Tag: Temin

Categories
Economics Programs Economists M.I.T.

M.I.T. Department of Economics Annual Report by E. Cary Brown, 1975-1976

The following annual report of the M.I.T. department of economics was most likely written for the care and feeding of administrators and the members of the department’s visiting committee. This report covers what was my second year of graduate school, so for folks from that time it reads like an annual Holiday newsletter to the family.

_______________________

Department of Economics
1975 – 76

Undergraduate Program

The long-run impact of the past year’s changes in the Institute Requirement in the Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences is not yet clear. Unquestionably they have increased the Department’s enrollment, but the precise amount is uncertain because simultaneously a major revision was made in the two introductory economics subjects. In the past year enrollments were larger than previously, but smaller than in the transition of the previous year. Nearly 200 of the Class of 1976 concentrated in economics for their Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences Requirement. Of all students presently enrolled, 327 (primarily juniors and seniors) have elected to concentrate in economics.

Undergraduate majors remain steady in numbers. As in 1974-75, 20 degrees were awarded. In the spring term the Undergraduate Economics Association was reactivated. Its weekly meetings with faculty led to several proposals for revision of the undergraduate program, and several student-faculty socials were organized.

Graduate Program

Enrollment has been remarkably steady in the graduate program. The number of applications for admission was virtually identical to the average of the previous six years. Next year’s entering class of 32 will be slightly larger than average, and will have fewer foreign students and more women, reflecting a shift in the percentage of applications from these groups. Four students from minority groups are expected to be in this class.

Financial support for the graduate student has changed very little over the last several years. We are still fortunate in having from one-third to one-half of the entering students on National Science Foundation Fellowships. For the whole student body, there has been an increase in the support by US foundations (other than NSF) and a decrease in support provided by M.I.T.

The number receiving the Doctor of Philosophy increased somewhat in the past year to 21. For the first time, two American blacks received degrees.* The class fared well in placement, their median salary offer totaling 24 percent above that of 1971. Like the past average, 86 percent went into teaching and 14 percent into non-teaching positions.

*Samuel Myers, Jr. Ph.D. thesis: “A Portfolio Model of Illegal Transfers”, supervised by Robert Solow.
Glenn Loury. Ph.D. thesis: “Essays in the Theory of the Distribution of Income”, supervised by Robert Solow.
See: William Darity Jr. and Arden Kreeger, “The Desegregation of an Elite Economics Department’s PhD Program: Black Americans at MIT“, History of Political Economy 46 (annual suppl.)

The Graduate Economics Association awarded the outstanding teacher in the Department prize to Professor Stanley Fischer.

PUBLIC SERVICE ACTIVITIES

The faculty has always been involved in public service activities tying research to the public interest. In connection with M.I.T.’s participation in the Bicentennial Celebration, Professor Jagdish N. Bhagwati set up a recent conference on the New International Economic Order: Professor Ann F. Friedlaender is planning one for this fall on Air Pollution and Administrative Control. Through the German Marshall Fund, Professor Richard S. Eckaus is organizing a fall conference on economic problems of Portugal. Professor Franco Modigliani arranged a conference through the Bank of Finland on International Monetary Mechanisms.

Various Congressional committees and government agencies have been advised. Professor Peter A. Diamond served on the Consultant Panel on Social Security for the Congressional Research Service. Professors Rudiger Dornbusch and Fischer and Institute Professor Paul A. Samuelson prepared a report for the US Department of Commerce on international financial arrangements. Professor Robert E. Hall was a member of the Advisory Committee on Population Statistics, Bureau of the Census. Professor Jerry A. Hausman served on the Econometrics Advisory Committee to the Federal Energy Administration. Institute Professor Modigliani was a consultant and member of the Committee on Monetary Statistics, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. Institute Professor Samuelson consulted with the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the US Treasury, and the Congressional Budget Office. Professor Charles A. Myers was a member of the National Manpower Policy Task Force. Institute Professor Robert M. Solow served as Deputy Chairman, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.

Several faculty members have been involved with the National Academy of Sciences and its related organizations. Professor Eckaus prepared a report, Appropriate Technology for Developing Countries, for the Board on Science and Technology for Developing Countries of the National Academies of Science and Engineering. Professor Franklin M. Fisher served on a National Academy panel on the Effects of Deterrence and Incapacitation; Professor Friedlaender was on the Executive Committee, Assembly of Behavioral and Social Sciences, National Research Council; Institute Professor Modigliani was on the Finance Committee; Institute Professor Samuelson served on the Editorial Board of the Proceedings; and Institute Professor Solow chaired the Steering Committee on Environmental Studies.

Professor Eckaus led an OECD Mission to Portugal that included Professors Lance Taylor and Dornbusch.* Professor Paul L. Joskow was a consultant to OECD in energy. Professor Evsey D. Domar was a member of a delegation of economists sent by the American Economic Association to the Soviet Union. Institute Professor Modigliani, who gave much time to the problems of stabilization in Italy, was a member of the Board of Directors of the Italian Council for Social Sciences.

*Along with several graduate students among whom were Paul Krugman, Andrew Abel and Jeffrey Frankel. Paul Krugman has written a short note about this experience with a picture!

