Tag: Samuelson

Harvard. Memo to Provost supporting Galbraith appointment. Black, 1947

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2021-12-17

As surprising as it might sound, the Harvard economics department couldn’t always get whom they wanted (Theodore Schultz). As a consequence we are able to observe an aggressive strategy employed by a member of one side in the departmental hiring dispute. Professor John D. Black attempted to play the rebound in re-pleading his case for John Kenneth Galbraith’s appointment to a newly established professorship. Indeed by writing directly to the Provost, Black could have been charged with at least an additional count of “working the ref”. The episode is well summarized in Richard Parker’s biography of Galbraith (John Kenneth Galbraith: his life, his politics, his economics, pp. 226-227). Still, there is nothing quite like the pleasure of watching sharp elbows at work in the service of intradepartmental politics as revealed in the complete letter posted below. Black was not afraid to push nativist buttons in referring to anti-Galbrathians among his colleagues: “European clique” (cf. Haberler in 1948 on Galbraith vs Samuelson), “the monetary-fiscal policy axis” and “gaudy Keynesian trappings”.

A cynical nose can detect more than a whiff of a self-serving plea to strengthen the prospects of Black’s own field and style of research.

Archival note: Parker refers to a copy of the letter in Black’s papers with the Wisconsin Historical Society, this post is based on a copy of the letter I found in Galbraith’s papers at the JFK Presidential Library.

Economics in the Rear-view Mirror provides the outlines and exams for Black’s courses on the marketing of agricultural commodities from 1947-48).

____________________

December 22, 1947

Provost Paul Buck
University Hall
Cambridge, Massachusetts

Dear Provost Buck:

As you are no doubt aware, it was I who last year nominated Galbraith for the joint professorship to the School of Public Administration and in the Department of Economics. It was my judgment at that time that in view of his experience in public affairs and acknowledged great ability he surely should be considered for this position. The voting last year confirmed my judgment surprisingly. Excluding Schultz, to whom the appointment was offered, and Tinbergen from the Netherlands, he ran neck and neck with Yntema for top place in all of the balloting, with Samuelson next, and Smithies in seventh place. Tinbergen owed his strength to the European clique in the Department of Economics (by no means all European born), who have a European idea of the function of a university, und would have been a misfit in this appointment.

The voting of course reflected in large measure the conceptions of the voting members as to the needs of the appointment. A majority of my colleagues in the Department of Economics thought of it in terms simply of getting another high-grade technical economist, with little thought for the needs of the School of Public Administration. To meet this situation, I prepared and read at one of last year’s joint meetings on the appointment, the following statement, which I now I now submit anew, as still describing the conditions of the appointment:

The decision as to an appointment in economics at this time raises the whole question of the future of the Graduate School of Public Administration and its meaning for the Departments of Economics and Government.

The first point to make under this head is that the two departments named, without the Graduate School of Public Administration, are destined to become conventional departments in these fields, not distinguishable from similar departments in other universities, except for probably having better faculties than most of them. Even the latter distinction could easily fade in the next decade or two. With the Graduate School of Public Administration working with them, they both have possibilities of becoming super-graduate departments, by building on top of the usual graduate offerings in these fields a type of advanced graduate instruction that deals with problems of the sort that arise in the higher levels of policy-making in government. The seminars now given are well worth while from this point of view, but they fell much sort of realizing their possibilities. The two departments therefore very much need the Graduate School of Public Administration. It offers them a real opportunity to achieve greatness and become important influences in our national life. On the other hand, the School can get nowhere without the regular graduate work of the two departments as a foundation. The School and the two departments should therefore work closely together, each helping the others at each step in their advancement.

This means looking at a problem, such as that of the new appointment, as a common problem, and asking the question what kind of an appointment now will promote best the progress of the departments and the School?

Before answering this question, we need to go back and consider the basis on which the School was conceived. Those who formulated the program for the School finally settled down on training in policy-making as the great opportunity for a school of public administration at a university like Harvard. They exhibited a kind of prescience and inner wisdom in so doing that would almost seem like a miracle except for the fact that it did grow almost inevitably out of the situation.

In the two or three years following the founding of the School, much actual headway was made in realizing the objective of training for policy-making. The program of the School and it method made a strong impression in government circles and in the world of education. Since then, the School has lost considerable of the advantage of such a splendid start. If it does not take hold with vigor again and press forward along the lines laid out, it will lose it entirely in five or ten more years and become nothing more than a minor adjunct of the two conventional departments of the University. This the departments themselves cannot afford to let happen. Neither can Harvard University.

Looking at the present problem in this light, there can be no doubt that the great weakness in our present situation is in persons qualified to train advanced graduate students in policy-making, who have the aptitude for it as well as the background. The interests of the departments are in such an appointment at this time. The training in policy-making, comparatively speaking, is not suffering now, and will not suffer for several years, because of deficiencies in the preliminary graduate training needed as a foundation for it.

Also needing to be considered are important and somewhat similar relations to other departments of Harvard University, particularly to the Graduate School of Business Administration, to the Law School, and to the new Department of Social Relations. The School can add something of high importance to each of these if its seminars in the policy-making function are adequately developed; and in turn its contribution will be much enriched by what workers in these fields have to offer.

An appointment at this time of one new professor qualified as indicated will not of course take us far alone the way we need to go. But it will make a good start. We shall need mainly two things in addition: A. Additional research funds for the different seminars — to be used in employing research associates, financing field work, statistical laboratory work, etc., B. Some appointments wholly on the faculty of the School. Funds for both of these, especially the first, can be obtained if sought in earnest.

In conclusion, it should be stated that the School has made a start exactly along the right lines. It does not need in the least to back up and take a fresh start, but instead only to pick up what it has and go forward with it.

You, Provost Buck, do not need to be told that since I made this statement, the School has done exactly what I was hoping for. Almost certainly now at least three of the major seminars of the School will have research projects combined with them, each with small staffs of research associates. Steps are being taken to bring the School into effective working relations with the Law school and the Department of Social Relations. The need for an appointment that will strengthen its instruction in the policy-making function has in consequence become even more urgent then it was a year ago.

When it came time to offer nominations again this year, I felt that in view of the strong vote for Galbraith last year, surely he should be considered again. The third men in the top three this year, Smithies, has been substituted for Samuelson by those who supported Samuelson last year, apparently for two reasons: one, they now admit Samuelson’s shortcomings in the policy role, and consider Smithies a better candidate from this point of view; two, they expect to have Samuelson appointed to the full professorship now vacant in the Department of Economics. There seems to be more general acceptance than year ago of my conception of the needs of the appointment.

It has been necessary for me to make this last statement because it is the basis for the most important factor in the whole situation as it now develops, namely, that to appoint both Smithies and Samuelson at this time would further unbalance the work in economics at Harvard in the direction of the monetary-fiscal policy axis, since both of these men work mainly along these lines. The simple fact of the matter is that the men working in money and banking, fiscal policy and international trade, plus a few (in theory mostly) who vote with them on appointments, already constitute a voting majority in the Department of Economics. (You will remember that they did their utmost to prevent Dunlop’s appointment two years ago.) To add one more to this axis at this time would be highly unfortunate. It is, of course, not their voting which is most important — it is the narrowing effect which they have on the teaching and research in economics at Harvard. Those two appointments would contribute more than usual to such narrowing, since they are Keynesians in addition.

Of course none of these in this axis considers that he is narrow. In their discussions, to be sure, they draw in all phases of the economy. But they organize it all in terms of a single framework of reference. They pour it all, as it were, through one narrow funnel, and do some sieving in the process. As to how much they may mislead themselves in so doing, — and unfortunately some of the policy-makers of the nation; we have had abundant evidence in the past two years.

We can be reasonably certain that within ten or fifteen years, the Keynesian system of economic thinking will have been pretty well taken in stride. It would be unfortunate if at that time Harvard found itself with a faculty in economics too largely clothed in outworn habiliments. The economies of that day will have a different cast then the pre-Keynesian; but it will have lost much of its gaudy Keynesian trappings.

One of the first stories told me about Harvard when I arrived in 1927 was of President Eliot’s having been asked why Harvard University’s Department of Psychology had never developed a “school” of thought in that field, as had the Departments of Cornell and Columbia, and of his having answered that if he had discovered that his Department of Psychology was becoming dominated by one school of thought he would have hastened to appoint the strongest man he could find of an opposing school.

Of course this last point is no argument for the appointment of Galbraith. It is merely an argument against appointing Smithies if Samuelson is going to be appointed to the Department of Economics — and the pressure for Samuelson’s appointment is very strong in the Department of Economics.

I do not propose to present any strong affirmative arguments in support of Galbraith’s appointment. I nominated him because I believed that he should at least be considered. It has been the votes of my colleagues that has put him in the running, and I prefer that they tell you their reasons. I would not want him appointed if in their judgment, and that of the ad hoc committee, he is not the strongest man for this joint appointment.

I say this even though I would hope that if Galbraith were appointed he could spare a small fraction of his time to helping me give the two year courses which I now give in Commodity Distribution and Prices (ordinarily called Marketing.) Even though I am now giving these two courses, with the help of one-fifth of the time of an annual instructor, in addition to three full year courses in the Economies of Agricultura (with help of part of the time of one visiting lecturer) besides supervising a score of doctor’s theses, I shall manage somehow if I can get some other regular help with the three courses in the Economics of Agriculture.¹

____________

The undergraduate course in marketing had 90 students in the fall term, and the graduate course had 12 plus 8 auditors. This course was offered to Harvard undergraduate in 1946-47 for the first time, except for sone special instruction in food marketing given to armed service prospects during the war. The graduate course has been given since 1933.
____________

It may also be of interest that 12 of the 120 Ph.D’s reported as conferred in Economics in the United States in 1946-47 (12 months) were to candidates writing theses under my direction. (See September 1947 American Economic Review.)

There have, however, been some statements made about Galbraith in faculty discussions that must be commented upon in the interest of truth and sound decision. It has been said of him that he is “not a highly competent technical economist.” All this means is that he has published no articles in which he has applied methods of statistical and mathematical analysis, to the development of refinements of economic and monetary theory. I have no doubt of Galbraith’s ability to do this when this is the important thing for him to do. The simple truth is that a man of his breadth of comprehension is likely to find himself mainly absorbed in dealing with broad fundamental economic relationships; and this is especially true in times as disturbed as those in which he has been doing his writing. When asked, in the summer of 1947, to read a paper on the current economic situation, I entitled this paper “Fundamental Elements in the Current Agricultural Situation,” and I wrote as follows:

“The day and the hour seem to call for analysis in terms of broad fundamentals. This is no occasion for the refinements of theory and their application; but rather for over-simplification and over-emphasis on a few vital elements. Something of accuracy is lost in consequence; but this is not relatively important in the emergency that confronts us. There are wild horses loose in the world and the first task is to bring them to leash. Later we can break them to the plow and the cart.”

