results something like the following: Among the areas particularly likely to be fruitful are the borderland with learning theory and psychology concerning choice and decision-making  [15], the borderland with statistics concerning decision theory and game theory [16], the borderland with anthropology concerning culture and values [17], the borderland with political science concerning political institutions [18]. Also promising, we feel, are mathematical approaches generally, including mathematical approaches to some of the above mentioned borderlands. [19] None of us wanted to rule out linear programming, though none of us was enthusiastic about input-output.

In summary of this topic, we have two statements: First, the familiar resource allocation theory is a powerful tool and there remains a rich field for its application. Second, it seems to us that if some resources are invested in related but different areas such as those mentioned in the preceding paragraph, there is now a worthwhile chance of that substantial pay-off in the form of new knowledge relevant to economics.

 

(5) Kinds of economists the department ought to try to hire.

Over the past few years several members of the department (and a good many outsiders!) have expressed the view that our department is too homogeneous in several ways. [20] Most of us rely heavily on resource allocation theory, as suggested in the preceding section of this report, and do not emphasize peripheral and possibly frontier areas such as decision theory, learning theory, information theory, psychology, anthropology, and the like. [21] Most of us were trained at Chicago at some stage, are essentially anti-socialist, [22] have essentially similar views about monetary and fiscal policy, have similar views about how far public policy should rely on the price mechanism and how far it should interfere with it, and are primarily theoretically and analytically oriented as opposed to institutionally oriented.

In recent department meetings, our discussion of this matter has often gone something like this: First, we more or less agree that we ought to diversify by seeking a socialist, or an institutionalist, or something of the sort. [23]  Then we considered names of economists who might qualify, and one by one we reject them on the ground that they are not really good economists. The discussion ends when someone says, “There’s really nobody good in that category.”

Granted that we want to maintain a high level of quality in the department, there are at least two difficulties involved in any attempt to diversify. One is that in hiring people we like to feel that we know them pretty well, so as to make informed decisions. And the younger people whom we know the best, by and large, are our own former students and fellow-students. This creates and perpetuates a bias in favor of people trained at Chicago. [24] The bias is not so strong, of course, in the cases of people who have published and made reputations, but even here it appears to exist (look at the people who were brought here as associate professor from elsewhere, and ask how many have had training at Chicago).

A second difficulty is simply that it is hard to separate judgment about the quality of an economist from judgment about his position on questions of research strategy and of economic policy. We agree in principle that high quality is very important, and also that it is possible for powerful and prolific minds to disagree in good faith concerning research strategy and public policy. Still there is a temptation to feel that one’s own views sincerely arrived at are best, and that somehow an economist who disagrees strongly with them cannot really be a very good economist. [25]

It seems to the committee that the real issue is not diversification per se. We see the issue somewhat as follows: As we said in the foregoing section of the report, we believe that the real frontiers of economics lie in directions that are somewhat unorthodox by the lights of the department. [26] We also believe that there are high-quality economists who are unorthodox in the same sense. If these two premises are correct, then our interest as a department in pushing forward the frontiers of economics must prompt us to make a serious attempt to add a few such people to our staff. It is only in this sense the diversification seems to be a worthwhile aim.  [27]

The question of what sort of people the department ought to try to hire includes not only the problem of finding economists of high quality who appeared to have productive unorthodox approaches. [28] It also includes the problem of rounding out the subject-matter coverage of the department.

The committee pulled itself again, this time as to the subject matter areas that the department ought to pay special attention to, in seeking new faculty. The results were as follows.

For replacement of staff lost in recent years, the two high-ranking fields were mathematical economics-econometrics, and industrial and market organization in social control of business. [29]  (The second of these seems less urgent for us, in the light of the business school’s intention to invest in it; see topic 2 above.) Ranking almost as high was the history of economic thought. [30]

For expansion, we thought of business fluctuations, the economics of the firm, and American economic history (the latter mainly so as to free Earl Hamilton to give work in his real specialty, European economic history, without sacrificing our offering in the American field).

The last two sections of the report may be summarized thus (and here is the second major suggestion referred to earlier). It is the feeling of the committee (1) that we should place a high value on quality, and (2) that in view of our belief that the present composition of the department is weak in areas where the frontiers of economics are to be found, we should make a serious attempt to find high quality people whose interests and competence give promise of advancing the frontier, as suggested in the end of the preceding section of the report. We also suggest that the department pay special attention to the fields mentioned in the foregoing paragraph. In particular, we suggest that the department undertake to appoint a person in the mathematical economics-econometrics area beginning in the fall of 1958. [31]

There is no reason why one or more of these things should not be combined in the same person. And, of course, there is no reason why we should pass up opportunities to hire good economists who are essentially orthodox by our lights, if our resources will permit us to do that as well as meet our author needs.

 

Handwritten Markings and Remarks

[1] Vertical line in left margin marks the last two sentences of paragraph.

[2] Question mark in left margin for this sentence.

[3] “a good point” in left margin for second sentence of paragraph.  “need to ask[?] terms of the specific job + not general letters” in the right margin

[4] “good” in left margin. Vertical line in left-hand margin marks the entire paragraph.

[5] “OK” in left margin. Vertical line in left-hand margin marks the entire paragraph.

[6] “good” written in left margin next to this sentence.

[7] Vertical line in left margin marks the last sentence of the paragraph.

[8] “get list from these committees” in left margin for this sentence.

[9] “OK” in left margin for the last sentence of this paragraph.

[10] “OK” in left margin next to this paragraph.

[11] “OK” in left margin for the last sentence of this paragraph.

[12] underlined “merely course titles as our department has” and “publishing an annual report for the Economics”

[13] Four vertical lines in the left margin mark the last sentence of this paragraph.

[14] Vertical line in the left margin marks the entire paragraph.

[15]  Underlined: “borderland with learning theory and psychology concerning choice and decision-making”,  “(1)” in left margin.

[16] Underlined: “statistics concerning decision theory and game theory”,  “(2)” in left margin.

[17] Underlined: “anthropology concerning culture and values”,  “(3)” in left margin.

[18] Underlined: “political science concerning political institutions”,  “(4)” in left margin.

[19] “(5)” with a vertical line in the left margin marking “mathematical approaches generally, including mathematical approaches to some of the above mentioned borderlands.”

[20] “is too homogeneous in several ways” is underlined.

[21]  “decision theory, learning theory, information theory, psychology, anthropology” is underlined.

[22] “anti-socialist” is circled

[23] “socialist” and “institutionalist” are each circled.

[24] Vertical line in left margin marking the second, third, and fourth sentences of this paragraph.

[25] Vertical line in left margin marking this entire paragraph.

[26] “economics lie in directions that are somewhat unorthodox” is underlined.

[27]  Vertical line in left margin marking the last two sentences of this paragraph.

[28] “productive unorthodox approaches” is circled

[29] “mathematical economics-econometrics” is circled  “also Stigler” written in left hand margin with reference to “industrial and market organization”

[30] “history of economic thought” is underlined, connected with short line to bottom margin note “Stigler”.

[31] Curly vertical line in the left margin marks the entire paragraph.

 

Source: University of Chicago Archives. Department of Economics Records, Box 42, Folder 8.
Mimeograph copy without marginal notes also found in Harvard University Archives. Papers of Zvi Griliches, Box 129, Folder “Correspondence, 1954-1959”.

Image Source: Professor Carl F. Christ in Johns Hopkins University yearbook. Hullabaloo 1962.

 

Categories
Chicago Economists Johns Hopkins

Johns Hopkins. Memories of Chicago Economics Ph.D. Alumnus and JHU professor Carl Christ, 2017

 

Sometime in the second half of the 1980’s, when my stock as an expert on the economy of the German Democratic Republic was reasonably high and the future fall of the Berlin Wall was still sufficiently somewhere over the rainbow, the President of the Johns Hopkins University (Stephen Mueller) apparently hoped enough to attract me to the young American Institute for Contemporary German Studies of Johns Hopkins in some capacity to have the economics department of the university invite me to present a seminar and talk with colleagues there. Knowing now just how excited departments can be about suggestions coming from the university administration regarding potential appointments, I should have gone into this campus visit with low expectations. 

As it turned out my host for the visit was the senior professor Carl Christ who was the proverbial gentleman and a scholar. He was an engaging and sympathetic mensch with broad interests. From that time I have read with delight his accounts of the Chicago years of the Cowles Commission. He struck me as a scholar you could trust.  I was introduced to his colleague Peter Newman who, if memory serves me correctly,  joined us for lunch. Come to think of it, for my latent interest in the history of economics, I could have hardly had a much better day.

However the story of my day with the Johns Hopkins department of economics would be incomplete without admitting that the seminar did not go well…for me. It was the first time in my (hitherto sheltered) academic life that I was mawled by a pit-bull seminarian over a point that was quite important for his c.v. but of third-order importance for the results of my paper. In any event, there was no further contact one way or another with the Johns Hopkins economics department after that.

My positive impressions of Carl Christ survived and I am delighted to share what I have found out about the life and career of the this fine specimen of  a 1950 University of Chicago economics Ph.D. Note:  “Although his economic training was in the ‘Chicago School,’ he never believed that economic efficiency was a higher goal than social justice,” wrote a daughter, Alice Christ of Lexington, Ky.”

The previous post provides his reading lists for a sequence of econometrics courses he taught at the University of Chicago in 1957.

___________________

Obituary
May 3, 2017

Longtime JHU Economist Carl Christ dies at 93

Carl Christ, Professor Emeritus in the Department of Economics at Johns Hopkins University, passed away on April 21, 2017. Professor Christ was born on September 19, 1923 in Chicago and graduated from the University of Chicago Lab School. He earned his BS in Physics from the University in Chicago in 1943 and his Ph.D. in Economics from the same institution in 1950. He worked as a Junior Physicist on the Manhattan Project in Chicago from 1943 to 1945 and was an Instructor in Physics at Princeton University from 1945 to 1946, after which he enrolled in the graduate program in the Department of Economics at the University of Chicago. He was a Research Associate at the Cowles Commission at Chicago from 1949-1950. He moved to the Department of Economics at Johns Hopkins in 1950, where he served on the faculty until 1955, when he moved back to the Department of Economics at the University of Chicago, where he served as Associate Professor from 1955 to 1961. In 1961, he returned to Johns Hopkins as Professor, where he remained until he retired in 2005 and assumed Emeritus status.