The Brookings Institution Panel for Economic Activity included Professors Dornbusch and Hall, with Institute Professors Modigliani, Samuelson, and Solow as senior advisors to it. Professor Friedlaender served on the examining committee, Graduate Records Examination, Educational Testing Service. Institute Professor Modigliani served on the Committee on Economic Stabilization, Social Science Research Council. Professor Fisher is a member of the Board of Governors of Tel Aviv University. Institute Professor Solow continues as Trustee for the Institute of Advanced Study.

RESEARCH

International topics seem to dominate the research interests of the faculty. Professor Bhagwati, in addition to his work in developing countries and international trade theory, has given attention to a proposal for applying taxation to the brain drain. Professor Eckaus studied the role of financial markets and their regulation and the behavior of income distribution in economic development. Professor Taylor had three major areas of research: the development of nutrition planning models in Pakistan, international food aid and reserve policies, and growth and income distribution in Brazil.

Professor Morris A. Adelman’s continuing research on the world oil market, Professor Joskow’s analysis of the international nuclear energy industry, and Professor Martin L. Weitzman’s examination of OPEC and oil pricing involve applied microeconomics with international implications.

Research in various applied microeconomics areas was responsible for the second largest fraction of faculty effort. Institute Professor Solow continued to research the economics of exhaustible resources, and Professor Weitzman completed his analysis of the optimal development of resource pools. Professor Joskow has explored the future of the electric utility industry and its financing, the future of the US atomic energy industry, and the pattern of energy consumption in the US. He is developing a simulation model of the energy industry, and is reviewing the regulatory activities of government agencies in general and the health care sector in particular. Professor Hausman examined the Project Independence Report and is analyzing the choice of new technologies in energy research.

In the transporation field, Professor Friedlaender surveyed the issues in regulatory policy for railroads and alternative scenarios in federal transporation policy. Professor Jerome Rothenberg examined such problems in urban transportation as pricing policies, demand sensitivity to price, and modeling locational effects. Professor William C. Wheaton considered an optimal pricing and investment policy in highways under a gasoline tax.

Inextricably intertwined with urban transportation are questions of urban location and housing. Professor Rothenberg carried out research in such aspects of this problem as microeconomics of internal migration, supply-demand for housing in multizoned areas, the impact of energy costs on urban location, and the development of a model of housing markets and of metropolitan development and location that can be applied to general policy questions. Professor Wheaton developed an equilibrium model of housing and locational choice based on Boston experience.

Institute Professor Modigliani also conducted research on the housing market, but his interest comes primarily from the side of stabilization policies and similar macroeconomic problems. He also participated in a review after 20 years of his life cycle hypothesis of saving, made monetary policy prescriptions for both the US and Italy, reflected on the description of financial sectors in econometric models, and explored more deeply the application of optimal control to the design of optimal stabilization policies in economic models. Institute Professor Samuelson reviewed the art and science of macromodels over the 50 years of their development. Professor Friedlaender completed a quarterly macromodel of the Massachusetts economy. Professor Hall developed a model to deal with income tax changes and consumption.

Public economics has both macro and micro aspects, both of which are represented in the Department’s research. With Visiting Professor James A. Mirrlees, Professor Diamond theorized about public shadow prices with constant returns to scale, and about the assignment of liability. He also has generalized the Ramsey tax rule and continued his research into an optimal Social Security system. Professor Hausman is reexamining the cost of a negative income tax; Professor Rothenberg analyzed the distributional impact of public service provision; and Professor Wheaton explored intertemporal effects of land taxes, fiscal federalism in practice, and the financial plight of American cities.

Besides such theoretical research, there was significant research of an entirely pure nature. Professor Robert L. Bishop reexamined the measurement of consumer surplus. Professor Fisher extended his exploration of the stability of general equilibrium and of aggregate production functions. Professor Weitzman investigated the welfare significance of national product in a dynamic economy. Professor Hal R. Varian further explored the theory of fairness, non-Walrasian equilibria, and macromodels of unemployment and disequilibrium. Professor Hausman examined the econometric implications of truncated distributions and samples, of probit models, and of simultaneous equation models. In historical research, Professor Domar was concerned with serfdom, while Professor Charles Kindleberger investigated the role of the merchant in nineteenth-century technologic transfer.

Publications

Professor Bhagwati edited Taxing the Brain Drain: A Proposal and Brain Drain and Taxation: Theory and Empirical Analysis, and coauthored Foreign Trade Regimes and Economic Development: India. Professors Dornbusch and Kindleberger published numerous papers on implications of the new international monetary exchange structure for exchange rates, price stability, international trade, and international capital movements. Professor Weitzman continued his study of the Russian economy with a paper on the new Soviet incentive model.

With Visiting Professor of Management Ezio Tarantelli*, Institute Professor Modigliani published Labor Market, Income Distribution and Private Consumption (in Italian) and various papers on stabilization policy in Italy. He also wrote papers on inflation and the housing market and edited New Mortgage Designs for Stable Housing in an Inflationary Environment. Professor Hall’s labor market research resulted in papers on persistence of unemployment, occupational mobility, and taxation of earnings under public assistance. Professor Michael Piore wrote on labor market stratification and the effect on industrial growth of immigration from Puerto Rico to Boston. Professor Fisher had several publications on indexation and adjustment of mortgages to inflationary episodes. In the realm of economic history, Professor Temin published Reckoning with Slavery and Did Monetary Force Cause the Great Depression?

*Ezio Tarantelli was the victim of a Red Brigades’ assassination in 1985.