This statement is truer today than it was in 1942. If any economist of today is turning out articles or books presenting analysis of refinements, he is doing it because he lacks real power of analysis of the larger issues of the day, or as a by-product of such analysis, or as relaxation from the steady grind of his regular job. No doubt some of Smithies’ articles fit into these latter descriptions. Galbraith’s writings of the past ten years have covered the larger aspects of a very broad range of subjects.

Another criticism has been that he is not a good speaker. It is true that he often speaks haltingly when extemporizing. He needs time to find the exact word he wants. But he writes excellent papers, and reads them very effectively. (John Williams reported at a recent faculty meeting that his paper and Ed Mason’s were the outstanding papers at a full meeting in Philadelphia. His paper at the Atlantic City meeting in December 1946 was an outstanding performance.) In fact, he has become a very effective writer. To have a man in the Graduate School of Public Administration who can write as effectively as Galbraith on public questions of the day will be a highly valuable asset.

It needs to be added that he is effective in the classroom in spite of halting for a word now and then. The secret of this is that he has an uncanny sense for the vital points in a classroom discussion the same in analyzing public issues, and for putting these in their proper perspective. He is also a very stimulating influence among students in private discussion.

Rating higher in my scale of values than in those of many other academicians is capacity. Some of my colleagues do twice as much teaching, research and writing as some others, and do it fully as well or better. Galbraith has demonstrated a high order of capacity.

The other adverse report concerning Galbraith is not so easy to analyze. It is that he does not handle public relations well, nor even his relations with colleagues and subordinates. Surely a man of Galbraith’s type needed a man of different sort to work alongside him and handle the difficult public relations of OPA. And surely Leon Henderson was not that man. He was less apt at it even than Galbraith. The public relations man for OPA had to say “No” very often; and Galbraith does not have the ease of manner for such an assignment. Given time enough to plan for it in advance, he is able to differ with his colleagues and associates in a pleasant and gracious manner; but not in haste and under pressure, and especially when some body is trying to “put something over”.

No doubt a factor in his relations with others has been his urge to get on with the job and not waste too much time talking about it. I must confess a kinship with him in this respect. He no more than I should be assigned task a with many administrative decisions.

On this point, I am ready to predict without any hesitancy that Galbraith’s relations with his colleagues in the School and in the Department of Economics, should he receive this appointment, would be more congenial by a wide margin then those now generally prevailing in these departments; also that in the role of a Harvard professor, his relations with the public and with government officials would be unusually cooperative and friendly.

Perhaps a word is in order as to why I did not vote for Yntema. Most of all, I do not want to take a chance on either of two things (1) that he will prefer to continue with his present job, thus postponing our filling this appointment for another year: (2) that he will accept the appointment, but will want to continue a tie-us with CED that will remain his main interest. We cannot afford any more such tie-ups. Second, he seems to be so well fitted to his present assignment that I do not believe he would fit ours.

Very truly yours,

John D. Black

Source: John F. Kennedy Presidential Library. John Kenneth Galbraith Papers. Box 519. Series 5. Harvard University File, 1949-1990. Folder: “Correspondence Re: Appointment of JKG as Professor of Economics. 12/22/47—3/22/50”.

Image Source: Professor John D. Black in Harvard Class Album 1945.

Tags BlackJD, Dunlop, Galbraith, Mason, Samuelson, SchultzTW, Smithies, Tinbergen, WilliamsJH, Yntema

Exam Questions Harvard M.I.T. Suggested Reading Syllabus

Harvard. Basic graduate microeconomic theory. Chamberlin and Samuelson, 1956-1957

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2021-09-09

For some reason, Paul Samuelson was asked to help out with the teaching of Edward H. Chamberlin’s graduate theory course during the 1956-57 academic year. In Paul Samuelson’s papers at Duke I was able to find a letter from the Harvard economics chair, Seymour Harris, confirming his appointment as “Visiting Professor” for co-teaching Economics 201. The actual “allocation of subject matter” between Chamberlin and Samuelson is not clear from Samuelson’s papers, nor from the course outlines. Since the second semester reading list only has Chamberlin’s name on it, it seems likely that Samuelson’s participation was limited to the first semester of the course. Because Robert Bishop’s manuscript on Economic Theory (taught to generations of M.I.T. graduate students) was included in the first section of the fall semester reading list and we find questions for a one hour mid-term exam in Samuelson’s folder for the course, I am led to conjecture that Samuelson taught most or all of the first half of the fall semester of the course. As we can see from the internal M.I.T. department teaching records included below, Paul Samuelson continued teaching his courses at “Tech” that year.

Perhaps a future trip to Duke University’s David M. Rubenstein Rare Book Manuscript Library to consult the Edward H. Chamberlin papers that were donated in 2019 will help to establish why Samuelson was needed at Harvard that year.

_________________________

Letter from Chairman Seymour Harris to Paul Samuelson
May 25, 1956

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

Office of the Chairman

M-8 Littauer Center
Cambridge 38, Massachusetts

May 25, 1956

Professor Paul A. Samuelson
Department of Economics and Social Science
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Cambridge 39, Massachusetts

Dear Paul:

Economics 201 meets Tuesday, Thursday, and at the pleasure of the instructor Saturday at 10. It would be hard to change that hour because of the arrangement of other courses, and also because we must have the same hour for the second semester.

I hope that you would get together with Ed and discuss the allocation of subject matter. You can have [Richard] Gill as an assistant, and he would, I am sure, be willing to meet the class once a week when you think it necessary. You will find him a most adequate assistant.

I may add that the Dean has agreed to recommend your appointment as a Visiting Professor, which is an unusual appointment, for most appointments of this kind, inclusive of Tech, are Visiting Lecturers. This suggests the high regard in which we hold you.

Sincerely yours,

[signed] Sey
Seymour E. Harris
Chairman

SEH/c
cc: Professor Chamberlin

P.S. I hope you will remember to bring my article on Saturday and any comments.

Source: Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Papers of Paul Samuelson, Box 33, Folder “Ec201 Harvard Course, 1955-1956 [sic]”.

_________________________

From the M.I.T. economics department records for 1955-56

Paul Samuelson was teaching full time 1956-57. He taught Economics and Industrial Management (14.117) and Mathematical Approach to Economics (14.151) in the fall semester and Economic Analysis (14.122) and Economics Seminar (14.192) in the Spring semester.

Source: M.I.T. Archives. M.I.T. Department of Economics Records, 1947—. Box 3, Folder “Teaching Responsibility”.

_________________________

Enrollment figures from Harvard President’s Report

[Economics] 201. Economic Theory. Professor Chamberlin and Professor Samuelson (Massachusetts Institute of Technology). Full course.

(F) Total 38: 26 Graduates, 2 Seniors, 1 Junior, 4 Radcliffe, 5 Others.
(S) Total 39: 27 Graduates, 2 Seniors, 1 Junior, 3 Radcliffe, 6 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1956-1957, p. 70.

_________________________

Economics 201
Economic Theory
Fall 1956
READING LIST

I. Supply, Demand, Revenue and Cost

Marshall, Principles (4^th edition or later), Book III, Ch. 3, 4, 6

Mill, Principles, Book III, Ch. 1-6

Chamberlin, Theory of Monopolistic Competition, Ch. 2

Schultz, H., Theory and Measurement of Demand, pp. 5-12

Bishop, Economic Theory Ms., Book II, Ch. 1, 2, 3

Viner, Cost Curves and Supply Curves (1930), AFA or Clemence Readings

Robinson, Economics of Imperfect Competition, Ch. 2

Suggested:

Ricardo, Political Economy (Gonner Edition or Sraffa Edition), Chapter I

Mills’ Autobiography or the Introduction to the Ashley edition of the Principles

Jevons, Theory of Political Economy, Chapters 3, 4

Keynes, “Alfred Marshall,” Economic Journal, September 1924 (Also in Keynes, Essays in Biography)

II. Production and Consumption Analysis

A. Production and Cost

Chamberlin, Theory of Monopolistic Competition, Ch. 8, Appendix B

Knight, Risk, Uncertainty and Profit, pp. 94-109.

Stigler, Production and Distribution Theories, Introduction

Stigler, Theory of Price, Chs. 7, 8

Suggested:

Douglas, P. Theory of Wages

Hicks, Value and Capital, Chs. 6, 7

Carlson, Sune, Theory of Production

Cassels, J. H, “On the Law of Variable Proportions,” in Explorations in Economics, essays in honor of Taussig

Schneider, E., Pricing and Equilibrium

B. Utility and Consumption Theory

Hicks, Value and Capital, Chs. 1, 2, 3

Stigler, Theory of Price, Chs. 5, 6

III. Welfare Economics

Boulding, K., “Welfare Economics,” Survey of Contemporary Economics, Vol. II

Hicks, J.R., “Foundations of Welfare Economics,” Economic Journal, 1939

Pigou, A.C., Economics of Welfare, Preface, Part I., Chs. 3, 7, 8; Part II, Introductory, Ch. 9

Lerner, A. P., Economics of Control, Chs. 3, 5, 6, 7, 9

Source: Harvard University Archives, Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003”, Box 6, Folder “Economics, 1956-1957 (2 of 2)”.

_________________________

Economics 201
Hour Exam
November 3, 1956

Define “external” and “internal” economies. What do we mean when we say these economies are (a) “pecuniary,” (b) technological”? (10 min.)
What are the conditions of stable equilibrium of supply and demand as analyzed by (a) Walras and (b) Marshall? Explain the “apparent contradiction” between the Walrasian and Marshallian stability conditions. (20 min.)
In the “Ricardian increasing cost” case, as described by Viner, what would be the effect on price, output, and rent to the fixed factor, of a tax of “x” cents per unit of output? Illustrate graphically. (20 min.)

Source: Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Papers of Paul Samuelson, Box 33, Folder “Ec201 Harvard Course, 1955-1956 [sic]”.

_________________________

1956-57
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Economics 201
Midyear examination. January, 1957.

Answer the first two (2) questions and any three (3) of the others. Be sure to allocate your time approximately as indicated.