Carl Christ had a distinguished record of scholarship across multiple topics. His interests ranged from econometric methods, especially the testing and evaluation of econometric models, to monetary and fiscal policy and to the history of econometrics. His work on macroeconometric models was rooted in the Cowles Commission tradition of structural econometric models based solidly on economic theory and careful attention to identification, endogeneity, and consistent and efficient estimation. He wrote a seminal paper on the forecast error variances from those types of models and on their sensitivity to model specification. He authored a widely used introductory econometrics textbook in 1966, Econometric Models and Methods, which popularized the structural econometric approach. The textbook was translated into several languages. In the area of monetary and fiscal policy, his major contribution was a deep incorporation of the federal budget constraint in all its dimensions–fiscal, monetary, reserves, debt, and so on–into macroeconometric models, which had inadequately incorporated those features prior to his work. He showed that policy multipliers were very different when the budget constraint was properly modeled. His interest in the history of econometric methods was also strong, and he wrote a history of the Cowles Commission during its first 20 years which was published in 1952, an expanded version of which appeared in the Journal of Economic Literature in 1994, and he wrote a history of the founding of the Econometric Society as well as several other pieces on the history of quantitative analysis. He was a student and admirer of Tjalling Koopmans and, with Martin Beckmann and Marc Nerlove, edited the Scientific Papers of Koopmans. A symposium in his honor where papers relating to his research were presented was held at Johns Hopkins in 1995 and was published in the Journal of Econometrics in 1998.

Christ served in numerous professional and department capacities during his career. He served in multiple capacities of the American Economic Association, including serving as Vice President, serving on its Executive Committee, chairing several other committees, and serving on the Editorial Board of the American Economic Review. He served in numerous roles for the National Bureau of Economic Research, including service as a Member, Vice Chair, and Chair of its Board of Directors. He served on the Council of the Econometric Society and in several other capacities for the Society. He was an elected Fellow of the Econometric Society and the American Statistical Association and received many other citations and awards. At Johns Hopkins, he served as Chair of the Economics Department twice, from 1961 to 1966 and from 1969 to 1970. He also served on numerous university committees throughout his career and into his time as Emeritus Professor. The Department of Economics at Johns Hopkins has a named professorship as well as a named graduate student fellowship in his honor.

He is survived by his wife of 66 years, the former Phyllis Tatsch.

 

Source:   Johns Hopkins University Department of Economics Website. “Longtime JHU Economist Carl Christ dies at 93”.

___________________

IN MEMORIAM
Published Apr 25, 2017

Longtime Johns Hopkins economist Carl F. Christ dies at 93
Trailblazing expert in field of econometrics specialized in fiscal policy and government budget restraint, spent more than 40 years at JHU

by Jill Rosen

 

Carl F. Christ, a distinguished economist whose career at Johns Hopkins University stretched more than 40 years, including two stints leading his department, died Friday. He was 93.

Christ was a trail-blazer in the field of econometrics, where statistical analysis puts economic theories to the test. In the late 1960s he wrote one of the first textbooks on the subject, a book that became a standard text used for decades in economics courses worldwide. Much later, in 1998, the Journal of Econometrics honored him with a special issue, a collection of articles by “friends, colleagues, and professional admirers of his life’s work,” that praised his contributions, his influence, and the “beauty” of his analytical work.

Christ, born in Chicago, graduated in 1943 from the University of Chicago, where his father was on the faculty of the business school. He did not initially pursue economics, but physics, teaching it at Princeton and working on the Manhattan Project, a research effort during World War II that led to the creation of nuclear weapons.

But Christ realized he wanted to use his mathematics ability to help the world in a different, more peaceful way. He once told the News-Letter, “During World War II, I lived in a house full of pacifists while I was working on the atom bomb. I then wanted to do something that had to do with human problems.”

“He wanted to do more good in the world,” said his daughter, Lucy Smith. “He wanted to be constructive and he saw economics as the path to do that.”

After returning to school and earning a PhD in economics from the University of Chicago, Christ joined the faculty of Johns Hopkins in 1950, where he stayed for most of the rest of his career, except for a six-year stint at the University of Chicago.

In addition to pioneering the use of computers to test econometric models, Christ’s niche was monetary and fiscal policy, especially government budget restraint. He is the author of four books, editor of one, and has more than 40 articles in journals and books, as well as more than 60 other publications.

“He was one of the greatest macro econometricians of the 1950s and 1960s,” said Johns Hopkins economist Robert Moffitt. “He worked on the first wave of econometrically-based macroeconomic models of the economy developed at the Cowles Foundation at the University of Chicago, and became a leading authority in the economics profession on their estimation.”

Students at Johns Hopkins chose him to win the George E. Owen Teaching Award in 1985, an award for outstanding teaching and devotion to undergraduates.

In 2008, when the university established a named professorship in his honor—the Center for Financial Economics’ Carl Christ Professorship—his colleagues described it as an honor for “the legacy of a man who has been an inspirational teacher and mentor to generations of Johns Hopkins students.”

Johns Hopkins economics professor emeritus Louis Maccini, who Christ hired, said Christ always had time for junior colleagues and students, ready with constructive criticism and good advice.

“When he hired me he was a very distinguished scholar, and I appreciated how I could talk with him and get sensible advice—passed on as if I was his equal,” Maccini said. “I tried to model myself after him in that regard.”

Beverly Wendland, dean of JHU’s Krieger School of Arts and Sciences, also recalled Christ’s dedication to the university.

“A renowned economist who was beloved by both his students and faculty colleagues, Carl was instrumental in making our Department of Economics the standard-bearer that it is today,” she said.” He will be remembered, not only for his pioneering work in econometrics, but for his love and dedication toward Johns Hopkins.”

Christ was passionate about the university community, joining numerous efforts and boards, and even appearing in a few Johns Hopkins theatrical productions. He was a devoted member of “The Oldtimers,” an informal club for retired faculty and staff.

“He held the thing together,” said Matt Crenson, a Johns Hopkins political scientist and an Oldtimer. “He planned meetings, he made reservations, he discussed the menu, and he sent out notices—I hope we’ll be able to survive without him.”

Off-campus, Christ served on the Maryland Governor’s Council of Economic Advisers and helped the Urban League by drafting brochures on financial topics, like how to buy a house with sustainable mortgage payments.

At Roland Park Place, where he lived, Christ joined the investment advisory committee and the hospitality committee. He could also be regularly spotted at the corner of 41st Street, with a “War is not the answer” sign.

In addition to his daughter Lucy, Christ is survived by his wife of 66 years, Phyllis; daughters Alice Christ and Joan Christ; and five grandchildren.

 

Source: Johns Hopkins University, Hub website.

___________________

Obituary
April 26, 2017

Carl F. Christ, noted Johns Hopkins economist
by Frederick N. Rasmussen
The Baltimore Sun

Carl F. Christ, a noted Johns Hopkins University economist whose career spanned more than four decades and who during World War II worked on the Manhattan Project, died Friday of complications from prostate cancer at Roland Park Place.

He was 93.

“Carl Christ was one of the leading figures in the world on macroeconomics and econometrics, and was clearly one of the most distinguished senior faculty members at the time,” said Louis J. Maccini, who retired from Johns Hopkins in 2013, where he had served as chair of the economics department from 1992 to 2007.

“We have been colleagues and friends for almost 50 years, and it was Carl who hired me at Hopkins in 1969,” he said.

“An important ingredient about Carl was that he was a very constructive person, and his comments and opinions were always constructively offered to students and colleagues,” he said. “When I came to Hopkins, he treated me equally as a colleague, and I appreciated that. It was a key element of his personality that he was always helpful and constructive.”

The son of Jay Finley Christ, a professor in the business school of the University of Chicago, and Maud Trego Christ, an educator and suffragette, Carl Finley Christ was born and raised in Chicago and was a graduate of the University of Chicago Laboratories School, a high school. He attended Colorado College for two years.

He was a 1943 Phi Beta Kappa graduate of the University of Chicago, where he earned a degree in physics.

From 1943 to 1945, he worked as a junior physicist for the Manhattan Project, which led to the development of the atomic bomb.

After his wartime work with the Manhattan Project, Dr. Christ decided to use his mathematics acumen to achieve peaceful ends.

“During World War II, I lived in a house of pacifists while I was working on the atom bomb. I wanted to do something that had to do with human problems,” he once told the Johns Hopkins News-Letter.

After serving as an instructor in physics at Princeton University from 1945 to 1946, he returned to the University of Chicago, where he earned a Ph.D. in economics.

“Although his economic training was in the ‘Chicago School,’ he never believed that economic efficiency was a higher goal than social justice,” wrote a daughter, Alice Christ of Lexington, Ky.

He joined the Hopkins faculty in 1950 as an assistant professor and in 1953 was named assistant professor of political economy.

Dr. Christ was a senior Fulbright research scholar at the University of Cambridge from 1954 to 1955.

Dr. Christ left Homewood in 1955 when he became an associate professor of economics at the University of Chicago, where he taught until 1961. He then returned to Hopkins as professor of political economy.

He was department chair from 1961 to 1966, and again from 1969 to 1970, and in 1977 was appointed to the Abram G. Hutzler professorship in political economy.

“Dr. Christ was a trailblazer in the field of econometrics, where statistical analysis puts economic theories to the test. In the late 1960s, he wrote one of the first textbooks on the subject, a book that became a standard text used for decades in economics courses worldwide,” according to a Johns Hopkins news release announcing his death.

The book, “Econometric Models and Methods,” was published in 1966. He was a contributor to the International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, Volume IV, which was published in 1968; “Simultaneous Equations Estimation,” 1994; and “Econometrics, Macroeconomics and Economic Policy” in 1996.

In 1998, the Journal of Econometrics honored Dr. Christ with a special issue that contained articles from “friends, colleagues and professional admirers of his life’s work,” and recognized him for the “beauty” of his work.