Institute Professor Samuelson published theoretical papers on factor price equalization and trade pattern reversal. In the realm of pure research, he put out papers on nonlinear and stochastic population analysis, optimal population growth, and the optimal Social Security system implied in a lifecycle growth model. He also brought out the tenth edition of his famous text, Economics: An Introduction Analysis.

FACULTY

Visiting Professor John R. Moroney was here from Tulane University; Visiting Professor Mirrlees came in the spring term from Nuffield College, Oxford University. Regular faculty on leave were Professors Fisher and Joskow in the fall and Professor Weitzman in the spring.

It is a pleasure to report the promotion to Associate Professor of Jerry A. Hausman. A new appointee, Professor Jeffrey E. Harris, with the unusual background of an M.D. and a Ph.D. in economics, will provide long-sought coverage in health economics.

Professor Kindleberger will retire as Ford Professor and become a Senior Lecturer on a half-time basis. Since 1948, when he came as an Associate Professor, Professor Kindleberger has been an effective teacher, scholar, participant in faculty governance, and counselor to governments and the public. He has trained the leading international economists of the next generation; he has produced a dozen books and more than a hundred articles in international trade and finance and in economic history. He epitomizes the highest kind of academician.

Several honors were bestowed on members of the Department. Institute Professor Modigliani will complete his year as President of the American Economic Association. Professor Myers received a Distinguished Alumni award from Pennsylvania State University. Professor Fisher was F.W. Paish Lecturer to the Association of (English) University Teachers of Economics. Institute Professor Solow received a D. Litt. from Warwick University, and Institute Professor Samuelson, a D.Sc. from the University of Rochester.

EDGAR CARY BROWN

Source: MIT Libraries, Institute Archives and Special Collections. MIT Department of Economics Records, Box 1, Folder “Annual Report 1975-6”.

Image Source: Building E52, Alfred P. Sloan Jr. Building, later Morris and Sophie Chang Building

 

https://mitmuseum.mit.edu/collections/subject/building-e52-alfred-p.-sloan-jr.-building-later-morris-and-sophie-chang-building-52

Categories
Economics Programs M.I.T. Undergraduate

M.I.T. Economics department committee (re-)organization. 1976-78

During my second year in graduate school at M.I.T. (1975-76), the economics department professors were engaged in a discussion about reforming the administration of their department. At the time I was completely unaware of this discussion that had been provoked by the following memorandum written by then Department Head, Professor E. Cary Brown, based on his experience with the growing overload of administrative chores and responsibilities in a department with the scale of that attained by M.I.T.’s economics department.

Brown’s memo to the faculty is followed by a transcription of a copy of the letter Brown wrote to Robert Solow, who as an administrative reorganization committee member, must have been asked for some further testimony. The entire committee’s (Peter A. Diamond, Stanley Fischer, Jerry Hausman, Paul Joskow, Robert M. Solow) report was completed two months after Brown’s memo. In the same departmental file from the M.I.T. archives, one finds a copy of the actual assignment of administrative responsibilities for the academic year 1977/78.

Many, if not most, of the administrative tasks had been allocated and faithfully executed before this “reorganization”. I know that Evsey Domar had long been covering the placement of new Ph.D.’s and also proudly serving as the departmental representative for library-related affairs. I sense reading these documents that the truly neglected child all along was the undergraduate program for which some arm-twisting was required to achieve equitable burden-sharing among the faculty. But perhaps there were other specific items that had been sore points too. Maybe Brown simply wanted an explicit organization chart to forestall “whataboutism” from the mouths of relatively uncooperative colleagues. But like I wrote above, this was a discussion that was invisible to me (appropriately so) at the time.

Cf. The committee assignments in the Harvard economics department during the 1972-73 academic year. 

__________________________

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS
CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS 02139

March 12, 1976

Economics Department Faculty

Dear [blank]

For some time I have become increasingly dismayed at the increase in the administrative burden in the Department, and now find the present job as Head to be a nearly impossible one. If the job is to be made tolerable, it must have substantial additional faculty support in some form to cut it down to a scope manageable either by me or a successor.

There are two basic ways that this can be achieved: (1) by spreading the administrative activities and responsibilities more widely among the faculty; or (2) placing these tasks on essentially an associate departmental head, whose precise title could take various forms Executive Officer, Academic Officer (e.g., Tony French in Physics), or Associate Head. I personally would favor the Associate Head route, but regard it as an open question subject to further discussion and consideration, and to Administration approval. This new structure should be treated as an experiment, to last no longer than until the next Head is chosen, and to be reconsidered at that time.

My own thinking about the administrative tasks of the Department separates them into four major areas: undergraduate programs, graduate programs, research programs, and personnel and budgeting. While these can be headed by an administrator or by faculty, it seems to me that the first two programs should have formal faculty control regardless of the form the administrative reorganization takes. The graduate program nearly has that form now and largely runs itself, with the exception of a few odds and ends that now lie outside the responsibility of the graduate registration officers. The undergraduate program is a long way from this structure and will require a good deal of imagination, initiative and effort to resuscitate the Undergraduate Economics Association and provide more guidance and support for majors. The research programs (student and faculty) focus more or less clearly under the Committee on Economic Research. Personnel and budgeting are an administrative responsibility. They have involved increasing amounts of time as budgets have tightened, space has tightened, and the search for new faculty has expanded.