(Forty-five minutes). Assume two individuals (who act as pure competitors) and two commodities. Given the “production-possibility” or “transformation” curve for each individual and also his indifference map, indicate graphically: a) the equilibrium price; b) the equilibrium quantities of each good produced by each individual; and c) the quantity of each good exchanged.
(Forty-five minutes). Discuss the scope and limitations of “Welfare Economics.” Illustrate your discussion with reference to one or two specific theoretical problems (e.g., the box-diagram).
(One-half hour). A production function relates product (Q) to two factors, labor (L) and capital (C). Distinguish the “three stages” for each factor, and give an interrelations among them in a) the case of constant returns to scale (homogeneous production function) and b) the general case.
(One-half hour). Distinguish “internal” and “external” economies and analyze the possibility of equilibrium under pure competition in each case.
(One-half hour). A monopolistic firm can buy labor and land at fixed prices but sells its output in an impurely-competitive market. Now let it be subject to a tax of $X per unit of its output. On the oversimplified assumption that the tax leaves its factor prices, the consumer demand for its product, and its production function unchanged, compare the new equilibrium of output, price, and factor hirings with the old.
(One-half hour). Define the “income” effect and “substitution” effect of a price change. Indicate, in terms of these effects, the likelihood of a) a backward-bending supply curve, and b) a positively-sloping demand curve.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University Final Examinations, 1853-2001. Box 25. Papers Printed for Final Examinations [in] History, History of Religions, …, Economics, …, Naval Science, Air Science. January, 1957.

_________________________

_________________________

Economics 201
Spring Term, 1956-57
Economic Theory—Professor Chamberlin

I. Monopoly and Monopolistic Competition

Chamberlin, Monopolistic Competition, Chapters 1, 4,5, 9.

_________, “Monopolistic Competition Revisited,” Economica, November 1951.

Robinson, J., Imperfect Competition, Foreword, Introduction, Chapter 1.

Monopolistic Competition, Chapter 3, Appendix A.

Triffin, Monopolistic Competition and General Equilibrium T-heory, pp. 78-108.

Hall and Hitch, “Price Theory and Business Behavior,” Oxford Economic Papers, No. 2 (1939). (Also in Oxford Studies in the Price Mechanism, T. Wilson, Editor).

Chamberlin, “‘Full Cost’ and Monopolistic Competition,” Economic Journal, May 1952.

_________, “The Product as an Economic Variable,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, February 1953.

Monopolistic Competition, Appendix C, Chapters 6, 7.

Chamberlin, “Product Heterogeneity and Public Policy,” American Economic Review, May 1950.

Suggested:

Robinson, J., Imperfect Competition, Chapters 3-7.

Fellner, Competition Among the Few, Chapters 1-7.

Holton, Richard H., “Marketing Structure and Economic Development,” Q.J.E., August 1953.

Alsberg, C. L., “The Economic Aspects of Adulteration and Imitation,” Q.J.E., 46:1 (1931)

Brems, “The Interdependence of Quality Variations, Selling Effort, and Price,” Q.J.E., May 1948.

II. Income Distribution—General; Wages.

Readings in the Theory of Income Distribution, 3.

Marshall, Principles, Book VI, Chapters 1-2.

Hicks, Theory of Wages, Chapters 1-4.

Readings, 12.

Monopolistic Competition, Review Chapter 8 and pp. 215-18, 249-52, (5^th or later edition).

Hicks, Chapters 5, 6.

Marshall, Book VI, Chapters 3-5.

Taussig, Principles, 4^th edition, Chapter 52 (or 3^rd revised edition, Chapter 47).

E.H.C., “The Monopoly Power of Labor,” in The Impact of the Union.

Readings, 19.

Hicks, pp. 170-185.

Suggested:

1. Douglas, Theory of Wages, Chapter 2.

2. J.B. Clark, Distribution of Wealth, Chapters 7, 8, 12, 13.

III. Interest

Böhm-Bawerk, Positive Theory, Book I, Chapter 2; Book II; Book V.

Marshall, Principles, Book IV, Chapter 7; Book VI, Chapter 6.

Wicksell, Lectures, Vol. I, pp. 144-171, 185-195, 207-218.

Clark, J.B., Distribution of Wealth, Chapters 9, 20.

Suggested:

Fisher, I., Theory of Interest, Chapters 5, 6.

Readings, Chapters 20, 21.

IV. Rent

Ricardo, Chapter 2.

Marshall, Book V, Chapters 8-11.

Robinson, Imperfect Competition, Chapter 8.

V. Profits

Marshall, Book VI, Chapter 5, Section 7; Chapters 7,8.

Taussig, Principles (4^th edition), Vol. II, Chapter 49, Section 1 (3^rd revised edition, Chapter 50, Section 1)

Veblen, Theory of Business Enterprise, Chapter 3.

Henderson, Supply and Demand Chapter 7.

Bernstein, P., “Profit Theory—Where Do We Go From Here?” Q.J.E., August 1953

Monopolistic Competition, Chapter 5, Section 6; Chapter 7, Section 6; Appendices D, E.

Schumpeter, Theory of Economic Development, Chapters 1-4.

Suggested:

1. Readings, 27, 29.

Source: Harvard University Archives, Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003”, Box 6, Folder “Economics, 1956-1957 (2 of 2)”.

_________________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics
Economics 201
Final Examination
May, 1957

A. Choose two of the following questions, allowing one-half hour for each.

Write a brief article on the subject of “oligopoly” designed for an encyclopedia of the social sciences, and therefore to be consulted and used mainly by non-specialists in the subject. (Consider well your objective before you begin.)
Discuss excess capacity in the economy, its meaning and its compatibility with “equilibrium.” What are the chief forces tending (a) to bring about, and (b) to eliminate, excess capacity?
(a) Discuss the issues involved in distinguishing between production costs and selling costs, and defend your own conclusions. (b) Are selling outlays, like production outlays, subject to the law of diminishing returns? Discuss, and illustrate your conclusion graphically.

B. Choose four of the following questions, allowing one-half hour for each.

“It is inappropriate to say that the marginal productivity of a certain type of labor determines its wage; wages, like the prices of all economic goods, are determined by both supply and demand.” Discuss with particular reference to the role of supply factors in an adequate theory of wages.
Develop the role which you would give to either (a) monopoly, or (b) rent, in your own theory of wages.
“Waiting is certainly not an element of the economic process in a static state, because the circular flow, once established, leaves no gaps between outlay or productive effort and the satisfaction of wants. Both are, following Professor Clark’s conclusive expression, automatically synchronized.” Discuss the several aspects of this quotation.
Outline your own theory of land rent, with some critical discussion of writers with whom you are familiar. (Restrict your discussion to the problem of land income, without extending the analysis to other factors.)
Write on risk as an element in the theory of profits, choosing such subdivisions or aspects of the problem as seem to you most significant. In what respects, if at all, would you regard a risk theory of profits as inadequate?

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University Final Examinations, 1853-2001. Papers Printed for Final Examinations [in] History, History of Religions, …, Economics, …, Naval Science, Air Science. June, 1957. In bound volume Final Exams—Social Sciences—June 1957 (HUL 7000.28, 113 of 284).

Image Sources:

John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation, Edward H. Chamberlin, Fellow 1958.

M.I.T., Paul Samuelson Memorial Information Page/Photos from Memorial Service. Accessed via the Internet Archive Wayback Machine.

Tags Chamberlin, Gill, Samuelson

Economics Programs M.I.T. Regulations

MIT. Revising Economics Ph.D. General Examinations. E.C.Brown, 1975

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2021-02-12

What makes this memo from E. Cary Brown particularly useful is that it provides us with a list of the graduate economics fields along with the participating faculty members as of 1975. Also the major revision proposed was to have a system of two major fields (satisfied with general examinations) and two minor fields (satisfied by course work). Interesting to note that graduate student input was clearly integrated into the revision procedure.

________________________

Memo from Chairman E. Cary Brown
on a Revision of General Exams, 1975

April 28, 1975

To: Economics Department Faculty and Graduate Students
From: E. C. Brown
Re: Revision of General Examinations

While it has been left that a Committee would be appointed to review the procedures of the general examination (see minutes of the Department Meeting of April 23, 1975), further informal discussion has moved toward a proposed concept of these examinations that I am submitting for consideration and agreement.

There seems reasonable satisfaction about the structure of the present examinations, subject to clarification of the final 2 field examinations and their relationship to the 2 field write-offs.
It is proposed that the 2 fields satisfied by passing the “general” examinations be designated major The examination will be offered in a field, will cover the field in a general way, and will be separated from course examinations. Minor fields will be satisfied by course work. A somewhat lower standard will be imposed in minor fields than in major fields. The “generals” examination, therefore, would apply to the fields of the candidate’s expected expertise, and emphasis would be on a broad coverage of the field.
Each field should, therefore, describe its general requirements for the field as a major one, and list the subjects that may reasonably be offered as a write-off to satisfy the field as a minor one. There should also be some details on the requirements when fields are closely linked (e.g., the proposal for the transportation field and its relationship to urban economics).
Assuming this proposal to be agreeable, the question of term papers still needs settling.

I propose, therefore, the following procedures:

Would each of you give Sue Steenburg a list of your graduate subjects for this academic year, with an indication of whether or not a term paper was required and, if so, the percentage of final grade it represented.
Would faculty in each field submit a list of subjects that may be used to satisfy major and minor requirements in their field as it would ultimately appear in the brochure. The fields to be covered are as follows, the faculty in the field are listed, and the responsible member underlined.

Advanced Economic Theory	Bishop, Diamond, Solow, Fisher, Samuelson, Varian, Hausman, Weitzman
Comparative Economic Systems	Domar, Weitzman
Economic Development	Eckaus, Bhagwati, Taylor
Economic History	Kindleberger, Temin, Domar
Finance	Merton
Fiscal Economics	Diamond, Friedlaender, Rothenberg, Brown
Human Resources and Income Distribution	Thurow, Piore
Industrial Organization	Adelman, Joskow
International Economics	Kindleberger, Bhagwati
Labor Economics	Piore, Myers, Siegel
Monetary Economics	Fischer, Modigliani
Operations Research	Little, Shapiro
Russian Economics	Domar, Weitzman
Statistics and Econometrics	Hall, Hausman, Fisher, Kuh
Transportation	Friedlaender, Wheaton
Urban Economics	Rothenberg, Wheaton

If there are any difficulties with these suggestions, let me know right away. If we can proceed along these lines, it appears to be simply a clarification of our recent past and a substantial timesaver. The reports can be looked at this summer by a student-faculty group, with responsibility for faculty on me and for students on Dick Anderson.

Source: M.I.T. Archives. Department of Economics Records, Box 2, Folder “Grad Curriculum”.

Image with identifications: Economics Faculty group portrait, 1976.

Tags Adelman, Bhagwati, Bishop, BrownEC, Diamond, Domar, Eckaus, FisherFM, Friedlaender, HallR, Hausman, Joskow, Kindleberger, Kuh, MertonRC, Modigliani, Myers, Piore, Rothenberg, Samuelson, Shapiro, Siegel, Solow, Soloway, TaylorFW, Temin, Thurow, Weitzman, Wheaton

Economics Programs M.I.T.