Dr. Christ also pioneered the use of computers to test econometric models. His field of specialties included monetary and fiscal policy, especially government budget restraint.

“He is particularly interested in what is known as the government budget restraint, which involves the three ways the government can raise funds when it spends money — taxing, borrowing or printing more money,” reported The Baltimore Sun in a 1981 article.

“Dr. Christ conceded that it is impossible to develop an economic theory that describes human behavior as well as scientific theory can describe the behavior of molecules,” according to the article.

In addition to his four books, he wrote more than 40 articles in journals and books, as well as in more than 60 other publications, including The Sun, regarding economic matters.

Dr. Christ was the recipient in 1985 of the George E. Owen Teaching Award, presented by Hopkins students for outstanding teaching and devotion to undergraduates.

His courses on macro- and microeconomics, government financial policy and the stock market were popular among students at the Homewood campus.

In 2008, Hopkins established a professorship in his honor at the Center for Financial Economics.

Dr. Christ began a phased-in retirement in 1989 and fully retired in 2009.

“According to department secretary Donna Altoff, he continued to show an exceptional level of interest in the students, and loved to talk to them and took interest in their job searches until the end,” wrote another daughter, Lucy Christ Smith of Seattle, in an email.

He and his wife of 66 years, the former Phyllis Tatsch, were former residents of Juniper Road in Guilford and moved to Roland Park Place in 2006. He remained active on many university committees and boards and even performed in several theatrical productions at Johns Hopkins and the Hamilton Street Club.

He was an active member of The Oldtimers, an informal club for retired Hopkins faculty and staff, where he planned meetings, discussed menus and sent out notices to the membership.

Dr. Christ served as a member of the Maryland Governor’s Council of Economic Advisers and helped the Urban League by drafting brochures in financial topics with such articles as how to purchase a house with affordable mortgage payments.

At Roland Park Place, he served as a member of the investment advisory and hospitality committees.

He also regularly participated in a weekly protest staged by residents along 40th Street in front of Roland Park Place, where he could be spotted carrying a sign that read “War is not the answer.”

He and his wife were avid catamaran sailors and windsurfers, and since 1933, he had spent summers on Lake Michigan at Williams Grove and Harbert Woods.

Dr. Christ donated his body to the Maryland Anatomy Board, and plans for a memorial service are incomplete.

In addition to his wife and two daughters, he is survived by another daughter, Joan Christ of Seattle; and five grandchildren.

 

Source: The Baltimore Sun, April 26, 2017.

 

___________________

 In Memoriam—Carl Christ (1923-2017)
Comments from Carl Christ’s students, friends and colleagues

From the Department of Economics, Johns Hopkins University webpage:
http://econ.jhu.edu/in-memoriam-carl-christ-1923-2017/

“Carl was a great teacher and mentor. I was delighted that i managed to catch up with him for lunch on my last visit to the US. He had a most significant impact on me and I am sure on so many others. He was what made Hopkins.”

—John Hewson

 

“I was a student of Carl’s in the 1960s. It was an interesting time. Re econometrics, it was a time when it was becoming a more common tool for economists. Carl had just finished his book and was using it in class. I remember complaining about the high word-to equation ratio relative to competing books (by Johnson and by Goldberger). His story was that his book was especially for grown-up economists who needed to learn econometrics on their own and needed more examples and explanations. So it was a book more than a text book.

Three things I still remember that are still important:

  1. He was an early nag about identification- something that faded for a while in the profession, but has come back with a vengeance.
  2. He used to preach that an econometric paper must not only tell the truth and nothing but the truth, but also the whole truth-more appropriate than ever now, in a world of easy data mining.
  3. I recall him once working on a draft of a survey paper on econometrics, and his secretary (there were secretaries then) misread “econometrics” in the title and typed “economic tricks.” He thought maybe that was a better title.

He was both a great scholar and a true gentleman. It is good that he lived so long.”

—Robert Van Order , George Washington University

 

“He was a kind and generous man and as residual claimant served as my thesis adviser for which I am eternally grateful. He may well have been the third or fourth member of the Department to be so engaged.”

—Stuart I. Greenbaum, Prof. Emeritus , Olin Business School, Washington U. STL

 

“Carl was my teacher in the early seventies. I still remember his course vividly. When he started his econometrics course with chapter (7?) on identification stating that the early chapters were background. He also insisted on giving us back his per-book royalty as we all had bought his book.

More recently, Carl invited me to write a piece on Bela Balassa for the New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics which I accepted with pleasure. Even though he did most of the work, he insisted that my name appear first…..

Carl was a great mentor and the life at Hopkins.

When we organized a service for Bela at the Bank, Carl spoke of Bela with great emotion, breaking up in tears when he told us that Bela took the train back to DC to help his daughter with her homework only to come back to Homewood the next morning.”

—Jaime de Melo

 

“Here is another anecdote: when I took Carl’s class in 1992 his book was out of print and Greene (2nd edition!) was the official textbook. However, he lent us copies of his book. He had photocopies for the male students and the original textbook for our female classmates (the rationale was that the hard-copy was lighter to carry than the photocopies).

Like Jim and Bob, I also remember his emphasis on identification and on the economic interpretation of the results. He was a great scholar, teacher, and a true Gentleman.”

—Ugo Panizza

 

“Dr. Christ was my econometrics teacher and Dissertation Advisor in the mid /late 70s. He was amazing. Pieces I remember fondly are

  • His penchant for using every inch and corner of the board before erasing anything… (and side-bets among students about when he’d actually have to bring out the eraser)
  • Carl and Phyllis attending the periodic grad-Department-wide crab outings to Bo Brooks that I organized — with very messy Bay Seasoning-coated hands around red beer cups
  • His being a real person
  • His dedication to swimming / exercise
  • His desire to have people really understand what he was talking about — and instilling in me a real wish to be useful — something that has been a focus ever since.
  • He was my favorite teacher, and a real role model. It was wonderful to know him, and he’ll be missed.

And I use that story about “economic tricks” all the time before speeches I give (:-)).”

—Lisa A. Skumatz, Ph.D Principal , Skumatz Economic Research Associates (SERA)

 

“Many thanks for sending out this very sad notice of the passing of Professor Christ. I had not heard of his passing even though I live in the DC area. He was my econometrics professor at JHU and, although I showed no talent in econometrics, I enjoyed his class very much. He was so enthusiastic in class, and out of class as well. It was really special to see him at the retirement party for Lou Maccini a few years ago.

Professor Christ was a true scholar, and the personification of a great teacher. A truly classy person who, along with several other Hopkins professors, should have received Nobel prizes. I know he will be missed at Hopkins and by many of his former students like me.

Please convey my sincere regrets to his wife.”

—Eileen Mauskopf

 

“I join all of you in expressing my deep gratitude to Carl and in celebrating his life and work. Carl was my professor and thesis advisor (with Bela). I owe them both greatly.

Let me share an anecdote and a comment.

Anecdote. In the late 1960s early 1970s I was an undergrad student of Econ at the Univ of Buenos Aires in Argentina. There was a bookstore in downtown BsAs specialized in imported books on economics, politics, and similar topics… I liked to go there and just look at the books (as a student, my income was limited). One day I was drawn to a green book on econometrics; I felt I had to buy it even though a) it was expensive; b) my econometrics was poor; and c) my English was even poorer to non-existent. Furthermore, I had not heard of the author and I was not planning on leaving my country to study abroad. Still, I bought the book and I carried it with me to the different countries in Latin America and the Caribbean where I lived and worked when I left my country in 1976.

Fast forward several years, and the mystery of why I bought the book was finally revealed: I went to study at JHU, first at SAIS, and then at the Dep of Economics, where, you guessed it, I was the only one in my class with a personal copy of Carl’s famous book. Carl had a good laugh when I told him the story about my (his) book.

Comment. Other colleagues mentioned Carl’s work on identification. I’d like to highlight a related issue: his paper on Pitfalls in Macroeconomic Model Building along with the paper on government budget constraints were two of the most useful applied macroeconomics papers I have ever read. Once I heard someone say that “macroeconomics is national accounting identities plus opinions.” Everybody is entitled to her/his own opinions (on expectations, behavioral issues, market clearing mechanisms, and so on) but Carl made clear that you are not entitled to your own accounting identities, nor can you ignore them. Many policy disasters in developing countries (and some developed ones) happen because policy makers ignore basic double-accounting identities Carl so rightly emphasized (along with the proper matching of independent equations and the number of endogenous variables in a well-specified macro model).

It was a privilege knowing Carl. My thoughts and prayers go out to him, his family, and friends.”

—Eugenio Díaz-Bonilla

 

“Carl Christ’s greatest legacy was far more than celebrated author of “Econometric Models and Methods” – a 10 year undertaking. And far more than several dozen first rate Journal articles. Even more than a first rate teacher willing to tackle undergrad economics courses. It was his very demanding role as a Thesis Advisor par excellence that I consider his greatest Legacy. Demanding his students work to highest standards of scholarship. No matter how long it took. Always willing to read draft after draft with carefully made comments. Carl Christ was a demanding task master. But he was a superb Thesis Advisor and readily accessible. Under his indefatigable energies those of us privileged to be his Thesis students learned the standards of scholarship. It was the greatest of privileges to be his student. His reputation as a sterling Thesis Advisor went well beyond the Hopkins community.”

—Peter I Berman , (1963-67)

 

“I had the honor and privilege to have been Professor Christ’s grad student and TA for the Macroeconomics and Senior Honors Essay. Aside from his outstanding scholarship, I was lucky enough to observe a fantastic and dedicated teacher at work and a wonderful person and humanitarian to boot. Many of us tried and in vain to emulate this role model. When we heard the sad news, some of us were reminiscing about our experiences with Professor Christ.