The administrative structure is an important matter to the Department. Because it involves departmental administration and the role of the Department Head, it concerns the Administration through Dean Hanham. He has asked me to appoint the following committee to consider these questions of reorganization and to make recommendations: Bob Solow, Peter Diamond, Stan Fischer, Paul Joskow, and Jerry Hausman. Please give your views to members of the committee as soon as you can.

Sincerely,
[signed “Cary”]
E. Cary Brown, Head

ECB/sc

__________________________

Brown to Solow

March 16, 1976

Professor Robert Solow
E52-383

Dear Bob:

I shrink from making organization charts, but the following diagram is intended to give some idea of the orders of magnitude of faculty involvement in departmental chores.

Chairman, Committee on Undergraduate Studies

  1. Faculty counselors (we have agreed with the UEA to keep members to 10 or less, and let faculty build up expertise by staying adviser for freshman, sophomore, junior, or senior year).

—10 faculty: 2 for each class. 4 for seniors

  1. Faculty adviser for humanities concentration in economics (advises and signs up students); also considers the eligibility of economics subjects, what we consider concentration, etc.
  2. Closely related to (2) is possible membership on the so-called Humanities Committee that approves and reviews the whole Humanities, Arts, and Social Science requirement and program. (We have no one on this year but as the largest concentration will surely need to have a presence.)
  3. Approval of transfer of credits from other schools to M.I.T.
  4. Advising with Undergraduate Economic Association in matters academic, professional, social.
  5. Undergraduate placement, while an Institute responsibility, could be supervised and assisted by a faculty member who would keep up to date on summer placement, interning possibilities, salaries. The experience our students have applying to graduate schools, actual jobs offered and taken.
  6. Design of curriculum, cooperative program, etc.
  7. Various activities, such as providing information to undergraduates in their choice of major (Midway in fall, seminar in spring), Open House activities, Alumni activities, etc.
  8. Relations with other Departments at undergraduate level, such as subject offerings, subject content, etc.
  9. Supervision and staffing of undergraduate subjects with multiple sections — 14.001, 14.002, 14.03, 14.04, 14.06, 14.30, 14.31.
  10. Catalog copy.

Chairman, Committee on Graduate Studies

  1. Graduate Registration Officers, so far one each for first two years, and one for thesis writers. Has been suggested that we have an additional adviser for foreign students and minority and women?
  2. Admissions Committee has, in the past, had three members.
  3. Placement, both summer and permanent.
  4. Supervision of core subjects.
  5. Ph.D. and M.S. requirements, program, size.
  6. Financial aid — coordinating various GRO; Admissions Committee, and Budget limitations.
  7. Graduate School Policy Committee meetings.
  8. Annual revision of brochure.
  9. Graduate Economics Association, Black Graduate Economics Association.
  10. Catalog copy.
  11. Various activities — professional and social that are not contained within a particular class.

Chairman, Committee on Economic Research (I faculty)

  1. Organized list of faculty projects requiring research assistants and the supply of them (both graduate and undergraduate). Assignment of R.A.’s.
  2. Assistance in research proposals.
  3. Inventory of internships and off-campus research.
  4. Supervision of unscheduled subjects, such as UROP, Undergraduate Seminar, and thesis.
  5. Supervision of M.I.T. Working Paper Series.
  6. Allocation of computer funds, developing rules, developing alternative sources.

Personnel and Budgeting (Administrative Officer and a large chunk of my time)

  1. Personnel
    1. Nonfaculty is supervised by the Administrative Officer.
    2. Faculty Personnel

(1) Employment — new Ph.D.’s and senior faculty
(2) Review and promotion
(3) Assignments, leaves, research

    1. Postdoctoral personnel
  2. Space allocations, revisions.
  3. Budget Proposals
  4. a. Proposals
    b. Implementation

Telephone
Xerox & Ditto
Supplies
Equipment

There may be other matters that I am leaving out – routine meetings average probably a day a week, and things like that. Consultations with faculty, students, and other Departments, would probably add a couple more days.

If there are questions, I’ll oblige, of course.

Sincerely,
E. Cary Brown, Head

ECB/sc

__________________________

MEMORANDUM

May 10, 1976

TO:       Department Faculty
FROM: Committee on Reorganization (PAD, SF, JH, PJ, RMS) [Peter A. Diamond, Stanley Fischer, Jerry Hausman, Paul Joskow, Robert M. Solow]

SUBJECT:         Reorganization

ECB’s [E. Cary Brown] letter of March 12, which created this committee, starts from the premise that the administrative burden on the Department Head has become essentially impossible. This seems clearly to be the case. It has happened because the department has increased in size and complexity without any corresponding adaptation of its administrative arrangements. Every new function has fallen into the Head’s lap. (Top that, anyone.) Apart from the sheer burden of work thus created, another problem is the difficulty of communications, because that is also time-consuming.

After some palaver and negotiation, we have a reorganizational package to suggest. It rests on two conditions; since it is something of an interconnected web, it will probably unravel if the two conditions can not be met. (1) Since the only way to correct an excessively centralized structure is to decentralize it, we propose to diffuse administrative responsibility more widely through the department; there will be at least one serious administrative post for everyone, or perhaps two minor posts instead, but everyone will have to participate. (2) The administrative load attached to the undergraduate program has increased with the size of the enrollment and the improvement of the curriculum; no one wants to manage an inadequately staffed program. We propose, therefore, that the normal teaching load for everyone in the department be agreed to be half graduate and half undergraduate teaching. This definition should be extended to everyone on the departmental budget: joint appointees, visiting professors, etc. As soon as there are a couple of exceptions to this understanding, there will be more. Then the management of the undergraduate program will break down, and it will revert or default to the Department Head, and that is what we are trying to stave off.