M.I.T. Economics and Political Science, excerpt from President’s Report, 1961

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2020-11-25

M.I.T.’s department of economics has done historically well in attracting graduate students who have received third-party funding, e.g. National Science Foundation Graduate Fellowships. Besides offering a top-down report of the position of the economics department at M.I.T., the excerpt from the President’s 1961 Centennial Year Report transcribed below offers the factual nugget: “This year, too, M.I.T. was selected as first choice by more Woodrow Wilson Fellows in economics — eighteen out of eighty — than any other school in the country”.

_____________________

Also from 1961

M.I.T. Graduate Economics Brochure of 1961.

General Examinations in Economic Theory at M.I.T. from 1961: Microeconomics; Macroeconomics.

Fun antique video. Round table discussion with Jerome Wiesner, Jerrold Zacharias, and John Burchard of MIT with Raymond Aron of the Université de Paris-Sorbonne, Isidor Rabi of Columbia University, and Sir Eric Ashby of Cambridge University was filmed as part of the Tomorrow television series produced by CBS Television Network for MIT on occasion of MIT’s Centennial in 1961.

_____________________

From the President’s Report 1961, M.I.T.

The Social Sciences In the light of the concerns of the Centennial for the larger influences of science upon society, I think it appropriate to review this year the state of the social sciences at the Institute. That we should have become occupied with these areas was inevitable, and the Institute has a clear obligation to cultivate especially those that relate most directly to modern developments in engineering, science, and mathematics. M.I.T. has recognized this responsibility and has responded with strong and growing support to work in the social sciences in the School of Humanities and Social Science and elsewhere. These activities are giving to the Institute an entirely new dimension that few not associated intimately with M.I.T. yet appreciate.

It is a simple truth that the interests of the great physical and social sciences were never more interwoven than today. The overriding practical problems of our time — defense; disarmament; the economics of change; the politics of peace; the relationships among industry, science, and government — require joint technical and social analysis. The very progress of science is influenced by the broader social context, and the advances of engineering affect all our human institutions.

In our decision to encourage the growth of certain key social sciences at M.I.T., we determined not only to build on strength, but also to exploit particularly those that have special relevance to our central concerns with science and engineering. We hope to create more points of contact between the social and physical sciences and to foster more fruitful collaboration between them. In this way, in spite of enormous pressures for growth, we can delimit the domain of our interests and the way in which we allocate our resources to them.

We have given special attention to those fields in which mathematics and statistical techniques are playing an increasingly important role. This is, of course, completely compatible with our M.I.T. style, with our desire to be governed in our approach to problems by a sense of the quantitative, the analytical, the mathematical. But by no means are we seeking to build our social sciences in the image of the physical. We recognize full well the many differences in set and attitude that distinguish them. An exaggerated insistence on emphases that are too narrow or criteria that are too rigid will only defeat our long-range objective of making the social sciences an integral part of the modern scientific university. Each field must be free to develop in its own way, to follow with complete freedom its own professional instincts.

From this point of view, the flowering of the social sciences at M.I.T. represents a new experience for us. Accustomed as we are to the demonstrable factual data of the physical sciences, we must accept the larger subjective element of judgment that enters into the social sciences in their present state. Since developments in many of these areas are open to a variety of interpretations, we must foster, within the limits of our aims and resources, a range of views and interests. The ultimate safeguard, however, lies not in seeking an impossible balance among modes of thought, but in recruiting a faculty of the highest intellectual power and integrity. This we have done.

In my report of a year ago I touched on a faculty survey of the social sciences which gave highest priority for development to fields of economics and economic history, political science, and psychology. I want now to comment briefly on the current status of these fields at the Institute and to examine in passing our commitments and our hopes in these areas.

ECONOMICS The oldest social science at M.I.T., economics is still by a sizable margin the largest. The teaching of economics goes back to 1881 and Francis Amasa Walker. General Walker, the Institute’s third president and one of its great builders, was an authority on political economy — as economics was then called — and his understanding of the processes in American industrial development notably influenced his views on the education of engineers. He gave an outstanding lecture course on political economy and was the author of a distinguished text in the field. He also brought other economists to the Institute.

Yet, until well into the modern era of M.I.T., economics remained largely a service department for the School of Engineering. Only since World War II has the department matured and assumed a truly professional character. Today it is universally conceded to be among the most distinguished. Indeed, by any of the usual measures — the stature of its teachers, the quality of its research, the achievements of its graduates — it ranks in the small handful of leaders. This year the president of the American Economic Association [Paul Samuelson] and the presidents-elect of the Econometric Society [Franco Modigliani] and of the Industrial Relations Research Association [Charles A. Myers] are members of this department. This year, too, M.I.T. was selected as first choice by more Woodrow Wilson Fellows in economics — eighteen out of eighty — than any other school in the country. The strengths which have won this kind of recognition within the profession are substantial indeed. They were achieved, essentially, by encouraging economics at M.I.T. to chart its own professional course; by the development of a distinguished graduate curriculum and of a major research program; and by insistence on the same standards of excellence we demand of our scientific and engineering departments. As a consequence, we have accomplished in economics the same kind of comprehensive renovation of purpose that Karl Compton undertook at an earlier date for the School of Science.

Economics at M.I.T. is also an important resource for other areas of teaching and research, and for the School of Industrial Management in particular. Management education at M.I.T. grew out of our teaching in economics, and today the teaching and research of the Department and the School reinforce one another more strongly than ever. Much of the research of the Department bears directly on the interests of the School — research on the economics of particular technologies; on the problems of measurement of productivity and output; on the contribution of technical progress to economic growth; on the origin and growth of new enterprises. Through this close relationship between the Department and the School, we also enjoy a fruitful interchange of theoretical and practical points of view.

The history and current role of economics at M.I.T. is the model for our development of other social sciences. We have now established sections of political science and of psychology within the Department of Economics and Social Science. Both are fields in which student and faculty interest is keen and in which we have unusual opportunities to make important contributions.

POLITICAL SCIENCE Because of the interweaving of technology with all the affairs of the modern world, and especially with those of government, we have set high priority on the development of political science. It is an area in which we have been moving rapidly ahead. This June we awarded our first Ph.D. degrees in this field, and there are now about thirty doctoral candidates within the Section. In addition, some five hundred undergraduates take elective courses in political science each year.

The Section now offers courses in six fields of political science, all of which are related to other interests of the Institute: international relations and foreign policy, political communication, defense policy, government and science, political and economic development, and political theory and comparative politics. Besides providing opportunities for combining work in political science with a scientific or engineering field, the faculty of the Section maintain close ties with their colleagues in economics, psychology, industrial management, and city and regional planning.

In the past two years, we have developed superlative strength in the field of comparative politics of developing areas, and through the association of the Section with the Center for International Studies we probably have as strong a faculty as is to be found anywhere in the politics of development. In support of this work, the Institute received two notable gifts this year. One, the donation of $500,000 from Dr. Arthur W. Sloan and Dr. Ruth C. Sloan of Washington, D.C., establishes a professorship in political science with emphasis on African studies. Not only does this gift provide an important new endowed professorship, but it also recognizes in a most dramatic way the growing stature of political science at the Institute.

The second grant is one of $475,000 from the Carnegie Corporation for research in training on the politics of transitional societies. The grant will make possible expansion of our research on the problems of nation-building in transition countries such as the newly emerged African and Asian nations. It, too, gives substantial recognition to the quality of our program. The Carnegie grant, among other benefits, establishes graduate fellowships both for course work at M.I.T. and for field work towards the doctoral thesis. We are enthusiastic about the values to be derived from this aspect of the grant which will permit us to send our students overseas for on-the-spot research in developing areas.

We have enjoyed magnificent opportunities for field studies in other areas of our political science activities through the generous support of the Maurice and Laura Falk Foundation, the Ford Foundation, and the Rockefeller Foundation. The Ford Foundation has also underwritten much of our work on government and science, and the Rockefeller Foundation this year supported a new seminar on arms control. This seminar brought together some thirty individuals in the Cambridge academic community with strong interests in both the technological and political aspects of this subject. We very much hope that this may prove to be the beginning of a substantial new research program on defense policy.

This brief sampling of our progress in political science is intended only to suggest the vitality of this field at the Institute. It has grown quickly, but without over- stretching itself. It has set high standards in research, and it has developed both its undergraduate and graduate courses in a most creative and constructive spirit. This new venture for M.I.T., in sum, has met with outstanding success.

[Reports on Psychology and Linguistics complete this section of the President’s Report]

Source: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The President’s Report 1961. pp. 11-16.

Image Source: The M.I.T. mascot beaver on the cover of its yearbook, Technique 1949.

Tags Modigliani, Myers, Samuelson, WalkerFA

M.I.T. Regulations Teaching Undergraduate

M.I.T. Dean’s request for writing requirements for elective subjects in economics department, 1953

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2020-09-21

The following exchange between the M.I.T. Dean of Humanities and Social Studies (John E. Burchard) and the representative of the chairperson of the Economics Department (Charles A. Myers covering for Ralph E. Freeman) gives us a short list of undergraduate courses that would have regularly had non-economics B.S. students attending to satisfy their distributional requirements in 1953. Dean Burchard’s informational request seems to be a fishing expedition with the hope of landing any evidence that some instructor in some course was helping to improve M.I.T. undergraduate writing skills. It is also interesting to see that sociology, psychology, and political science were all subjects administered by the economics department.

____________________________

Dean Reminding Economics Department about Information Request

May 6, 1953

Memorandum to Professor [Charles Andrew] Myers:

I asked Ralph [Evans Freeman] a while ago to get me some information but have not heard from him and imagine it got left and wonder if you could undertake this survey for me in the near future and give me an answer.

The problem is that those of us who were worried about the English style of our students at M.I.T. are pretty certain that we will never get a good overall performance on the mere basis of instruction in the first two years where writing is required and read and criticized. The burden of continuously upholding the standard obviously is going to rest with the professional departments and I have no doubt there are great inconsistencies in this throughout the Institute, and I also have no doubt most of them are pretty remiss in this obligation.

Before starting any campaign on this question, however, it is obvious that I need to know whether the house of my own School is in point of fact in order, or if not how far it is out of order.

I accordingly asked Professor [Howard Russell] Bartlett and Professor [Ralph] Freeman to get me an indication of the amount of writing required in the various subjects which might be elected by students in the School. In the History Department this was obviously limited to non-professional subjects and for the moment I am more interested in the general electives in the Department of Economics than I am in what policing you do of your own majors. It would be more helpful to know about both.