Not sure how many know this, but beyond the academics, Professor Christ was also an athlete. I recall a sweet and funny anecdote when Kali Rath, Rafael Tenorio and I were teaching at University of Notre Dame in Indiana in the 90’s, and Gabriella Bucci at Depaul University. We received a call from Carl and Phyllis inviting us with our spouses to his summer house at the lake in New Buffalo, Michigan. We arrived at their home and proceeded to walk to the lake, where he wanted to teach us wind surfing. While walking to lake, we were all chatting with Carl and Phyllis when Kali noticed that Carl was casually holding two buckets containing equipment and other stuff for the sailboat etc.. so he insisted that he should help carry at least one. Carl asked “are you sure?” Kali assured him, and so Carl let go of one of the buckets and kept walking to the lake with the rest of us in tow. Suddenly, I realized that Kali was lingering way behind. I went back to ask him the matter and Kali said “Why don’t you try to lift the bucket” I tried and barely managed lift it before dropping it!! It took two of us to lift it and carry it to the lake panting and all, while marveling at how Carl managed to carry two of them and still lead the troops all the way to the lake while carrying on casual conversation with all of us. We had a wonderful day there.

As many others alumni already mentioned, he epitomized what Hopkins is.

He is and will be sorely missed. Deepest sympathies to Phyllis and family and the larger Hopkins one.”

—Ralph Chami , Assistant Director Institute for Capacity Development International Monetary Fund

 

“Dear friends and colleagues,

Carl Christ was a major reason I came to Hopkins. My undergraduate adviser knew his work and my budding interest in econometrics, and recommended that I apply to Hopkins. Little did I know that behind the book-writer was such a remarkable teacher, scholar, and person.

As a teacher, he was instrumental in helping me really understand identification, a concept I had only loosely grasped as an undergrad. His course built a foundation in econometrics that has served a whole generation of Hopkins students well to this day. More broadly than that, his approach to every question or idea in seminars or conversations was couched in terms that students could appreciate.

The depth of his involvement in his field of research was clear. Among other things, he would talk about the inner workings of the various macroeconometric models of the day. With his characteristic smile and a twinkle in his eye, he would relate that the publicized estimates from those models could sometimes be the technical estimate from the model –with a little final “from the gut” adjustment by the lead economist. Not trying to indict anyone, he was rather intending to both give us some insight to the complicated interaction of modeling limitations, the intuition of experienced economists, and policy influence, as well as get us thinking about what really constituted good research practices.

On the personal side, one of my early memories of the graciousness of Carl and Phyllis was the party they held for first-years in the fall of 1976, on election night for Ford vs Carter. Besides it being a wonderful social mixer, they held a little contest for who could pick the winner and his percentage of the popular vote. As I recall, the winner was the wife of one of our non-US classmates – politics has always been a universal language …

It was terrific to see Carl and Phyllis at Lou’s retirement event. While we hadn’t seen each other in a very long time, his memory was keen as always. He quickly recalled not only my first post-Hopkins job but also some of our DOPE softball days! Those are fond final memories.

My heartfelt condolences go to Phyllis and all of their family and friends.

Best regards,

—Richard J. Willke, Ph.D. , Chief Science Officer International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research

 

“And, yet several more anecdotes.

I remember Carl – we called him Dr. Christ, back then. I was a grad student in the latter part of the 1970s; macroeconomics and international finance were my declared fields.

I remember Carl most vividly for his skillful and intuitive application of mathematical modeling to the greater understanding of macroeconomic theory and policy.

One of my fondest memories of him, was observing how he sat during our general seminars. I remember chuckling to myself, as I watched him, sitting in his chair, his legs folded up underneath him, in the shape of a pretzel. I always marveled at his ability to do that. ?Like the other professors in the department, he was dedicated to his students, the Department, the University, and his profession.

Certainly, one of the great ones!

He will be missed!

My condolences to his wife and family.”

—Milt Pappas, Ph.D.

 

“Carl Christ was an inspiration to me. He was a brilliant economist and very approachable. As a student, I remember that any of the students would walk past his office and he would call out a welcoming greeting to us. My first teaching experience was as a TA for him and I learned a lot from him. I am still a Professor!

Carl, rest in peace and send your blessings to us here on earth.”

—Marianne McGarry Wolf, Ph.D. , Wine and Viticulture Department, California Polytechnic State University

 

” I have just learnt about the sad demise of my most respected Professor Carl Christ. He is the one who offered me the admission with Fellowship to the Graduate Program in Economics at JHU in 1966, was my Ph.D. dissertation major guide along with late Prof Niehans); wrote a rather strong recommendation to my first post Ph.D. employer, IIM Ahmedabad (India), where I served 1970 through until my retirement in 2010; gave a strong recommendation to the Illinois State University, where I served as a full time visiting professor for five semesters at different times during 1982-1990; among several other critical helps. More than these, he was the one who taught me how to conduct research, how to develop econometric models, and how to even draft the thesis in good and correct English language (he corrected the language of the entire first chapter of my thesis and asked me to correct the rest in the same ways). As he was away in England as a Visiting Professor during 1966-67, I missed having had any full course under him, though a lot of my learning in Macroeconomics and Econometrics is due to him. He encouraged me whenever I was upset during my thesis work, helped me even when I had personal difficulties, and arranged my thesis defense shortly after the Commencement as I was keen to return back to India to attend my sister’s wedding. On personal level, he invited me with his family to his house and blessed my wife and both daughters! Such a teacher and guide, rare to find, had been a great boon to me and my accomplishments. Prof Christ, Prof Niehans and Prof Edwin Mills, all at JHU, were great Professors to me! All of them were/are great economists and I have always felt great pride through them.

It has been my great fortune and privilege to be a student of Prof Carl Christ. I offer my humble prayers to the Almighty GOD to grant peace to the departed soul, and courage and strength to the bereaved family to bear this loss. Prof Christ will always remain in my heart and mind through my life. ”

—Girdharilal Saduram Gupta

 

“Carl Christ was an inspiring teacher. I was fortunate to be his research assistant (or one of them) on his econometrics text and in fact am cited in the acknowledgements in the book. It was a great honor to work with him.”

“Good memories of a fine man, Bob (Robert Van Order). I was on campus 1963-65 when he was doing his book (then went off to South Korea and finished the dissertation later on the work there). I do remember to this day his emphasis on identification and am glad you mentioned it.”

—Roger Norton, ’71 , Texas A&M University

 

“The tributes to Carl Christ are really nice to read. I entered Professor Christ’s econometrics class when I arrived at Hopkins, in 1971. The first thing he did was to give everyone a 5 dollar bill, which he told us was the royalty on his book that we had to buy for the class. I was impressed, as were others – indeed, I can still see that scene in my mind even now. Later on, I marked his econometrics assignments, and he became my thesis supervisor. He was a famous scholar of uncompromising integrity with his students and in his own work. By example, he inspires still.

My deepest condolences to Mrs. Christ and her family.”

—Stanley L. Winer , Canada Research Chair Professor in Public Policy, School of Public Policy and Department of Economics, Carleton University, Canada

 

“I was a student at Hopkins 1973-77. Carl taught me econometrics-and impressed upon me the importance of identification and, as a result, structural estimation. I passed his semester of economic tricks, but failed the second semester (with Charley Mallor, I believe). They gave me an oral exam—he and Charley. Carl’s synopsis—“It’s like pulling teeth, but you pass. Just don’t do a thesis in econometrics.” Good advice.

His ability to sit like a pretzel, his good cheer on every day I ever was in his presence, his willingness to slide hard into the catcher at the annual softball game, his obsessively-compulsively organized office (journals were organized like dentin woodwork on a house, with each year’s worth of a journal lined up perfectly, but every other year’s collection pulled forward precisely one inch)—all were memorable. But grad school is an apprenticeship, and Carl was unstinting in his ability–by example and by the gifts of his time—to develop us into fellow professionals.

If there is an afterlife, I’ll bet for Carl it involves him sailing Lake Michigan in the mornings and writing research in the afternoons—as was his wont during the summers when I knew him.”

—Robert A Driskill , Vanderbilt University

 

“Like all of us I have a great memory of Prof Christ. I was at JHU during 1968 to 1972. He was not my thesis advisor, but I had always learned from him in and out of his courses. He was always a great teacher. And one summer I had the privilege of living in his beautiful home, being his house keeper when he was on vacation. When I was returning to Thailand to begin my teaching career at Thammasat University he gave me one advice which I always follow. He said ‘when writing a recommendation letter, always tell the truth’.

I am forever grateful for what he had done for me.”

—Narongchai Akrasanee , Bangkok, Thailand

 

“Thank you everybody for bringing back wonderful memories about Dr Christ who contributed so much in making my Hopkins years (1973-77) so enjoyable.

Like Jim and Ugo put so eloquently, Dr Christ was indeed a scholar, a teacher, a true gentleman and a mentor. He was also a father figure for foreign students like me.

I was very moved to read in his obituary that he “regularly participated in a weekly protest staged by residents along 40th Street in front of Roland Park Place, where he could be spotted carrying a sign that read “War is not the answer.””

We were lucky to have known him and to benefit from his teachings of economic tricks and more importantly from his exemplary behaviour as a teacher and mentor that will always be wit us.

My sincere condolences to his wife and family.”

—Andre Sapir

 

“Fun to read so many tributes to Carl. Certainly, a “man for all seasons”, one who was always civil and professionally courteous in all situations which I can remember in my JHU days. After almost 40 plus years in academic life, I certainly appreciate the witness of Carl’s manner and style of interacting with colleagues and students. A collegiality which we cannot always take for granted, and which we cannot ever underestimate as a value when we recruit faculty in our institutions.

On his teaching and academic advising, looking back, of course, we of my vintage remember well the extensive treatment of identification and of properly-specified government budget constraints in any model, for meaningful policy discussion.

We of the Johns Hopkins diaspora were very fortunately to have him as one of our professors.”

—Paul McNelis

 

“Professor Carl F. Christ was my and Poonsa-nga econometrics professor and Dissertation Adviser in different period of time in the 70’s. He was an amazing scholar, teacher, a true gentleman, a great mentor and the life at Hopkins.

He was liked our father during our wedding and beyond. It was a big opportunity provided by him for Poonsanga to be a postdoctoral fellow at MIT in 1976 and for me to do my dissertation immediately after being a Ph.D. candidate.