The particular organization we have in mind is as follows.

  1. The central functions (budgeting, space, leaves, relations with the MIT hierarchy, etc.) will be in the hands of the Department Head and an Associate Head namely PAD [Peter A. Diamond]). In addition, one of them (probably ECB [E. Cary Brown]) will be an ex officio member of the Committee on Undergraduate Studies to be proposed below, and the other will be an ex officio member of the Committee on Graduate Studies. The precise division of labor is obviously a matter of taste; for the moment, ECB [E. Cary Brown] will probably do most of the relations with the MIT structure and PAD [Peter A. Diamond] will concentrate on intra-departmental matters.
  2. There will be a Director of Undergraduate Studies (PT [Peter Temin]), who will be chairman of a Committee on Undergraduate Studies (with 2 or 3 additional members, possibly RD [Rudiger Dornbusch], PJ [Paul Joskow] and one other). This committee will be responsible for revisions of the undergraduate curriculum adding and subtracting subjects, staffing them, degree requirements, etc. In recent discussions with the Undergraduate Economics Association, the proposal has merged that there should be a larger number of Undergraduate Advisors (i.e., registration officers) than there is now, with each taking care of at most 10 students. That suggests we would need about 8 such advisors. The members of the Committee might serve as advisors, plus others. Merely serving as registration officer for 10 undergraduates is by itself not an onerous job.
  3. There seems to be no need for change in the organization of graduate studies in the department. We suggest that there be a Director of Graduate Studies (RSE [Richard S. Eckaus]) and a Committee on Graduate Studies which would, as now, consist of the other two Graduate Registration Officers. Things are going very well now with REH [Robert E. Hall] handling the first-year students. MJP [Michael J. Piore] the second-year students and RSE [Richard S. Eckaus] the thesis-writers. REH [Robert E. Hall] is prepared to take on the task or devising a scheme to keep track of post-generals students, and see that they find themselves a reasonable thesis topic in a reasonable amount of time. The scheme may need another person to look after it.
  4. We suggest the creation of Committee on Staffing whose functions would include looking after the hiring of assistant professors, the dovetailing of visiting professors with faculty leaves, and the rationing of visiting scholars. The picture we have is that the members of committee would do the interviewing and preliminary screening of new Ph.D.’s at the annual meetings, and decide which of them to invite to come and give seminars. At that stage and thereafter, the whole department faculty would be in on the act, and final decisions would be made, as they are now, in a department meeting. The main time-consumer for this committee would be the correspondence in connection with hiring. Since that would fall on the Chairman, that post would be a major one. For the other members of the committee, the burden would be relatively light. We suggest REH [Robert E. Hall] as chairman, plus perhaps 3 others.
  5. There seems to be no reason to change the way the Admissions Committee now functions.
  6. We see no need for major change in the Placement process. Our only suggestion are (a) perhaps to provide EDD [Evsey D. Domar] with another person to share the load, and (b) to have a pre-season department meeting, analogous to the post-generals meeting, at which each graduate student entering the market could be discussed by the full facuIty, and information and ideas collected.
  7. There are other details. RLB [Robert L. Bishop] is functioning as advisor to MIT undergraduates thinking about economics as part of their Humanities requirement, and we are happy to preserve that human capital. MAA [Morris A. Adelman] who has been our representative to CGSP is to begin a term on the CEP, which should count as a major administrative burden. We need his successor on CGSP.

One last point: we hope that each committee chairman will promptly send a written notice of each substantive decision to the Head and Associate Head for distribution to the department faculty, so that communications are well looked after. That plus rational expectations should do the trick.

Source: MIT Archives. MIT Department of Economics Records. Box 2, Folder “Department Organization”.

__________________________

DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITIES:
ECONOMICS DEPARTMENT 1977-78
  1. UNDERGRADUATE COMMITTEE
Chairman: Peter Temin
Members: Cary Brown Senior Faculty Counsellor, Ex Officio
Jerry Rothenberg Senior Faculty Counsellor
Peter Temin Senior Faculty Counsellor
Rudiger Dornbusch Junior Faculty Counsellor
Jeffrey Harris Junior Faculty Counsellor
Jagdish Bhagwati Sophomore Faculty Counsellor (Fall)
Henry Farber Sophomore Faculty Counsellor (Spring)

Summer Jobs: Jeffrey Harris
Humanities Adviser: Robert Bishop
Transfer of Credits: Cary Brown

  1. GRADUATE COMMITTEE
Chairman: Richard Eckaus Thesis, Graduate Registration Officer
Members: Paul Joskow/Mike Piore Second Year Graduate Registration Officer
Marty Weitzman First Year Graduate Registration Officer
Jerome Rothenberg CGSP Representative
Stan Fischer, Ex Officio

Admissions Committee:

Chairman: Robert Bishop
Members: Frank Fisher and Lance Taylor

Placement: Evsey Domar
Harvard-MIT Theory Seminar: Eric Maskin
Theory Workshop: Kevin Roberts

  1. OTHER DEPARTMENTAL ACTIVITIES

Staffing Committee: Chairman: Rudiger Dornbusch

(For New Ass’t Profs.) Members:

Paul Joskow
Jerry Hausman
Stan Fischer, Ex Officio
(Added for Temporary Visitors: Robert Solow)

Independent Activity Period: Jeffrey Harris/Marilyn Simon
Unstructured Subjects Committee: Peter Temin, Undergraduate; Richard Eckaus, Graduate
Computer Allocation: Richard Eckaus

ADDENDUM: INSTITUTE COMMITTEES

CEP: Morris Adelman
Associate Chairman of the Faculty: Michael Piore
Visual Arts: Jerry Rothenberg
Library System, Chairman: Evsey Domar

Image Source:  For this portrait of members of the M.I.T. economics department in 1975 see the Economics in the Rear-view Mirror post that provides identifications.