What Professor Bartlett did was write me a general answer which told me how many papers were required each semester, the approximate length, and how many written examinations. I wonder if it would be possible for you to dig out the same information for the various appropriate subjects in the Department of Economics and report to me fairly soon. I would like to be thinking about this problem during the summer.

Sincerely yours,
[unsigned]
John E. Burchard
Dean of Humanities and Social Studies

Jeb/h

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Economics Department’s First Response to Dean’s Request for Information

Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Industrial Relations Section
Department of Economics and Social Science
Cambridge, Massachusetts

May 11, 1953

Memorandum to Dean John E. Burchard

Dear John:

This is in answer to your memorandum of May 6^th. I guess this is something Ralph was unable to compete before he left and I thought I should get done promptly since I will be leaving tomorrow for the annual research meeting of the Committee on Labor Market Research of the Social Science Research Council in Minneapolis. George Shultz is one of the invited guests.

Perhaps the best way to answer your question is to list what the various people in charge of the various undergraduate subjects reported:

14.01	[Economic Principles I]	([Robert Lyle] Bishop) — 3 or 4 written hour examinations, mostly of the essay type
14.02	[Economic Principles II]	([Edgar Carey] Brown) — 4 written hour examinations, no term papers
14.03	[Prices and Production]	([Robert Lyle] Bishop) — 2 to 3 hour examinations; no term papers
14.09	[Economic Problems Seminar]	([Paul Anthony] Samuelson) — no written exams, but 2 written papers, one long and one short, plus oral presentation of the content of the paper prior to the submission of the written paper
14.51	[International Relations]	([Norman Judson] Padelford) — 8 written quizzes of 35 to 40 minutes in length; no term paper, except that sometimes there are written projects.
14.61	[Industrial Relations]	(Doug [Douglass Vincent] Brown and [John Royston] Coleman) — 3 hour examinations and 3 written case reports
14.63	[Labor Relations]	([George Pratt] Shultz) — 3 written hour examinations and one term paper
14.64	[Labor Economics and Public Policy]	([George Benedict] Baldwin) — 3 hour examinations and one written term paper
14.70	[Introductory Psychology]	([George Armitage] Miller) — 2 or 3 written hour examinations, partly objective in character; no term paper
14.72	[Union-Management Relations]	([Joseph Norbert] Scanlon) — 2 hour examinations and a special paper on a particular case
14.73	[Organization and Communications in Groups]	([Alex] Bavelas and [Herbert Allen] Shepard) — 2 objective-type examinations and one written essay-type examination
14.75	[Experimental Psychology]	([Joseph Carl Robnett] Licklider) — no examinations, but a written paper on the experiment, suitable for publication — this latter test is never quite met but students are expected to write with that end in view
14.77	[Psychology of Communication]	([George Armitage] Miller) — 3 objective-type examinations
14.91 and 14.92	[The American Political System; Comparative Political and Economic Systems]	([Jesse Harris] Proctor and [Roy] Olton) — 3 written hour exams, no term paper in the first term — 3 written hour exams plus a written term paper in the second term
15.30	[Personnel Administration]	([Paul] Pigors) — 4 written cases, one term paper and one hour examination

I think this pretty well covers the principal courses which are taken by undergraduate students in other departments. I think my own experience in teaching such undergraduate courses as 14.61 and 14.63 is similar to that of most of the staff, in that I have called attention to students of misspelled words, poor grammar, and generally poor organization and expression of written answers and papers. I really doubt if we can do much more or should do much more. It would be quite a task to go over each written examination with each student in detail, or even to do this after they have submitted a term paper. From time to time I have done this with some theses but not as a general rule, since the student is warned in advance that his grade will depend not only on content, but on expression.

I hope this gives you the information you need.

Sincerely
[signed] Charlie
Charles A. Myers

m:g

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Follow-up Request by Dean

May 12, 1953

Memorandum to Professor Myers

Dear Charlie:

Your memorandum of yesterday answers my question about the writing in part.

I guess I agree, though I wish I didn’t have to, that people in the department cannot be expected to act as writing critics for students who are still defective in their English. Though I wish more people required papers and fewer examinations, this is obviously a matter of individual teachers’ methods.

The remaining question which I think is not answered is I believe a critical one, namely, does poor writing really result in a lower grade, and if it does is that single comment written on to the paper when it is returned with the grade to the student?

I hate to trouble you further but wonder if you would be able to explore this with the same group of people.

Sincerely yours,
[unsigned]
John E. Burchard
Dean of Humanities and Social Studies

Jeb/h

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Economics Department’s Response to Follow-up Request by the Dean

Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Industrial Relations Section
Department of Economics and Social Science
Cambridge, Massachusetts

June 1, 1953

Memorandum to Dean John E. Burchard

Dear John:

These are some further thoughts on your memo of May 12^th, asking me to check again on whether poor writing really results in a lower grade in our courses and whether comments are written on the papers when they are returned with grades to the students.

Nearly everyone with whom I have talked here agrees that poor writing does result in a lower grade, if by “poor writing” is meant poor organization, hasty sentence construction, and confusing or fuzzy thinking as expressed in written words. Poor spelling apparently does not count so much, although Bob Bishop and I specifically do encircle misspelled words on written exams and papers. Comments on poor organization, etc., are specifically written on papers and exams when returned to students, and I know that many of us have stressed to students before writing exams and papers that their grades will depend in part on the way in which their material is organized and presented.

One further experience might be of interest in connection with your comment that you wish more people would require papers and fewer examinations. During the past term Jim Baldwin gave term papers in 14.64 and found that the pressure of senior theses on the students was so great that they did a very poor job on the papers. His grades reflect this, but he is bothered about the apparent conflict between the senior thesis and the term paper requirement in senior Humanities and Social Studies courses. Maybe we ought to place more emphasis on good writing in the senior thesis in the Department and in other Departments.

Sincerely,
[signed] Charlie
Charles A. Myers

CAM:dg

Source: M.I.T., Institute Archives and Special Collections, School of Humanities and Social Sciences. Office of the Dean, Records, 1934-1964. Box 3, Folder “103, Economics Department, General, March 1951-1956”.
For [first and middle names of instructors] and [course titles]: Course Catalogue of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1952-53.

Image Source: (Left) John Burchard ; (Right) Charles A. Myers. MIT Museum Legacy Website (People Collection).

Tags Adolph Miller, BaldwinGB, Bishop, BrownDV, BrownEC, ColemanJR, Myers, Pigors, Samuelson, Scanlon, ShultzG

Funny Business M.I.T.

M.I.T. Economics Faculty Skit à la Rowan and Martin’s “Laugh-In”, December 1968

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2020-05-15

This post continues our series “Funny Business” that features successful and less-than-successful attempts at humor by economists. Reading one of these historical skits demands the reader to concede that the defense, “It seemed funny at the time,” might actually be valid for fifty year old jokes. At the December 1968 Graduate Economics Association party the M.I.T. economics faculty offered its version of the wildly popular, frenetic comedy series “Rowan and Martin’s Laugh-In” (like “Sit-in”, get it? As I just said, “it seemed funny at the time”).

For young and non-U.S. historians of economics, remote learning of the original Laugh-In content is easy:

Rowan & Martin’s Laugh-In information at IMDb.
Rowan & Martin’s Laugh-In highlights on YouTube.

The tag-line “Sock it to me” was a creation of the 1960s and made a meme by Rowan and Martin’s Laugh-In. Paul Samuelson closing the skit with that line is almost up there with 1968 Presidential candidate Richard Nixon’s saying it in his cameo appearance on Laugh-In.

The skit transcript below includes some square-bracketed comments to help the reader. Of course, nothing says “joke” more than a good footnote.

______________________

Reminder/Invitation

December 11, 1968

Graduate Students, Faculty Members
and Secretaries

DON’T FORGET!!

A week from today is the GEA Christmas Party—Tuesday, December 17^th. The festivities will begin at 8:00 pm in the Campus Room of Ashdown House. Admission is only $1.00 and the entertainment is free.

______________________

GEA CHRISTMAS SKIT 1968
[Faculty]