I have stayed with him and Mrs. Phyllis three times, first with Poonsanga in Baltimore home in 1982, second I was alone in his summer home with Lucy and her family and the third with my two sisters in their Baltimore home in 2006.

Apart from losing our teacher and dissertation adviser, we have lost our beloved father. He will be in our hearts for ever. Our sincere condolences to Mom Phyllis and their 3 daughters and grandchildren.”

—Poonsa-nga and Borwornsri Somboonpanya Ph.Ds , International Education Travel Co., Ltd. (IET), Bangkok, THAILAND

 

“I have very fond memories of my days as a graduate student at JHU in the 60s.

Carl was a great teacher, a model as a scholar, and a wonderful and unforgettable person.”

—Ernst Baltensperger

 

“Carl lived a long, active and productive life.

I was only on the faculty at Hopkins for a year as a young assistant professor, but Carl was remarkably kind and always prepared to discuss without any condescension and when I came back for a brief visit in 2006 it was as if I had never been away. A true gentleman and a scholar.”

—Alan Kirman , Directeur d’études à l’EHESS, Membre de l’IUF, Professeur émerite à Aix-Marseille Université, Paris

 

“It is great to read the tributes to Carl Christ. I was also a student of his in the early 70’s as well as his TA. He cared about all his students; both the graduate and undergraduate students, and spent a great deal of time with them. As a first-year graduate student, I was assigned to be a discussant on a paper that he presented. When the paper was published, I was listed in the acknowledgements, which was a thrill for a young graduate student – the first time my name was in a journal.

He has been a role model for me as an academic. When I do empirical work, I always think of him and his admonishment that no matter how sophisticated the methods, the work stands on the economics behind it.”

—Susan Vroman , Department of Economics, Georgetown University

 

“I have very fond memories of Carl that go as far back as 1952 when I started my graduate studies at JHU. I took econometrics from him, way before his book came out. The following year Richard Stone was visiting Hopkins and he and Carl organized an evening seminar to read Morgenstern and von Neumann on the theory of games – way before game theory became popular.

The last time I saw Carl and Phyllis was at a conference in 2014. Attached is a photo from that conference of Carl with Takeshi Amemiya, Al Harberger and me.”

—Marc Nerlove , Distinguished University Professor, Emeritus, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Maryland College Park

 

“I took econometrics from Carl in the mid 1970s. I had no idea about his background in physics until I read his obituary. I think this background explains why Carl always thought that there should be no conflict between economic theory and econometrics; they are complementary. This view of economic research was what he imparted to generations of his students. It was his imprint on those of us lucky enough to takes his courses.

He truly was a gentleman and a scholar and as decent a man as I have known. My condolences to his family on their loss.”

—Robert J. Rossana , Dept. of Economics, Wayne State University

 

“Dr. Christ was my graduate econometrics professor and I was his TA for undergraduate macroeconomics in spring ‘92.

As I recall, it was a large class and I assisted Dr. Christ in exam grading and keeping track of records which he all scribed by hand. He was of the generation prior to the internet age, and I remember him being extremely afraid of computer viruses affecting his non-internet ready PC with a floppy disk drive.

My efforts to cajole him into using Excel to add efficacy was futile and I was vetoed with his totally convinced _expression_ that this may infect his computer. I thought it was funny that an intellectual giant of physics and math/stat-intensive econometrics would be so concerned with a computer virus which had almost no chance of penetrating his computer.

He was a great communicator who resonated with undergraduate students. He will be greatly missed.”

—Jongsung Kim , Professor of Economics, Bryant University

 

“I entered the program too late to take Carl’s courses. When I was on the job market, Carl was the one who taught me how to communicate and negotiate with the other side. Maybe that was the time he taught me the real “economic tricks.” When he was very happy to know that I got an offer from U Texas, Carl said, “You see, you are already wearing jeans.” Then he told me the joke that, since Texans are so proud of being the largest state in the contiguous US, Alaskans would split the state in half so that Texas would become the third largest state in the US. I still remember his smile, which I saw several times again since I moved back to Hopkins. Maybe that is the thing that lured me back: an celebrated academic with a warm heart.”

—Yingyao Hu , Professor of Economics, Johns Hopkins University

 

“I was very saddened to hear of the passing away of Professor Christ. I was his student in the early seventies when I was a graduate student at Hopkins. He was a great teacher and a wonderful person. I too remember him returning the royalty money to the students who had purchased the Econometrics textbook. His stress on the Identification problem has stayed with all of us it seems.

Professor Christ was an inspiring teacher, and could set tough exams. He would set an open book final exam and students had twenty four hours to complete it. Most of us had to stay up all night trying to figure out the answers! He was an enthusiastic participant in all department activities, whether dissertation seminars or even Halloween parties!

Professor Christ was also my dissertation adviser,together with Professor Hugh Rose. He was generous with his time, and our discussions were always stimulating and thought provoking. My husband and I stayed with him and his wife when I visited Hopkins for my graduation, and we remember their warm hospitality. Please convey my sincere condolences to his wife, and other family members.”

—Bimal Kaicker Beri

 

“I studied in Hopkins 1966-69, took Carl’s modules on macroeconomics and econometrics, worked as his

A in undergraduate macroeconomics and benefited from generous hospitality at his fine house .

I have nothing but happy memories of my interactions with him during those years. He was brilliant without showmanship, considerate in all matters, diligent and conscientious as a lecturer. He gave us graduate students a deep and long-lasting insight into macroeconomic foundations. I count myself lucky to have had him as teacher and mentor.

There was something quintessentially American about him. He embodied the best of American virtues: openness, honesty, seriousness of purpose combined with optimism and a prevailing cheerfulness. Unlike many other US academic economists he seemed to have a strong sense of place, as witness his enduring devotion to Hopkins.

He was rightly admired as a man of the highest integrity. One of many instances of this stays in my memory. The recommended text for his econometrics module was (naturally and properly) his own textbook Econometric Models and Methods that had recently been published. It was an expensive tome and he was conscious of the tight budget constraint many of us graduates were subject to in those days. He believed it was wrong for him to benefit personally from his choice of textbook. Accordingly everyone in the class who had bought his book was given an envelope addressed in his own hand containing the amount of the royalty he would receive from each sale, calibrated to the last cent.

Thank you, Carl! I’ll raise a glass to you for a good life well-lived.

May he rest in peace.”

—Dermot McAleese , Emeritus Whately Professor of Political Economy, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland

 

“I am deeply saddened to hear the news that Mr. Carl Christ has passed away on April 21, 2017. I join my fellow econ-alumni in offering my condolences to the family and friends of Carl was my teacher and thesis supervisor (with Bela Balaasa and Lawrence Klein (from U Penn) at the Department of Political Economy during 1985-1987. He was not only a kind teacher but also a great human being as he was always willing to help student.

What I liked most about Carl was that he would comment on the papers of the faculty and graduate students during Graduate Student Seminars in a polite yet constructive manner. I never found him being harsh while offering comments. I had the opportunity to interact with Carl on a regular basis, when I was writing my Ph.D. dissertation. His comments were always constructive and improved the quality of my work.

Let me share with my fellow econ-alumni some interesting facts about Carl and my Ph.D. defense. I defended my thesis on August 5, 1987. By then Carl had already left for Beijing to set up JHU Campus in China. My other supervisor, Bela Balassa had to go through 13 hours throat surgery in Washington, D.C on August 4, 1987—a day prior to my defense. He too, was therefore not available during my defense. Larry Klein was in some Latin American Country and had promised to be present at my defense on August 5. By 10:50 am (the defense time was 11:00 am), Klein did not show up at the JHU which made me really nervous, thinking that none of my supervisors would be there during my defense. However, by 10:55am, Larry Klein entered the building of Economic department. I breathed a sigh of relief when I saw Larry Klein with his travel bag entering the department. Bruce Hamilton and Louis Maccini represented Carl and Balassa in my defense.

Before Carl left for Beijing, I had a long meeting with him in his office where we went through the final draft of the thesis. He was very much satisfied with my work which gave me enough confidence and encouragement to defend my thesis, of course, Larry Klein was a great source of strength during the defense. I defended my thesis on August 5, 1987 with minor comments; submitted the revised version within 10 days and left US on August 25, 1987. My thesis defense was a memorable event for me as I defended my thesis in the absence of two of my supervisors (Carl and Bela).

It was indeed a privilege and honor for not only knowing Carl but also being his student. With Carl’s demise, I lost all of my thesis supervisors. The world has lost three great human beings that the God had bestowed on us. May God rest Carl’s, Bela’s and Klein’s souls in peace and give strength to their families and friends to bear this loss.”

—Professor Ashfaque Hasan Khan , Principal & Dean, School of Social Sciences & Humanities (S3H), National University of Sciences & Technology (NUST), Islamabad

 

“I entered Hopkins in 1961, the same year as the second coming of Carl to JHU. When I applied to JHU, I was attracted by the names like Machlup, Domar, and Musgrave, but both Machlup and Domar were gone by the time I entered. Musgrave was still there for two more years, and I learned a great deal by reading his textbook Public Finance. A greatest boost for me, however, was the fact that Carl came back in the same year. He invited me to his office and asked me if I liked mathematics. I proudly answered yes. Then he asked me if I knew differential equations. My heart sagged as I didn’t know them. During the first two years at Hopkins I worked as research assistant to Dr. Edwin Mills in his project on water resources. It was good education for me as Dr. Mills was a man of a very sharp mind. But I was bogged down by the need to study geology of water, which I found extremely boring. Just then Carl came along and suggested I should work on econometrics, which I did. Initially I had planned to finish my dissertation in two years, but as my father became rather ill, I wanted to finish the thesis in one year and go back to Japan with a doctor’s degree and show it to my father. He died two weeks after I came home. I couldn’t have finished the thesis in one year without Carl’s cooperation way beyond his duty. The other members of the committee were Edwin Mills and Geoff Watson, to whom I am also grateful.”