Categories
Chicago Funny Business Harvard M.I.T. Princeton

M.I.T. Faculty Skit, Playing Monopoly at Lunch, 1986

 

It has been a while since I have added an artifact to the MIT economics skits wing of the Funny Business Archives here at Economics in the Rear-view Mirror. Apparently the following script was a, if not the sole, late-20th century MIT faculty skit not written by Robert Solow. I can believe that. In any event, today’s post is further grist to the mill for social historians of economics.

Again a grateful tip of the hat to Roger Backhouse is in order.

__________________

1986 FACULTY SKIT

(Skit opens with Dornbusch, Fischer, Diamond, Eckaus and McFadden seated around MONOPOLY board. Farber is standing alongside, watching the game. Fisher and Hausman are in the wings to make walk-on appearances).

ANNOUNCER: One of the most important unwritten rules in the Economics Department is that no one but Bob Solow writes the skit. This year, Bob reportedly outdid himself and wrote a sitcom in which Bob Lucas is struck by a blinding light while driving to work and transformed into a neo-Keynesian. The skit, titled “I’m OK, You’re OK,” follows Lucas’ attempts to explain why he is estimating Phillips curves to Lars Hansen and Tom Sargent.

Unfortunately, Bob is unable to be with us tonight, since he is delivering the presidential address to the Eastern Economic Association in Philadelphia. When we opened the envelope marked “SKIT” which Bob left for us, we were surprised to discover only a copy of his presidential address. We suspect he had a somewhat bigger surprise when he opened his envelope in Philadelphia. [Address published as “What is a Nice Girl Like You Doing in a Place Like This? Macroeconomics after Fifty Years” Eastern Economic Journal, July-September 1986]

We were of course scared skitless when we realized our predicament, and we were tempted to re-run some of the great Solow skits of the past. There was the 1974 Watergate Skit, in which Paul Colson Joskow testifies to Senator Sam Peltzman that he would run over his grandmother to get a t-statistic above two. There was the 1978 Star Wars skit, in which Milton Vader and his minions capture the wookie Jerrybaca and hold him captive in the Chicago Money Workshop. And in the incredible 1973 MASH skit, Hawkeye Hall and Trapper Jerry Hausman find Radar Diamond and Hot Lips Friedlaender cavorting in the Chairman’s office. (If that doesn’t give Solow Rational expectations, what does?)

We guessed that you had all seen these re-runs on late-nite channel 56, however, and therefore decided to try something new and provide a partial answer to the age-old question: What Really Goes On in the Freeman Room at Lunchtime on Wednesdays? We now invite you to join us for a brief look at one of these infamous gatherings…

 

MCFADDEN: (Rolling dice). “Who owns Oriental Avenue?”

DORNBUSCH: Me. That’s six dollars.

FISCHER: My turn? (Rolls dice). Damn. Inflation tax again; Here’s ten percent of my cash balances. I passed go, didn’t I?

DIAMOND: Uh huh. Here’s $186 dollars.

FISCHER: I should get $200.

DIAMOND: Not since Gramm-Rudman. Everything’s reduced seven percent across the board.

DORNBUSCH: My turn. (Rolling dice). Four. (Reaches over and moves marker).

ECKAUS: No way, Rudi—you just moved six places. No overshooting in this game. (Hands Dornbusch Chance card)

DORNBUSCH: Ah. Go directly to Brazil. Do not return until the day classes start.

HAUSMAN: (Walking in from side of stage) How come you guys are playing MONOPOLY? I thought you usually played RISK…

DIAMOND: Oliver [Hart] took that game home. You know, his contract calls for RISK-sharing…

HAUSMAN: Can you believe the graduate students scheduled the skit party for the Friday before income taxes are due? The only people who’ll come are graduate students and people like theorists who file 1040 EZ’s. (walks off)

(FISHER walks in)

DIAMOND: (Rolling dice). My turn. Oriental again. Six more dollars for Dornbusch.

FISCHER: That’s a pretty profitable property, Rudi.

FISHER: How many times do I have to say it! You can’t possibly tell that from accounting numbers! (Pause). Why don’t we ever play fun games, like Consultant?

ECKAUS: I hear Jorgensen and Griliches play that all the time up at Harvard. Maybe you should give them a call.

FISHER: They’re never around.

DIAMOND: Of course not, Frank—that’s how you play consultant.

(FISHER exits.)

FARBER: Speaking of Harvard, how are we doing on graduate recruitment this year? I heard there was some Princeton scandal.

DIAMOND: The AEA put them on probation for recruiting violations. People could look the other way when they offered prospective students money and cars, but this year Joe Stiglitz promised to write a joint paper with all entering students.

FARBER: They’re really giving out cars?

DIAMOND: Sure. Yugo’s.