	Music
[Franklin M.] Fisher:	It’s the Faculty Laugh-In.
	Music
	(Enter [E. Cary] Brown, [Paul A.] Samuelson and [Robert L.] Bishop, Brown and Samuelson sit.)
Samuelson:	For the first question on your advanced theory oral: Who was the greatest economist of all time?
Bishop	(After much thought) Pigou…
	Music
[Morris] Adelman:	It is written: when offer curve bend backwards, then is time to send [Walt] Rostow to Texas. [For background to Rostow Affair, see Appendix below]
	Music—through
[Matthew D.] Edel (carries sign)	“Economics is a dismal science”
	([Peter] Temin and [Duncan] Foley enter as Rowan and Martin)
Foley:	It certainly was a swell idea to put on a faculty laugh-in.
Temin:	It’s so much easier than thinking up a connected skit.
Foley:	Well, what cute laugh-in type feature do we have coming up next?
Temin:	I see by my script here that we’re going to have a “Laugh-in looks at…” next.
Foley:	Yes, it says: Faculty laugh-in looks at the new [Nixon] administration.
	Music
[Jerome] Rothenberg:	Washington: James Reston has expressed outrage at news reports that the University of Maryland has no plans to hire Spiro T. Agnew. [Motivation for James Reston mention here see, Appendix “Rostow Affair” below]
Temin:	Meanwhile at the Council of Economic Advisers, Republicans begin to grapple with the unaccustomed complexities of the Federal budget.
	(enter Bishop and Foley)
Bishop:	They always said Art Okun could do it with a pencil on the back of an envelope. [See Appendix below]
Foley:	I still think we’d better wait for the computer printout.
Bishop:	No, look, its easy. Let’s see, how does it go? Is it Y = C + the deficit, or does the deficit = Y + C?
	Music
Temin:	At the same time we hear the swan song of liberals seeking sanctuary on college campuses.
Fisher:	Song “Hey Dick [Nixon]” [presumably to the tune of “Hey Jude”, lyrics to parody not in the file]
Rothenberg:	Washington: the M.I.T. economics department has again startled Washington circles by announcing that it will not hire Henry Kissinger in 1972. [cf. Appendix below on “Rostow Affair”]
Foley:	Why don’t we just use their budget?
Bishop:	And give up on the job? It can’t be that hard.
Foley:	We don’t even have the computer printout yet.
Bishop:	Doesn’t investment come in here someplace?
	Music
Rothenberg:	Washington: It has just been learned that the M.I.T. economics department, responding to the furor over the Rostow affair has abolished its economic history requirement. [see Appendix below]
	Music
	(Man seated, knock on door: goes to answer, returns)
Adelman:	Dear, Mr. Brower is here to fix the point (calling). [Punny reference to Brower’s fixed-point theorem that is a building block for the proof of the existence of a general equilibrium.]
	Music—through
Edel (carries sign)	“Pigou Power”
	(Enter Bishop, Brown, Samuelson)
Brown:	Describe an Edgeworth-Bowley Box.
Bishop:	(gesturing) It’s about so wide…
	Music
	(Enter Foley and Temin)
Foley:	What movie did you see last night?
Temin:	“Thoroughly Modern Miltie” [clearly “Milton Friedman”, the film’s title was “Thoroughly Modern Miltie”]
	Music—through
Fisher (carries sign)	“Nest principal minors” [Linear algebra joke, written like a creepy, even pedophilic, command here, “nested principal minors” or “nest of principal minors” would be proper.]
Rothenberg:	The negative definite is equivalent to the lie direct. [Shakespeare As You Like It, V:iv in Appendix below]
	Music
Foley:	The computer printout is here!
	(enter tons of printout)
Bishop:	I think I’ve got it!
Foley:	What?
Bishop:	One of Okun’s envelopes. How old do you think this is anyway?
	Music
Samuelson:	A Poem by Paul A. Samuelson Some people cover lots more ground But no one handles the New York Times like Carey Brown. [Likely another reference to the Rostow Affair, see Appendix Below]
	Music
	(Adelman seated, door knock)
Adelman:	Dear, Mr. [Evsey] Domar is here to compare the systems. [One of Evsey Domar signature courses was “Comparative Economic Systems”]
	Music
Foley:	What movie did you see last night?
Temin:	Ride the high Pontry [“Ride the High Country”, 1962 Western film by Sam Peckinpah]
Foley:	What Pontry again? [A punny reference to Pontryagin’s maximum principle in optimal control theory.]
	Music
	(Enter Bishop, Samuelson, Brown)
Brown:	What was Marshall’s greatest contribution?
Bishop:	In 1903, Marshall gave £1500 to King’s College.
	Music
	(Enter Fisher and Temin with box)
	“2 squares least stage” (sign) [“2-stage least squares” is the name of statistical procedure, here Fisher and Temin are the two “squares“.]
	Music
Adelman:	Mark Hopkins said the ideal education is a professor and a student sitting on a log, with the professor talking to the student. I sometimes think I would get the same results sitting on the student and talking to the log.
	Music
Bishop:	Sock it to me
	Music
	(Enter Temin and Foley)
Temin:	Here we are out here again imitating Rowan and Martin.
Foley:	Shouldn’t you be standing on the other side? What now?
Temin:	Now we’re giving the “Flying Fickle Finger of Fat Award” just like on TV.
Foley:	And who gets the “Flying Fickle Finger of Fat Award”?
Temin:	Fate. The Flying Fickle Finger of Fate Award goes to…
	(Music cue—fanfare)
Temin:	Kenneth Boulding for receiving a vote of confidence from…himself. [Boulding gave his Presidential address to the American Economic Association a few weeks later on “Economics as a Moral Science”. For likely background to the joke see the Appendix below.]
	Music
Fisher:	A Bordered hessian is a German mercenary surrounded by continentals.
	Music
Samuelson:	(carries sign) “I am an external economist.”
	Music
Foley:	What movie did you see last night?
Temin:	“Closely watched brains” [“Closely watched trains”, 1966 Czech film directed by Jiří Menzel]
	Music
Foley:	(Poring over computer printout). I think the whole idea of the budget is a stupid, dumb, stupid idea. Why do we even need a budget?
Bishop:	Look, we’ve got to have something to send down to the Congress tomorrow.
Foley:	I’m going to hold my breath until the stupid deficit comes out right.
Bishop:	Just try to remember whether capital gains are part of income or not.
	Music cue
	(Enter Fisher, Temin, Edel) “3 squares least stage” (sign) [“3-stage least squares” is a statistical procedure, and Fisher, Temin and Edel are the three “squares“.]
	Music
Brown:	The students are revolting.
Bishop:	Yes, I’ve though so for a long time.
	Enter Everybody
Rothenberg:	SDS Sam [SDS=Students for a Democratic Society… (wild guess) impression of Bogart saying “Play it Again Sam”?]
Foley:	Well, here we are out here again, and it’s time to say…
Temin:	Long joke.
Foley:	Say goodnite, Peter.
Temin:	Goodnite, Peter.
Samuelson:	Sock it to me.

Source: M.I.T. Archives. Folder “GEA 1967-68”.

_________________________

Appendix

Rostow Affair

Source: Howard Wesley Johnson, Holding the Center: Memoirs of a Life in Higher Education. From Chapter 8, pp. 189-90.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

Art Okun’s Reputation as an economic forecaster “on the back of an envelope”

Source: Joseph A. Pechman contribution for In Memoriam: Arthur M. Okun. November 28, 128–March 23, 1980 (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 1980), p. 14.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

From Shakespeare’s As You Like It
Act V, Scene 4.

JAQUES

Can you nominate in order now the degrees of the lie?

TOUCHSTONE

O sir, we quarrel in print, by the book; as you have
books for good manners: I will name you the degrees.
The first, the Retort Courteous; the second, the
Quip Modest; the third, the Reply Churlish; the
fourth, the Reproof Valiant; the fifth, the
Countercheque Quarrelsome; the sixth, the Lie with
Circumstance; the seventh, the Lie Direct. All
these you may avoid but the Lie Direct; and you may
avoid that too, with an If. I knew when seven
justices could not take up a quarrel, but when the
parties were met themselves, one of them thought but
of an If, as, ‘If you said so, then I said so;’ and
they shook hands and swore brothers. Your If is the
only peacemaker; much virtue in If.

Source: From the Shakespeare homepage at M.I.T.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

Kenneth Boulding’s Vote for AEA to Meet in Chicago in 1968

Source: Robert Scott, Kenneth Boulding: A Voice Crying in the Wilderness (Palgrave Macmillan, 2014).

Tags Adelman, Bishop, Boulding, BrownHG, Domar, EdelMD, FisherFM, Foley, Okun, RostowWW, Rothenberg, Samuelson, Temin

Funny Business M.I.T.

M.I.T. Dystopian Faculty Skit by Solow,1969

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2020-02-19

The current events of the late ‘sixties are the clear inspiration for this somewhat dark, dystopian skit for the M.I.T. economics departmental Christmas party of December 1969. According to the cover page, it was written by Robert Solow with input from Frank Fisher.

The skit was transcribed from the typed text [that includes a short handwritten addition] from Robert Solow’s papers in the Economists’ Papers Archive at Duke University. A grateful tip of the hat to Roger Backhouse for this artifact that should keep a cultural historian of economics busy for a few hours and be worth a few minutes of procrastination for working economists.

Pro-tip: you can summon all of the Economics in the Rear-view Mirror posts with economic humor content using the keyword “Funny Business”:

https://www.irwincollier.com/category/funny-business/

_______________________

Back-story for selected references in the text

SPECTRE. In Ian Fleming’s world of James Bond the acronym for the organization of international evil [Special Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge and Extortion].

Chairman Edel. Assistant Professor Matthew D. Edel (Yale, Ph.D.) taught the course Economic Growth and Development. Presumably pronounced to rhyme with “Fidel”. Edel was a regional expert for Latin America, spoke at a colloquium February 4, 1970 on “The Strategy of Cuban Economic Development”

14.463 Monetary Economics in term I, 1969-70 was taught by four instructors.

According to the staffing report for that term in the departmental records at the MIT archive.

Karen H. Johnson, M.I.T. Ph.D. (1973),
Robert K. Merton, M.I.T. Ph.D. (1970), advisor Paul Samuelson
David T. Scheffman, M.I.T. Ph.D. (1971), advisor Paul Samuelson
Jeremy J. Siegel, M.I.T. Ph.D. (1971)

There is no record that Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow were ever graduate students of economics in M.I.T.

Bread and Roses. Reference to the Women’s Liberation Organization in Boston, 1969-1971. The name chosen in memory of the Great Lawrence Strike of 1912.

Ted Behr. An M.I.T. Ph.D. (1969) who by 2009 had already gone through seven career changes and twelve jobs. Must have been quite a character judging from this interview.

I think we may assume that no Bulgarians were injured in the writing or performance of this skit.

_______________________

Some Obvious Context

Fall 1964. Berkeley Free Speech Movement

Wikipedia Entry on the Protest Year 1968

April 1968. Columbia Student Strike ; Harvard Student Strike

February 1969. Black student strike at the University of Wisconsin

_______________________

RIP VAN SAMUELSON RETURNS TO MIT AFTER THE REVOLUTION
FACULTY SKIT
Christmas 1969

CAST

P. Diamond
R. Eckaus
R. Engle
F. Fisher
C. Kindleberger
M. Piore

SCRIPTWRITER-IN-CHIEF — R. Solow

HELPED BY – F. Fisher

Is it really true that Samuelson has been asleep all these years? Then how come the 13^th and 14^th editions of the textbook came out on time?

Well, I don’t know. Samuelson isn’t talking.

Careful, there. If it’s not talking it’s not Samuelson.

It’s got to be. His broker recognizes his fingerprints from soiled sell orders. Actually, there are two schools of thought about how the textbook came out while Samuelson was sleeping. Modigliani claims that the 13^th and 14^th editions were simply forecasted by the FRB-MIT model, using a long lag. But some people believe that the 13^th and 14^theditions are just the 2^nd and 3^rd editions reprinted. Can’t verify that, though. Nobody’s been able to find a copy of the early editions.

Not that it matters. Must be a shock for Paul to realize that nobody uses the text any more, except of course for the Bulgarian translation. They’re the only people reactionary enough to go for that stuff any more.

You mean even Hanoi University has dropped it?

Oh sure, they adopted Best Known Thoughts of Chairman Edel, last year. You know, the one that begins “Equilibrium grows out of a barrel…”

Out of the barrel of a gun?

No, no, a barrel of rum. Chairman Edel never got over that trip to Cuba.

Did you fellows hear that Samuelson is back? When did he disappear anyway?

Oh, a long time ago. Even before Chomsky became President. It’s hard to know the exact date. Things were pretty clear up until April 1972, when we were supposed to have 31 days of moratorium, but the month only had 30 days, so we cancelled the first day of May, only you couldn’t cancel May Day — Christmas you could cancel, but not May Day. So we cancelled the second day of May. But then we were three days short to fit in the 32 days of moratorium for that month, so we had to run into June. From then on it was chaos.

Things are still a little funny. I can’t get used to having summer vacation in the middle of winter, and Fisher pretending to go off skiing when it’s 90 degrees in the shade, when we all know he’s leading rent strikes anyway.