—Takeshi Amemiya , Stanford University

 

“I took Dr. Christ’s course in Intermediate Macroeconomic Theory in spring 1963, and his econometrics course in 1965-66. Dr. Christ was a brilliant and challenging teacher. He always gave each student, who purchased his econometrics book for class, a refund equal to the amount of the book royalty. I have never had another professor do that. During my time in graduate school, Dr. Christ was the Department Chair. In my opinion, he did an excellent job.”

—Alan Sorkin , Ph.D.,1966

 

“As a grad student, I took Professor Christ’s Econometrics course in 1971-72 and also TA’d for him in the undergraduate macro principles course. For someone seeking a career at a teaching institution, as I did, there couldn’t have been a better role model than Professor Christ. He took great pains to make sure the TA’s knew what he would be lecturing on before each class, prepared us for what would be the most difficult material for the students, allowed us (really, expected us) to come up with our own quiz and exam questions, met with us regularly, etc. One day each week he would have lunch in the undergraduates’ cafeteria, just so his students would have a chance to interact with him outside the classroom setting. What a great example he set of a true teacher-scholar! I feel very fortunate to have been mentored by him.”

—Geoffrey Gilbert , Professor Emeritus of Economics, Hobart and William Smith Colleges

 

I once came across Dr. Carl Christ in the hallway when I was still a graduate student. We briefly talked and he was very approachable to me. He gave me a lot of encouragement on economics study and also a few books that I still keep them now. He was a gracious scholar and gentleman.

—Yizhen Zhao , East Carolina University

 

Carl Christ has made a lasting positive difference. He was my thesis supervisor

during my graduate school days at Hopkins (1962-1966). I also served as his teaching assistant in an undergraduate course in economics. I chose university teaching and research as a profession, from which I am now retired. Whenever a student thanked me for my supervision and advice, I smiled in thankful remembrance of my experience with Professor Christ. I endeavoured to pass on the Christ attitude towards students, even though lacking his natural devotion to the cause of education and, above all, his easy ability to detect and direct you, always, to the important details in the analysis or argument. I received prompt and insightful comment when I submitted research to Carl Christ as late as 2004. A resounding thank-you. May the life that Carl Christ lived lessen the family’s grief at his passing.

—John W. Iton , Ph.D.(1966) Retired

 

I would like to mention another way in which Carl Christ was a memorable professor — he was a terrific teacher of undergraduates.

I was an undergraduate at Johns Hopkins (BA ’88), and I went on to graduate school in economics later on. I took Macro Principles with Carl (or Dr. Christ, as I called him then), and Micro Principles with Bruce Hamilton, and both the content of these classes and the personal regard of both professors had a huge influence on me. (And while I’m mentioning it, so did my first TAs, Jonathan Neuberger and Greg Hess.)

Carl was gracious to everyone, but not only that — he took me, as a 19-year-old, seriously. I recognize, now that I am a professor too, how meaningful that is. I got more and more excited about economics the more classes I took, and I ended up taking some first-year graduate classes, including econometrics from Carl, before I left Hopkins. As many of the letter writers have mentioned, his emphasis on simultaneous equations models stayed with me forever after!

I look back very fondly on these formative years that I experienced at Johns Hopkins.

—Leora Friedberg , Department of Economics, University of Virginia

 

Carl and I exchanged holiday cards regularly for more than 40 years, updating each other on our professional, family, and social accomplishments and challenges. Like many of my fellow Hopkins doctoral students, Carl Christ was a friendly, insightful, and demanding professor: certainly one of the great leaders in the department when I was there from 1967-71. Two anecdotes: Our econometrics class was one of the first to use his textbooks. One of the students in the class – not me – off handedly mentioned that there might be a conflict of interest if an instructor required his students to purchase a book that he had written. The next class day Carl gave each of us who had purchased the book something like $2.00 to reflect his royalties. However, his generosity had limits: there was nothing for anyone who had purchases a used copy. Second: At the time I was at Hopkins the department was on the top floor of Gilman Hall. There was a back staircase, and one day after lunch several doctoral students, including myself, decided to race us the stairs from the ground floor. We did this in waves, and not very quietly. At one point, at the top of the landing, we were greeted by Carl, and expected a stern “what are you doing?” or “you are disturbing the peace.” Instead, he simply smiled and asked what was the best time. I suspect that he might have tried to beat it!

—Bruce Jaffee , Emeritus Professor of Business Economics and Public Policy, Indiana University

 

Image Source:  Carl Christ at the Mathematical Economics Conference in Honor of M. Ali Khan in 2013.  From the gallery of pictures at “In Memoriam–Carl Christ (1923-2017)”.

Categories
Chicago Statistics Suggested Reading Syllabus

Chicago. Econometrics sequence (2 quarters). Christ, 1957

 

From 1955 through 1961 the University of Chicago economics Ph.D. alumnus (1950) and early Cowles Commission researcher, Carl Christ, was associate professor at the University of Chicago. I stumbled upon the following reading lists for his two quarter econometrics sequence from 1957 filed away in Milton Friedman’s papers along with Econ 300A and 300B (Price Theory and Distribution)  reading lists.

It is interesting to see that input-output theory and linear programming are still considered parts of “econometrics” at even this relatively advanced date. 

The next post will provide life and career information as well as anecdotes shared by former students and colleagues following his death in April 2017.

___________________

Economics 314 and 315
Econometrics and Special Topics in Econometrics
READING LISTS
Winter and Spring 1957
Mr. Christ

 

  1. Econometrics “Texts”

Chiefly for 314:

Tinbergen, Jan, Econometrics.

For both 314 and 315:

Tintner, Gerhard, Econometrics.
Klein, Lawrence R., A Textbook of Econometrics.
Hood, William C., and Tjalling C. Koopmans, Studies in Econometric Method (Cowles Commission Monograph 14). Especially chapters 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 9. (Chapter 6 is chiefly for Economics 315).

  1. Statistical Inference (Including Regression and Correlation)

In addition to relevant parts of books listed above, the following are useful. They are approximately in increasing order of difficulty.

Chiefly for 314:

Wallis, W. Allen, and Harry V. Roberts, Statistics: A New Approach. Especially the following sections and chapters.
2.8; 4.5-6; 5; 6.1, 6.5; 8.7; 9; 10.9-12; 12; 14.1-2, 14.5-6, 14.8; 15; 17; 18; 19
Walker, Helen M., and Lev, Statistical Inference.

For both 314 and 315:

Ezekiel, Mordecai, Methods of Correlation Analysis, 2nd edition.
Yule, George Udny, and Kendall, An Introduction to the Theory of Statistics (not the earlier book by Yule alone).
Snedecor, George W., Statistical Methods.
Fisher, Ronald A., Statistical Methods for Research Workers, 6th edition or later.
Tippett, L. H. C., The Methods of Statistics.
Hoel, Paul G., Introduction to Mathematical Statistics.

Chiefly for 315:

Anderson, R. L., and T. A. Bancroft, Statistical Theory in Research.
Mood, A. M., Introduction to the Theory of Statistics.
Wilks, S. S., Mathematical Statistics.
Cramer, Harald, Mathematical Methods of Statistics.

  1. Econometric Techniques and Problems (Including the Estimation of Parameters)

In addition to relevant sections of books cited under I and II above, see the following. Items marked with an asterisk(*) are particularly important.

Chiefly for 314:

Working, E. J., “What do Statistical ‘Demand Curves’ Show? QJE 41 (February, 1927), pp. 212-35. Reprinted in AEA Readings in Price Theory, pp. 97-115.
*Christ, Carl F., “History of the Cowles Commission,” in Cowles Commission, Economic Theory and Measurement. (20th Annual Report). Especially pp. 12-13, 30 (bottom)-41, 47 (middle)-60.
*Koopmans, Tjalling C., “Identification Problems in Economic Model Construction,” Econometrica 17 (April, 1949), pp. 125-44. Reprinted as chapter 2 in Hood and Koopmans (cited under I above), pp. 27-48.
*Marschak, Jacob, “Economic Structure, Path, Policy, and Prediction,” AER, XXXVII (May, 1947), pp. 81-4.

For both 314 and 315:

Koopmans, Tjalling C., “The Logic of Econometric Business Cycle Research,” JPE 49 (April, 1941), pp. 157-81.
*Haavelmo, Trygve, “The Statistical Implications of a System of Simultaneous Equations,” Econometrica 11 (January, 1943), pp. 1-12.
*Marschak, Jacob, “Econometric Measurements for Policy and Prediction”, Chapter 1 in Hood and Koopmans (cited under I above), pp. 1-26.
*Bennion, E. G., “The Cowles Commission’s ‘Simultaneous Equation Approach’”, Rev. Econ. and Statistics, XXXIV (February, 1952), pp. 49-56.
*Meyer, John R., and Miller, “Some Comments on the ‘Simultaneous Equations Approach’”, Rev. Econ. and Statistics, XXXVI (February, 1954), pp. 88-92.
*Bronfenbrenner, Jean, “Sources and Size of Least Squares Bias in a Two-Equation Model,” chapter 9 in Hood and Koopmans (cited under I above), pp. 221-35.
*Haavelmo, Trygve, “Methods of Measuring the Marginal Propensity to Consume,” JASA 42 (March, 1947), pp. 105-22. Reprinted as chapter 4 in Hood and Koopmans (cited under I above), pp. 75-91.
Foote, R. J., and K. A. Fox, Analytical Tools for Measuring Demand, U. S. Department of Agriculture Handbook No. 64.
*Klein, Lawrence R., “On the Interpretation of Theil’s Method of Estimation of Economic Relations,” Metro-economica 7 (December, 1955).
*Basmann, Robert, “A Generalized Classical Method of Linear Estimation of Coefficients in a Structural Equation”, Econometrica 25 (January, 1957).