FARBER: All I got was a motorcycle…

MCFADDEN: Harvard and Princeton have been dumping all over us. Every prospective student has heard that Jerry Hausman cashed in his Frequent Flyer miles for a 727. And some even know that Marty Weitzman has a Harvard offer.

FISCHER: Well, that offer was certainly no surprise. The Harvard deans read THE SHARE ECONOMY and decided they should hire more workers.

DIAMOND: Still, we’re getting the best students. This morning I signed a Yale undergrad by offering him Solow’s office. I figured Bob can share E52-390 with Krugman, Eckaus, and Farber next year. But what happens when we run out of river-view offices?

FARBER: How’s Harvard doing on recruiting?

ECKAUS: Not too well. They’re on a big kick to look relevant. Mas-Collel’s going nuts—Dean Spence has a new rule that any agent in a theoretical model has to have a proper name. Andreu’s having real problems with his continuum papers…

MCFADDEN: I hear the Kennedy School’s helping their visibility. Have you heard about the new Meese Distinguished Service Medal?

DIAMOND: No. Who’s getting them?

MCFADDEN: Sammy Stewart for Distinguished Relief Pitching,
Martin Feldstein for Distinguished Empirical Work,
Larry Summers for Distinguished Dress,
NASA for distinction in Travel Safety,
Bob Lucas and Bob Barro for Distinguished Plausible Assumptions,
Ferdinand Marcos for Distinguished Contributions to Charity,
and John Kenneth Galbraith for Distinguished Use of Mathematics.

DORNBUSCH: Harvard’s visibility campaign’s paying off. Just last week one of their junior guys hit the cover of PEOPLE magazine with a paper about marriage rates among movie stars.

FISCHER: You read PEOPLE?

FARBER: The National Enquirer had a story about a Harvard student who claimed to have a picture of Jeff Sachs in Littauer. Just like the old days with Howard Hughes…

DORNBUSCH: Perhaps we should return to the game.

(MODIGLIANI walks on).

DIAMOND: My turn again? (Rolls dice and moves piece). Community Chest. (Looking at card) You are elected department head. Lose three turns.

(Someone walks up and hands DIAMOND a telephone message. He stands up.)

DIAMOND: I nearly forgot. I’m scheduled to join Mike Weisbach who is taking a prospective student windsurfing this afternoon. Figured it was the least I could do to convince him we were as laid back as Stanford. Franco—do you want to take my place?

MODIGLIANI: (Sitting down in Diamond’s place) So, what are the new developments on the Monopoly front? [Famous Modigliani paper “New Developments on the Oligopoly Front,” JPE, June 1958] (Pause) Now, which of these pieces is Peter’s?

MCFADDEN: The coconut. [Reference here to Diamond’s coconut model of a search economy.]

MODIGLIANI: My turn now?

FISCHER: No Franco—but go ahead. [presumably a reference to Modigliani’s propensity to talk, and talk, and talk.]

MODIGLIANI: (Rolls dice and moves marker). Chance. (McFadden hands him a card). What is this? You have won second prize in a Beauty Contest, Collect $10? This is NOT POSSIBLE. This year I win only FIRST PRIZES [reference to 1985 Nobel Prize for Economics].

DORNBUSCH: (To audience) Wait till he gets the bequest card… [cf. the JEP Spring 1988 paper by Modigliani that surveys the bequest motive]

FISCHER: Franco, I have a deal for you. I’ll trade you Mediterranean and the Water Works for North Carolina and an agreement that you never charge me rent on either property. If you renege, I’ll order Chinese food.

MODIGLIANI: No deal. But what’s this about Chinese food?

FISCHER: It’s a new thing I learned from Garth [Soloner]—it makes the deal sub-gum perfect.

MCFADDEN: My turn. (Rolls and draws a Chance card). My favorite card: Advance Token to the Railroad with the Highest Logit Probability Value. Let me see which one that is… (pulls out a calculator)

FISCHER: While we’re waiting for Dan to converge, how did we do in junior hiring? Did we get that Princeton theorist?

ECKAUS: No dice. All the Princeton guys told him not to come.

DORNBUSCH: Why?

ECKAUS: They said “Go to Yale, go directly to Yale.”

MODIGLIANI: What about senior appointments?

FARBER: Ask Peter [Temin]. He’s on the Search Committee.

MCFADDEN: (Looking up from calculator). I’m having convergence problems. Maybe we should postpone the game for a few minutes while I run down to the PRIME.

[the image of the last page at my disposal is very blurred, fortunately it is only the wrap-up by the announcer]

ANNOUNCER: As you all know, NOTHING takes a few minutes on the PRIME. So until next year, when the [?] [?] Solow who accompanied Stan, 3PO and R2D2 to [?] the [?] [?] from Chicago returns to produce another skit. Good night.

 

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

Categories
Economics Programs M.I.T. Regulations

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

 

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.

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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).
  4. Assuming this proposal to be agreeable, the question of term papers still needs settling.

I propose, therefore, the following procedures:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.

Categories
Funny Business M.I.T.

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

 

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 17th. 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).

 

 

Categories
Amherst Chicago Economists Harvard M.I.T. Placement

Chicago. Zvi Griliches asking Frank Fisher for junior appointment leads, 1961

 

In a 1961 memo Zvi Griliches reported to his Chicago colleagues some scouting results regarding a possible junior appointment in economics. He spoke econometrician-to-econometrician with his colleague Frank Fisher at M.I.T. about the most interesting graduate students in the Cambridge area on the job market that year. Four names were mentioned, two unsurprising enough were the names of economists “unable” to be drawn from the gravitational pull of Cambridge. 