Don’t complain. It might have been worse. Solow claimed to have a proof that the term would never end once we got up to 32 moratorium days a month. But one of the younger mathematical economists made a brilliant application of the theory of Riemann surfaces and showed that you could pack any finite number of moratorium days into one month if you did it right.

It was the last article anyone published in this department. Can you remember when we used to write articles and hope for tenure? That was before tenure was abolished. God, life was easy then. Nowadays it’s all action, action, action. And if you’re lucky, if you happen to win a rent strike, or destroy some draft records, or win an amateur topless contest, then maybe the central committee of SPECTRE will keep you on for a year. But suppose you lose the strike, or you let a white man go to work on a construction site, boy that SPECTRE can be tough. You remember when they threw Domar into the arena with Kampf and gave Kampf the bullhorn?

I looked away. Bloodthirsty crew — they awarded Kampf both ears and the tail that day. We had to take up a collection to send Ricky and Alice [note: Evsey Domar’s daughters] to Bread and Roses Karate School. And today they’re members of SPECTRE, the Student Power Electoral Committee for Teachers of Relevant Economics. It was better in the old days when appointments went on good looks and amiability. Even publishing was better than action all the time. That last piece of work I did, keeping the recruiter for Mars Bars from getting onto the campus, it went well but it was exhausting.

Why are we against Mars Bars?

Space, military, it’s all the same.

Anyhow, now that he’s back, what’s Paul going to do around the department? He’s getting a little old for real action, and he might find it hard to pass the monthly Relevance Check.

It’s going to be a problem. He was falling behind the times when he went to sleep. Of course he looks better now, with 10-15 years growth of beard, but he doesn’t dig the revolution. El Lider Maximo of the Graduate Student Commune asked him what he could contribute, and Samuelson said he’d like to teach the History of Economic Thought.

The History of WHAT???

That’s exactly what the Commune Lider said.

Poor old Samuelson doesn’t know that Thought isn’t Relevant. In fact he didn’t even know that Economics isn’t Relevant. When El Lider explained that it was all action now, old Samuelson said he thought there should be both Thought and Action just so their marginal net productivities were equal.

Gad, I haven’t heard anything like that since the day they fired Diamond for saying “Pareto-optimal” once too often.

Whatever happened to Diamond?

What else, he’s at B.I.T., the Bulgarian Institute of Technology. Boy, if the old stuff ever comes back in style, those Bulgarians will have it made. But go on, what happened when Samuelson pulled that bourgeois bit about marginal whatnots?

Well, Solow was standing there and he muttered something to Samuelson—it sounded like “Check the second-order conditions, Paul old boy”—and then went back to trying to look hip.

That’s living dangerously. Solow just barely passed last month’s Relevance Check, and he hasn’t been on a successful action in a long time. I don’t think that went over so good when he claimed that skiing Black Mountain was a real action. He better watch out — if B.I.T. won’t take an old man like that, SPECTRE may throw him to Kampf.

Right on. Nothing gets past El Lider. When Solow whispered that to Samuelson about second-order conditions, El Lider asked him right away — Did you say something? Solow replied Negative. Definite. That’s really living dangerously — I think it’s code of some kind.

It certainly doesn’t sound Relevant. I haven’t read anything like that in Ted Behr’s Newsweek column, at least not lately.

What’s going on this week in the department?

In the Theory course we’re holding an obstructive picket line at the drug counter of the Tech Store. Somebody discovered they were selling only white pills.

If I know what the pills are for, I hope the picket line isn’t too obstructive.

Of course not; I told you it was the Theory course. Then in the Economics of Education course we’re going to burn down a school. In the Money course, Johnson, Merton, Siegel, Bonnie, and Clyde are going to rob a bank and distribute the proceeds to the C.L.F.

Is that the California Liberation front?

Oh no, Berkeley has been a free-fire zone for months; nobody is left. It’s the Center for Love and Finance, our answer to the profit motive. Has anyone told you what the Econometrics Commune is doing?

No. Last week somebody had an idea for an empirical paper, but the results only came out at the 10% Relevance Level and half the commune was purged for Type One Error.

Served them right. Any Type II Error executions?

You know we have to have public trials for Type II error.

That’s right—Power to the People…. Well, it’s nice to see that the action curriculum is moving along. Sure beats the Old Days before chairman Edel — remember when they taught about Indifference curves? INDIFFERENCE curves, mind you, with innocent people being napalmed in Laos, Birmingham, Princeton, they taught about indifference curves.

Hard to believe. Of course now, ever since we adopted Bohmer’s best-selling text Economics for Good Guys we handle all that stuff by the tangency of the Relevance Map and the Isoconcern lines. Makes all the difference in the world, takes the subject out of the mind and puts it back in the gut, where it obviously belongs.

The Admissions Commune has been meeting all day.

How does the entering Movement look?

Terrific. There’s one girl who was heavyweight sugar-cane-cutting champion of the Big Ten, and another who had already led three successful rent strikes as a junior — two of them publishable, according to her advisor. Then there are a couple of Black Belts from Bread and Roses — they come on Karate Scholarships of course.

Any amateur topless contest winners?

We’re trying for a few, but most of them will go to Harvard—ever since they hired Brigitte Bardot for the economics faculty—

She was past her peak.

Peaks. And aren’t they all? Anyhow, all the amateur topless winners go to Harvard. But we’ve got some applicants who’ve starred in home movies. Not to mention a few school-burners and a couple of guys who have specialized in destroying computers.

How are their vibrations?

Good.

Fine. If there’s anything I can’t stand it’s bad vibrations. How about GRE scores.

The Graduate Relevance Exam grades just came — most of the people we’re accepting are in the 800’s on Obstructive and at least 750 in Vituperative. Looks like a good class — I mean Movement.

Has anyone heard what the Placement and Appointments Committees have decided?

They decided to eliminate the middleman and merge. That way everybody stays forever — once a Commune always a Commune. It gives new meaning to that old phrase about departmental inbreeding.

We still have this problem about what to do with Samuelson. Here he is after all those years asleep and hardly knowing anything about action and relevance and all the new things. The Bulgarians won’t take him — B.I.T. doesn’t mind using the old textbook, but they’re overloaded with these old-timers. If we can’t find something for him to do we may have to throw him to….

Terrible news. The students are revolting again. There’s a new movement sweeping all the Communes. They want one day of classes this month, two days of classes next month, three days the month after…there’s no telling where it will end, except that nobody can count over 30 any more.

Gad, we may have to go back to teaching again. Well, at least that gives something for Samuelson to do.

Oh didn’t they tell you. When Samuelson saw what the new system was like, he went back to sleep. Better get the Bulgarians on the phone.

Source: Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Papers of Robert M. Solow, Box 83.

Image Source: Robert Solow in his office, MIT Museum Website.

Tags BehrT, Diamond, Domar, Eckaus, EdelMD, Engle, FisherF, JohnsonKH, Kindleberger, MertonRK, Modigliani, Piore, Samuelson, ScheffmanD, SiegelJ, Solow

Funny Business Gender M.I.T. Policy Popular Economics

M.I.T. Washington Post op-ed by Samuelson on Sound Debt Policy, 1963

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2019-12-19

Source: Paul A. Samuelson, “We can have sound debt policy” from the Washington Post, included with Extention of remarks of Hon. Jeffery Cohelan of California in the House of Representatives, Friday, May 31, 1963 in Congressional Record: Proceedings and Debates. Volume 109, part 25—Appendix, May 31, 1963, p. A3510

Also found as a mimeographed copy in Harvard University Archives. Papers of Alvin Harvey Hansen, Box 1, Folder “Business Cycles.”

Image Source: Samuelson Memorial Information Page/Photos from Memorial Service. Accessed via the Internet Archive Wayback Machine.

Tags Samuelson

Exam Questions M.I.T.

M.I.T. General Examination in Advanced Economic Theory. Sept 1962 and May 1963

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2019-12-14

Edwin Burmeister received an M.A. from Cornell in September 1962 before going on to M.I.T. to complete his Ph.D. in economics in 1965. His papers at the Duke Economists’ Papers Archive include a folder of advanced economic theory general examinations at M.I.T. (May and September 1962; May 1963). The copy of the May 1962 exam has been transcribed and posted earlier. This post adds the remaining two exams to the collection of artifacts. Pro-tip: Burmeister’s papers includes his solutions to the September 21, 1962 exam, most likely prepared during his preparation for the May 1963 exam.

I should mention that on none of the three exams is “M.I.T.” actually written. However, since Samuelson and Solow’s names are typed on the copy of the Sept 1962 exam and since Burmeister was a M.I.T. graduate student for certainly the May 1963 examination (and, like many before and after him, cast an eye on previous exam questions), it is pretty obvious where the exam questions must have come from.

________________________

General Examination
Advanced Economic Theory

Professors P. A. Samuelson and R. M. Solow
Friday, September 21, 1962

Do as many problems as you have time.

Derive the demand function, X_i = Dⁱ(I, p₁, …, p_n) ≥ 0 for a consumer with income I and having positive prices and having respectively preferences satisfying the following utility functions:
1. 1. U = k₁ log X₁ + … + k_n log X_n
  2. U = mX₀ +logX₁ [Be careful!]
  3. U = a₁X₁ + a₂X₂ + … + a_nX_n [where] a_i≥0

Extra credit

1. 1. U = Min (X₁/b₁, X₂/b₂, …, X_n/b_n)

A firm owning some fixed and non-transferable “capital” has a production function

Q = f(labor, land) = 20L^.5T^.25

It sells in a competitive market at $P_q. It rents labor in a competitive factor market at $W and rents land at $R.
What are its demand relations for factors, and its supply relation for output? What are its “profits” or “quasi-rents to owned capital.”
It will suffice for you to write down all the relations that define these desired functions and describe how they could be solved. (In other words, you don’t have to do the explicit solving.)

In a Hicksian general equilibrium model all income effects turn out to be negligible. Comment decisively on its

(a) Property of dynamic stability (or possible instability)
(b) Property of imperfect stability (or possible instability)
(c) Property of perfect stability (or possible instability)

Let H(X,y) be a function of non-negative vectors X(of dimension m) and y (of dimension n). Define X*, y* as a saddle point of H if

H(X*,y) ≥ H(X*,y*) ≥H(X,y*)

For all non-negative (X,y).
Prove that X* and y* are optimal vectors for a pair of dual linear programs if and only if they provide a saddle point for the function

H(X,y) = C’X+b’y – y’AX.

Show that a simple Leontief model is capable of producing any positive vector final demands (given enough labor) if and only if (I-A)^-1 is non-negative.