Chiefly for 315 (in chronological order):

*Haavelmo, T., “The Probability Approach in Econometrics,” Econometrica 12 (1944), Supplement.
*Koopmans, Tjalling C., “Statistical Estimation of Simultaneous Economic Relationships,” JASA 40 (December, 1945), pp. 448-66.
Cochrane, Donald, and Guy H. Orcutt, “Application of Least Squares Regression to Relationships Containing Autocorrelated Error Terms,” JASA 44 (March, 1949), pp. 32-61.
Orcutt, Guy H. and Donald Cochrane, “A Sampling Study of the Merits of Autoregressive and Reduced Form Transformations in Regression Anaysis,” JASA 44 (September, 1949), pp. 356-72.
Koopmans, Tjalling C., ed., Statistical Inference in Dynamic Economic Models (Cowles Commission Monograph 10).
*Koopmans, Tjalling C., and W. C. Hood, “The Estimation of Simultaneous Linear Economic Relationships,” chapter 6 in Hood and Koopmans (cited under I above), pp. 112-99.

  1. Statistical Tests for Econometric Equations

For both 314 and 315:

Durbin, James, and G. S. Watson, “Testing for Serial Correlation in Least Squares Regression. II.” Biometrika 38 (June, 1951), pp. 159-78.
Hotelling, Harold, “The Selection of Variates for Use in Prediction,” Annals Math. Stat. 11 (1940), pp. 271-83.

  1. Aggregate Econometric Models of the U. S. Economy

For both 314 and 315:

Tinbergen, Jan, Statistical Testing of Business Cycle Theories, Vol. II: Business Cycles in the U.S.A., 1919-1932.
Klein, L. R., Economic Fluctuations in the U.S., 1921-1941 (Cowles Commission Monograph 11).
Clark, Colin, “A System of Equations Explaining the U.S. Trade Cycle 1921-1941,” Econometrica Vol. 17 (April, 1949), pp. 93-123.
Christ, Carl, “A Test of An Econometric Model for the U.S., 1921-1947,” in Conference on Business Cycles (N.B.E.R.), pp. 35-129.
Valavanis-Vail, Stefan, “An Econometric Model of Growth, U.S.A. 1869-1953,” AER 45 (May, 1955), pp. 208-21, 225-7.
Klein, L. R., and Arthur Goldberger, An Econometric Model of the U.S., 1929-1952 (Contributions to Economic Analysis, No. IX).
Fox, Karl A., “Econometric Models of the U.S., “ JPE 64 (April, 1956), pp. 128-42.
Christ, Carl F., “Aggregate Economic Models,” AER 46 (June, 1956), pp. 385-408

  1. Demand Studies

For both 314 and 315:

Schultz, Henry, Theory and Measurement of Demand.
Girshick, M. A., and Trygve Haavelmo, “Statistical Analysis of the Demand for Food,” Econometrica 15 (April, 1947), pp. 79-110. Partly reprinted as chapter 5 in Hood and Koopmans (cited under I above), pp. 92-111.
Wold, Herman, and Lars Jureen, Demand Analysis.
Fox, Karl A., The Analysis of Demand for Farm Products (U. S. Department of Agriculture Technical Bulletin No. 1081).
Working, Elmer J., Demand for Meat (American Institute of Meat Packing).
Stone, Richard N., The Measurement of Consumers’ Expenditure and Behaviour in the U.K., 1920-1938, Vol. I (National Institute of Economic and Social Research, London).

  1. Consumption Functions

For both 314 and 315:

Ferber, Robert, A Study of Aggregate Consumption Functions (N.B.E.R.).
Modigliani, Franco, and R. E. Brumberg, “Utility Analysis and the Consumption Function,” in Kenneth Kurihara, ed., Post Keynesian Economics.
Brumberg, R. E., “An Approximation to the Aggregate Saving Function,” Economic Journal 66 (March, 1956).
Nerlove, Marc, “Estimates of the Elasticities of Supply of Selected Agricultural Commodities,” Journal of Farm Economics 38 (May, 1956), pp. 496-512. Read primarily for the expectations hypothesis.
Friedman, Milton, and Gary Becker, “A Statistical Illusion in Judging Keynesian Models,” JPE 65 (February, 1957).

  1. Other Applications

Chiefly for 314:

Douglas, Paul H., “Are There Laws of Production?” AER 38 (March, 1948), pp. 1-41.
Mendershausen, Horst, “On the Significance of Professor Douglas’ Production Function,” Econometrica 6 (April, 1938), pp. 143-53.

Chiefly for 315:

Hildreth, Clifford, and Frank Jarrett, A Statistical Study of Livestock Production and Marketing (Cowles Commission Monograph 15).
Prais, S. J., and H. Houthakker, The Analysis of Family Budgets (Cambridge Univ., Dept. of Applied Economics).

  1. Input-Output

Chiefly for 314:

Evans and Hoffenberg, “The Interindustry Relations Study for 1947,” Rev. Econ. and Statistics, XXXIV (May, 1952), pp. 97-142.
Dorfman, “The Nature and Significance of Input-Output,” Rev. Econ. and Statistics, XXXVI (May, 1954), pp. 121-33.
Christ, Carl F., “A Review of Input-Output Analysis,” in Conference in Research on Income and Wealth, Studies in Income and Wealth, Vol. 18: Input-Output Analysis: An Appraisal (N.B.E.R.).

  1. Linear Programming

Chiefly for 314:

Dorfman, “Mathematical, or ‘Linear’, Programming,” AER XLIII (December, 1953), pp. 797-825.
Chipman, “Linear Programming,” Rev. Econ. and Statistics, XXXV (May, 1953), pp. 101-17.
Heady, “Simplified Presentation and Logical Aspects of Linear Programming Technique,” Journal of Farm Economics, XXXVI (December, 1954), pp. 1035-48.
Boles, “Linear Programming and Farm Management Analysis,” Journal of Farm Economics, XXXVII (February, 1955), pp. 1-24.

  1. Calculus

The following (arranged in increasing order of difficulty) are useful.

Thompson, Sylvanus P., Calculus Made Easy.
Allen, R. G. D., Mathematical Analysis for Economists.
Courant, R., Differential and Integral Calculus (2 vols.).

  1. Matrix Algebra and Determinants

In addition to the following, see appendices in Tintner and in Klein (cited under I above), and special sections in Anderson and Bancroft and in Mood (cited under II above):

Aitken, A. C., Determinants and Matrices.
Albert, A. A., Introduction to Algebraic Theories.
Ferrar, William L., Algebra.
Wade, Thomas L., The Algebra of Vectors and Matrices.
Allen, R. G. D., Mathematical Economics, Chapters 12-14.

 

Source:   The Hoover Institution Archives. Papers of Milton Friedman, Box 77, Folder 1 “University of Chicago 300A & B”.

Image Source. Detail of “Carl Christ, teaching economics-1963” (second from left at seminar table) from the Carl Christ memorial webpage of the Department of Economics, Johns Hopkins University.

Categories
Chicago Economists

Chicago. Milton Friedman from Cambridge to T.W. Schultz. 29 Mar 1954

About a week ago I posted Milton Friedman’s letter from Cambridge, England to T. W. Schultz dated 28 October 1953. Today we have the next carbon copy of a letter to Schultz from Cambridge in the Milton Friedman papers at the Hoover Institution in which Friedman discusses a range of issues from a one-year appointment in mathematical economics at Chicago, the Cowles’ Directorship appointment, and postdoctoral fellowships. The letter ends with a laundry-list of miscellaneous comments from Arthur Burns’ Economic Report to the President through the reception of McCarthy news in England. Friedman’s candid assessments of many of his fellow-economists make this letter particularly interesting.  More to come!

______________________

If you find this posting interesting, here is the complete list of “artifacts” from the history of economics I have assembled. You can subscribe to Economics in the Rear-View Mirror below. There is also an opportunity for comment following each posting….

_____________________

Milton Friedman to T.W. Schultz
29 March 1954

15 Latham Road
Cambridge, England
March 29, 1954

 

Dear Ted:

Of the people you list as possible visiting professors while Koopmans is away, Solow of M.I.T. is the one who offhand appeals to me the most. I have almost no doubt about his absolute competence: I read his doctoral dissertation at an early stage and saw something of him last summer and the preceding summer when he was spending some time at Hanover in connection with one or another of Bill Madow’s projects. He has a seminal mind and analytical ability of a very high order. My only questions would be the other that you raise, whether he is broadly enough interested in economics. And here I am inclined to answer with an uncertain yes, relying partly on the fact that he is flexible and capable of being induced. I do not know Dorfman of California either personally or through his writings. My question about him is that I believe that we would do best if we could use this opportunity in general to bring in someone with a rather different point of view and who will provide a broadening of the kind of thing done under the heading of mathematical economics, and my impression is that Dorfman is very much in the same line as Koopmans – but here too, I don’t have much confidence in my knowledge. As you know, I think very highly of both Modigliani and Christ, but as of the moment for this particular spot, would prefer Solow, partly on grounds of greater differentiation of product.

One rather harebrained possibility that has occurred to me outside your list is Maurice Allais, the French mathematical economist who is Professor at École des Mines. Allais is a crackpot genius in many respects. He came out of engineering and is largely self taught, which means he holds the erroneous views he has discovered for himself as strongly as the correct ones. I have always said that if he had, at a formative age, had one year of really good graduate education in economics he might have become one of the really great names. At the same time, Allais is an exceedingly active and stimulating person who works in mathematical economics of a rather different kind than we have been accustomed to. I think it would be a good thing to have him around for a year – both for us and him – though I am most uncertain that it would be for a longer period. I don’t have any basis for knowing whether Allais would be interested.

I have tried to think over the other European mathematical economists to see if they offer other possibilities. There are others in France: Guilbaud [Georges-Théodule Guilbaud (1912-2008)], Boiteux [Marcel Boiteux (1922-)] (I don’t have that spelled right), but none seem to me as good as Allais for our purposes. There are Frisch and Haavelmo in Norway, Wold in Sweden; of these, Haavelmo would be the best. I find it hard to think of anybody in England who meets this particular bill, and would be at all conceivable. Dick Stone? Has just been over and is not primarily mathematical but might be very good indeed in some ways. Is certainly econometric minded and fairly broadly so. R.G.D. Allen? Has done almost nothing in math. econ. for a long time.*

*[handwritten footnote, incomplete on left side presumably because carbon paper folded on the corner:   “…real possibility here is a young fellow at the London School, A. W. Phillips…invented the “machine” Lerner has been peddling. He came to econ. out of ….good indeed. He has an important paper in the mathematics of stabilization (over) policies, scheduled to appear(?) in Econ. Journal shortly.”]