Consider the von-Neumann model with 3 activities and 4 commodities and with input matrix

$\text{A}=\left[ \begin{matrix} 0 & 1 & 0 \\ 1 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 1 & 0 \\ \end{matrix} \right]$ and output matrix $\text{B}=\left[ \begin{matrix} 1 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 2 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 1 \\ \end{matrix} \right]$

Find the optimal activity and price vectors in the von-Neumann sense, and the associated expansion rate.

________________________

General Examination in Advanced Economic Theory: May 1963

Answer any 4 questions.

Suppose all of the N people in a market have identical indifference maps, that are homothetic (i.e., with unitary income elasticities everywhere). Let each j^th man have his endowment

$\left( \bar{Q}_{1}^{j},\bar{Q}_{2}^{j},\ldots ,\bar{Q}_{r}^{j} \right)$

1. 1. Show that the final equilibrium of exchange is quite independent of the distribution among men of the fixed totals
$\begin{array}{l}\bar{Q}_{1}^{1}+\bar{Q}_{1}^{2}+\ldots +\bar{Q}_{1}^{N}={{A}_{1}}\\...................................\\\bar{Q}_{r}^{1}+\bar{Q}_{r}^{2}+\ldots +\bar{Q}_{r}^{N}={{A}_{r}}\end{array}$
1. Show that the equilibrium prices can be found by treating any man as the single Robinson-Crusoe living under autarky.
2. What can you, therefore, state about the i) Imperfect, ii) Perfect, and iii) Dynamic stability of the equilibrium?
A Kaldor-Goodwin model defines[sic]
$\text{a}\frac{\text{dK}}{\text{dt}}=\beta \text{Y}-\text{K, }\left( \text{a,b,}\beta \right)>0$
$\text{b}\frac{\text{dY}}{\text{dt}}=\frac{\text{dK}}{\text{dt}}-\text{S}\left( \text{Y} \right)$
(i) Explain the meaning of each equation. (ii) Give an equation for its stationary equilibrium solution. (iii) What does its local stability and oscillation depend on? (iv) What shape for the only arbitrary function will give rise to unique-amplitude oscillation?
In Mitopia
$\text{C}+\frac{\text{dK}}{\text{dt}}=\sqrt{\text{KL}}\text{ and L = }{{\text{L}}_{0}}{{\text{e}}^{\text{gt}}}$ .
How must K(t) grow if C/L, per capita consumption, is to remain at a maximum constant level? What will then be the interest rate, and the relative share of labor?
A machine with a length of life T costs $f(T). The machine is known with certainty to yield a net income stream of $a per year steadily throughout its lifetime. Find the equation determining the optimal length of life of a machine under each of the following assumptions.
1. The instantaneous rate of interest in a perfect capital market is r; the length of life is chosen to maximize the present value of net cash flow (including initial cost).
2. The interest rate r is used to discount net income, and durability is chosen to maximize the capital value of a new machine per dollar of initial cost.
3. The internal rate of return (i.e. the discount rate that equates capital value and initial cost) is maximized.

Suppose that in cases (a) and (b) the interest rate is such that the capital value of the machine equals its initial cost. Show that all three solutions then coincide. Which is the “right” way to look at the problem?

In a Leontief system with n commodities and one primary factor, labor, let P_i be the money price of commodity i, P₀ the money wage, a_oithe direct labor input per unit output of commodity i, X_i the output of commodity i, and C_i the final demand for commodity i. Show that the increase in P_j/P₀ resulting from a unit increase in a_0iequals the increase in X_ineeded for a unit increase in C_j.
Consider an individual whose life is divided into two periods, Present and Future. He is endowed with some physical good in each period.
1. Show how to construct a supply curve relating the amount of saving he will do in the Present as a function of the rate of interest.
2. Show that in a society of identical individuals with no time preference, the equilibrium rate of interest is zero if corresponding to each individual with endowment X in the Present and Y in the Future, there is another individual with endowment Y in the Present and X in the Future.

Source: Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book & Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Edwin Burmeister papers. Box 23, (unlabeled) Folder.

Tags Burmeister, Samuelson, Solow

Funny Business Harvard

Harvard. ‘Twas a Night in the Sixties. Poem by Martin Feldstein, 1980

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2019-12-04

1997 Feldstein — (Cambridge, MA - March 9, 1997) Faculty portrait of Professor Martin Feldstein. Staff Photo Mary Lee/Harvard University News Office.

‘Tis the Season to be Jolly so it is time to share this 39-year old economics parody composed, and one imagines performed, by Harvard Professor, Reagan economics adviser, and long-time president of the National Bureau of Economic Research, Martin Feldstein (1939-2019).

I have inserted first or last names between square brackets for the benefit of any non-economist or young economist (Boomer says, “You’re Welcome”) that has somehow landed on this page.

__________________

‘Twas a Night in the Sixties
by Martin Feldstein

Cambridge, Massachusetts
December 1980

‘Twas a night in the sixties
And all through the land
Unemployment was falling
Inflation at hand.

The stock market was rising,
Without any care,
In hopes a Dow thousand
Soon would be there.

The Keynesians were snuggled
Secure in their Chairs,
While visions of multipliers
Allayed all their cares.

Paul [Samuelson] with his textbook
And Art [Okun] with his gap
Had settled their brains
For a long postwar nap.

When out in the land
There arose such a clatter,
A voice that was crying
That money could matter.

Away from their desks
They flew in a flash
To see who was claiming
Such power for cash.

They looked at their models
With equations precise,
That gave semblance of proof
To conclusions so nice.

When what to their wondering
Eyes should appear
But a miniature sleigh
With eight tiny reindeer

With a little old driver
Who was having such fun
They knew in a moment
It must be Milton [Friedman]

More numerous than eagles
His supporters they came
And he whistled and shouted
And called them by name.

First John [sic, Jean-Baptiste] Say and then [David] Hume
Then [Alfred] Marshall and [John Stuart] Mill,
Now [Karl] Brunner and [Alan] Meltzer
And Anna [Schwartz] and Phil [Cagan].

From the U. of Chicago
To Minneapolis-St. Paul
Then dash away! Dash away!
Dash away all!

As economic theories with which economists play
When they meet with an obstacle
Assume it away,

So off to the journals,
Their papers they flew,
With monetarist theorems,
Rational expectations too.

And even in Cambridge
Was heard the new truth,
The theorems and lemmas
Of each little proof.

The Keynesian thinkers
Were spinning around
When onto the scene,
Milton came with a bound.

He was dressed all in gold
From his head to his foot
And his ideas were polished
And ready to put.

“Velocity’s stable,
M1 and M2,
Which shows what the Fed
Shouldn’t be trying to do.”

“That curve by Phillips
It really is straight
And the cost of funds
Is the real interest rate.”

He wrote many a word,
And with evidence too.
At the NBER
His volumes they grew.

His ideas how simple.
He puts them so well.
It would be no wonder
When he got his Nobel.

A wink of his eye
And a nod of his head
Soon gave Keynesians to know
They had something to dread.

Then turning his talents
To the writing of prose
TV and best seller
He did with wife Rose.

Then he sprang to his sleigh
To his team gave a whistle
And away they all flew
Like the down of a thistle.

But I heard him exclaim
As he drove out of sight,
“Keep freedom for all,
and keep money tight.”

Source: Ancient, analogue copy found in Irwin Collier’s personal papers.

Image Source: Faculty portrait of Martin Feldstein in 1997 in The Harvard Gazette, June 13, 2019.

Tags Brunner, Cagan, Feldstein, Friedman, Meltzer, Okun, Samuelson, Schwartz

Letter from Chairman Seymour Harris to Paul Samuelson May 25, 1956

HARVARD UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

Office of the Chairman

M-8 Littauer Center Cambridge 38, Massachusetts

From the M.I.T. economics department records for 1955-56

Enrollment figures from Harvard President’s Report

Economics 201 Economic Theory Fall 1956 READING LIST

I. Supply, Demand, Revenue and Cost

Suggested:

II. Production and Consumption Analysis

A. Production and Cost

Suggested:

B. Utility and Consumption Theory

III. Welfare Economics

Economics 201 Hour Exam November 3, 1956

1956-57 HARVARD UNIVERSITY Economics 201 Midyear examination. January, 1957.

Economics 201 Spring Term, 1956-57 Economic Theory—Professor Chamberlin

I. Monopoly and Monopolistic Competition

Suggested:

II. Income Distribution—General; Wages.

Suggested:

III. Interest

Suggested:

IV. Rent

V. Profits

Suggested:

HARVARD UNIVERSITY Department of Economics Economics 201 Final Examination May, 1957

A. Choose two of the following questions, allowing one-half hour for each.

Memo from Chairman E. Cary Brown on a Revision of General Exams, 1975

Also from 1961

From the President’s Report 1961, M.I.T.

Dean Reminding Economics Department about Information Request

Economics Department’s First Response to Dean’s Request for Information

Follow-up Request by Dean

Economics Department’s Response to Follow-up Request by the Dean

Reminder/Invitation

GEA CHRISTMAS SKIT 1968 [Faculty]

Appendix

Rostow Affair

Art Okun’s Reputation as an economic forecaster “on the back of an envelope”

From Shakespeare’s As You Like It Act V, Scene 4.

Kenneth Boulding’s Vote for AEA to Meet in Chicago in 1968

Back-story for selected references in the text

Some Obvious Context

RIP VAN SAMUELSON RETURNS TO MIT AFTER THE REVOLUTION FACULTY SKIT Christmas 1969

CAST

General Examination Advanced Economic Theory

Professors P. A. Samuelson and R. M. Solow Friday, September 21, 1962

General Examination in Advanced Economic Theory: May 1963

‘Twas a Night in the Sixties by Martin Feldstein

Letter from Chairman Seymour Harris to Paul Samuelson
May 25, 1956

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

M-8 Littauer Center
Cambridge 38, Massachusetts

Economics 201
Economic Theory
Fall 1956
READING LIST

Economics 201
Hour Exam
November 3, 1956

1956-57
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Economics 201
Midyear examination. January, 1957.

Economics 201
Spring Term, 1956-57
Economic Theory—Professor Chamberlin

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics
Economics 201
Final Examination
May, 1957

Memo from Chairman E. Cary Brown
on a Revision of General Exams, 1975

GEA CHRISTMAS SKIT 1968
[Faculty]

From Shakespeare’s As You Like It
Act V, Scene 4.

RIP VAN SAMUELSON RETURNS TO MIT AFTER THE REVOLUTION
FACULTY SKIT
Christmas 1969

General Examination
Advanced Economic Theory

Professors P. A. Samuelson and R. M. Solow
Friday, September 21, 1962

‘Twas a Night in the Sixties
by Martin Feldstein