Getting back home, the names that occur to me have, I am sure, also occurred to you. Is Kenneth Arrow unavailable for a year’s arrangement? What about Vickrey? I don’t believe that in any absolute sense I would rate Vickrey above Christ, say, but for us he has the advantage of bringing a different background and approach.

The above is all written in the context of a definite one-year arrangement in the field of mathematical economics. I realize, of course, that this may turn out to be an undesirable limitation. This is certainly an opportunity to try someone whom we might be interested in permanently; and it may be possible to make temporary arrangements for math. econ. for the coming year – via DuBrul, Marschak, etc. The difficulty is that once I leave this limited field, the remainder is so broad that I hardly know where to turn. For myself, I believe we might well use this to bring someone in in money, if that possibility existed. If it did, I should want strongly to press on you Harry Johnson, here at Cambridge, but originally a Canadian educated at the University of Toronto, who is the one new person I have come to know here who has really impressed me.

One other person from the US left out of the above list but perhaps eligible even within the narrower limitations is William Baumol. Oughtn’t he be considered?

Within the narrower limitations, my own listing would, at the moment, be: Allais, Solow, Baumol, Arrow, Vickrey, Phillips. I would hasten to add that my listing of Arrow fourth is entirely consistent with my believing him the best of the lot in absolute competence, and the one who would still go to the top of this list for a permanent post.

I turn to the other possibility you raise in your letter, a permanent post a la the Tobin one. I am somewhat puzzled how to interpret the change of view, you suggest, I assume that the person would be expected to take over the directorship of Cowles. If this is so, it seems to me highly unfortunate to link it with a permanent post in the department. Obviously, the best of all worlds would be if there were someone we definitely wanted as a permanent member of the department who also happened to be interested in the Cowles area and was willing to direct, or better interested in directing, Cowles. In lieu of this happy accident, I would myself like to see the two issues kept as distinct as possible; to have the Cowles people name a director, with the aid and advice but not necessarily the consent, of the department; have the department offer him cooperation, opportunity to teach, etc., but without having him a full-fledged permanent member. I hope you will pardon these obiter dicta. I realize that this is a topic you have doubtless discussed ad nauseam; what is even more important, if after such discussion, you feel differently, I would predict that you would succeed in persuading me to your view; which is why I leave it with these dicta and without indicating the arguments – you can provide them better than I.

The issue strikes me particularly forcefully because I do feel that in terms of the needs of the department, our main need is not for someone else mainly in the Cowles area; it is for someone to replace either Mints in money, or me in orthodox theory, if I slide over to take Mints’ role.

For Cowles’ sake as well as our own, there might be much to be said for having the directorship be the primary post for whoever comes. It seems to me bad for Cowles to have that post viewed as either a sideshow or a stepping stone. For directorship of Cowles, some names that occur are: Herbert Simon; Dorothy Brady; with more doubt Modigliani. One possibility much farther off the beaten track is Warren Nutter, who has, I gathered, been a phenomenal administrative success in Wash. at Central Intelligence Agency; yet is an economist. Would Charlie Hitch, who has been running Rand’s economic division be completely out?

[Handwritten note: “You know, Gregg Lewis might be better than any of these if he would do it!]

If the post is to be viewed as primarily a professorship in the department, with Cowles directorship as a sideline, I have great difficulty in making any suggestions: I would not, in particular, be enthusiastic about any of those mentioned in the preceding paragraph. Arrow, yes, but he is apparently out. Simon Kuznets, yes, but he would be likely to make Cowles into something altogether different that it is. I feel literally stuck in trying to think of acceptable candidates. Perhaps I can be more useful in reacting to other suggestions.

Let me combine with this some comments on your March 15 letter, which I should have answered long since.

On the post-doctoral fellowship, I feel less bearish than you, primarily, I suppose because I am inclined to lay a good deal of emphasis on the intangible benefits from having a widespread group of people who have had a year at Chicago. It seems to me that a post-doctoral fellowship is more likely to do this than a staff appointment, both because it is likely to bring in a wider range of people to apply and because it is rather more likely to have a one or two year limit and so a more rapid turnover. What has disappointed me most is the limited number of people among whom we have been forced to choose. Why is it that we don’t get more applications? Is it because we do treat it now like a staff appointment? Do we advertise it as widely as we might and stimulate a considerable number of applicants? Or is it simply because the great increase in number of post-doctoral fellowships available (and decrease in quality of people going in for economics?) has lowered the demand for any one fellowship? I find it hard to believe that making it into a staff appointment would help much in providing more adequate review and appraisal – this is I believe a result of the limitations of time on all of us – but it might give it greater prestige and make it more valuable to the recipient in this way, though, it would cost him tax and limit freedom.

I believe that part of the problem you raise about the postdoctoral fellowship has little to do with it per se but is a general problem about the department. Is our own work subject to as much discussion and advice from our colleagues as each of us would like? The answer seems to me clearly no. The trouble is – and I am afraid it is to some extent unavoidable and common at other places – that we have so many other duties and tasks to perform that being an intellectual community engaged in cross-stimulation perforce takes a back seat. This disease is I think one that grows as the square of the professional age. From this point of view, I think that the more junior people around the better in many ways and I think this one of the real virtues of the development of research projects that will enable us to keep more beginners around.

On the whole, I continue to think that the fellowship idea is sound, in the sense that we ought to have a number of people around who have no assigned duties. I would defend the Mishan result in these terms. I think he was a most useful intellectual stimulant and irritant to have around even if his own output was not too striking. The virtue of the fellowship arrangement is that it enables you to shape the hole to the peg. I cannot of course judge about Prais. But I am surprised by your adverse comments on Dewey’s use of it; I would have thought his one of the clearly most successful post-doctoral fellowships so far.

As you have doubtless heard, Muth has decided to go to Cowles. I am sorry that he has. I think he is good. I am somewhat troubled about the general problem of recruiting for the Workshop at a distance. In addition to Muth, I had heard from Pesek, whom I encouraged but left the matter open because he would rather have a fellowship that he applied for that would pay his travelling expenses to Washington. My general feeling is that it would be a mistake to take anyone just because I am not on the spot, that it would be far better to start fairly slowly, and let the thing build up, adding people as they turn up next year. Any comments or suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

I am delighted to hear about Fred’s ford project. I had a wire from Willits recently re Harberger and I assume it was in connection with his proposed project. Al Rees will be a splendid editor, I feel, and it is excellent to have him entirely in the department. I hardly know what to think of Morton Grodzins as Dean. I assume that his appointment measn that he was regarded as a successful administrator at the Press. Grodzins has great drive and energy, is clearly bright and intelligent, but whether he has the judgment either of men or of directions of development that is required, and the ability to raise money that Tyler displayed, is something I have less confidence in. Who is taking over the Press?

I enjoyed your comments on both Arthur Burns and McCarthy. With respect to the first, I thought the economic report extraordinarily good, both in its analysis of the immediate situation and in its discussion of the general considerations that should guide policy. It showed courage, too, I think in its willingness to say nasty things about farm supports and minimum wages to mention two. My views about the recession are indicated by the title of a lecture I am scheduled to give in Stockholm towards the end of April: “Why the American Economy is Depression-proof”. After all, there is no reason why Colin Clark should be the only economist sticking his neck out. It continues to seem to me that the danger to be worried about is over-reacting to this recession and in the process producing a subsequent inflationary spurt. Arthur seems to me to be showing real courage in holding out against action. To do something would surely be the easy and in the short run politically popular course.

McCarthyism has of course been attracting enormous attention here. Indeed, for long it has crowded almost all other American news into the background with the result that it has given a thoroughly distorted view of America to newspaper readers. I enclose a clipping in this connection which you may find amusing. it is not a bad summary, though I trust I put in more qualifications.

We have gotten an opportunity to go to Spain via an invitation to lecture at Madrid (Earl’s doing, I suspect), so Rose and I are leaving next week for a week there. Shortly after our return we go to Sweden and Denmark for a couple of weeks. We are very much excited by the prospects. Best regards to all.

Yours

[signed]
Milton

 

Source: Hoover Institution Archives. Milton Friedman Papers. Box 194, Folder “194.6 Economics Department S-Z, 1946-1976”.

 

Image: Left, Milton Friedman (between 1946 and 1953 according to note on back of photo in the Hoover Archive in the Milton Friedman papers). Right, Theodore W. Schultz from University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf1-07484, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.

Categories
Columbia Courses Economists Harvard Transcript

Columbia. Search Committee Report. 1950

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

___________________

January 9, 1950

 

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

Dear Mr. Chairman:

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

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

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

 

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

[p. 2]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Respectfully submitted,

[signed]

Robert M. Haig

 

______________________________

Appendix A – Martin Bronfenbrenner

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

Born: 1914

Education and Degrees:

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

Fields: Theory, mathematical economics, statistical methods, econometrics

Doctoral dissertation: Monetary theory and general equilibrium

Publications:

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

Additional publications:

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

Additions to list of publications circulated, January 9, 1950

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

______________________________

Appendix B – D. J. Dewey

On leave from Iowa.

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

Bibliography:

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

Friedman and Schultz are highly enthusiastic.

Statement by Hart, dated December 6, 1949:

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

______________________________

Appendix [C] – James Tobin

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

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

Data supplied by Harvard:

Address:    Department of Applied Economics, Cambridge University, England

Married:   Yes, one child

Born:          1918, U.S.

Degrees:

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

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

Special Field: Business Cycles

Thesis Topic: A Theoretical and Statistical Analysis of Consumer Saving

Experience:

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

[p. 2 of Appendix C]

Courses:           1939-40

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

1940-1941

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

1946-47 Library and Guidance

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

 

Data from 1948 Directory of American Economic Association:

Harvard University, Junior Fellow

Born:                1918

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

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

Dissertation: A theoretical and statistical analysis of consumer saving.

Publications:

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

______________________________

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

Image Source: The beyondbrics blog of the Financial Times.