Griliches ended his memo with the remark “This year Domar happens to be MIT’s ‘placement officer’ and this is likely to put us at some competitive disadvantage.” Does this mean that Griliches thought the monopsonist Evsey Domar would deliberately discriminate against the University of Chicago?

_______________

Four graduate students discussed by Zvi Griliches and Frank Fisher

Beals, Ralph E. Dept. of Econs. Amherst College, Amherst, MA 01002. Birth Yr: 1936.  Degrees: B.S., U. of Kentucky, 1958; M.A., Northwestern U., 1959; Ph.D., Mass. Institute of Technol., 1970. Prin. Cur. Position: Clarence Francis Prof. of Econs., Amherst Coll., 1966.  Concurrent/Past Positions: Assoc., Harvard Institute for Int’l. Develop., 1973.  Research: Int’l. trade, commercial policy & industrialization in Indonesia.

[According to the Prabook website: Ralph E. Beals was Assistant professor economics, Amherst (Massachusetts) College, 1962-1963; associate professor, Amherst (Massachusetts) College, 1966-1971. ]

Hohenberg, Paul M. RPI, Dept of Econ, Troy, NY 12180. Birth Yr: 1933.  Degrees: B.Ch.E., Cornell U., 1956; M.A., Tufts U., 1959; Ph.D., Mass. Institute of Technol., 1963. Prin. Cur. Position: Prof. of Econs., Rensselaer Poly. Institute, 1977.  Concurrent/Past Positions: Vis. Assoc. Prof., Sir George Williams U., Montreal, 1972-74; Assoc. Prof., Cornell U., 1968-73.  Research: Urbanization & econ. change in Europe and U.S.

Marglin, Stephen A.  Birth Yr: 1938.  Degrees: A.B., Harvard U., 1959; Ph.D., Harvard U., 1965. Prin. Cur. Position: Prof. of Econs., Harvard U.

Temin, Peter. Mass Inst of Tech, Dept of Econ, Cambridge, MA 02139. Birth Yr: 1937.  Degrees: B.A., Swarthmore Coll., 1959; Ph.D., Mass. Institute of Technol., 1964. Prin. Cur. Position: Prof. of Econs., Mass. Institute of Technol., 1970.  Concurrent/Past Positions: Assoc. Prof., Mass. Institute of Technol., 1967-70; Asst. Prof., Mass. Institute of Technol., 1965-67. Research: Econ. history; telecommunications policy.

 

Source:  Biographical Listing of Members. The American Economic Review, Vol. 83, No. 6 (Dec., 1993).

_______________

Memo on possible appointments written by Zvi Griliches

November 8, 1961

[To:] A. Rees
[From:] Z. Griliches
[Re:] The possible appointments.

I had a long telephone conversation with Frank Fisher last week about “whom we should look at.” It is his opinion that the single best young man coming up now in the Cambridge area is:

Stephen A. Marglin—He is a mathematical theorist, with several papers to his credit. He has spent a year at Cambridge, England and is currently in his second year of a three year Junior Fellowship at Harvard. I had already invited him to give a talk to the workshop and he will be here on January 16 to talk on “The Social Rate of Discount and the Opportunity Costs of Public Investment.” Frank thinks that we would have a very hard time getting him, in particular for next year, but that he is clearly the best.

The best current MIT student that will be coming to the market is, in Fisher’s opinion:

Ralph Beals—who is a third year graduate student specializing in the fields of monetary policy and econometrics. He has been working with Solow and Albert Ando and his interests in the monetary area have appartently been stimulated by Solow’s and Ando’s involvement in the Monetary Commission stuff.

In addition, Fisher mentioned that there are also two ver good “economic historian types” finishing there this year:

Peter Pemin[sic, “Temin”]—who is working with Gerschenkron at Harvard, and
Paul Hohenberg—who is working withKindelberger on the sources of the econonmic development of France in the 19thcentury.

This year Domar happens to be MIT’s “placement officer” and this is likely to put us at some competitive disadvantage.

cc:       H. Johnson, M. Friedman, T. Schultz✓, G. Stigler, W. Wallis.

Source:  University of Chicago Archives. Department of Economics Records, Box 42, Folder 3.

Image Source:  Zvi Griliches from the University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf1-06565, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.

 

Categories
Economists Funny Business M.I.T.

M.I.T. Faculty Skit with Peter Diamond as Sir Lancelot, 1967

____________

Today’s post is an excerpt from a script for a department faculty skit performed at the MIT Graduate Economics Association’s “Shawmut Follies” of 1967. The “skitwrights” were Duncan Foley and Peter Temin who adapted the lyrics from tunes taken from the popular musical Camelot (based on the legend of King Arthur and his Knights of the Round-Table) to departmental happenings.

The backstory of this scene is that the future 2010 Nobel prize winner Peter Diamond left the University of California (Berkeley) to join the M.I.T. economics faculty in 1966. I suppose one could imagine the scene opening with the two long-haired peasants as West coast hippies speaking in a Greenwich Village beatnik-ese dialect. The casting problem for having a “chick” in a faculty solely made up of men was solved by employing the departmental administrator Del Tapley rather than by an Elizabethan substitution of male actors in female roles (We are talking Cambridge Massachusetts in the 1960’s and not Berlin in the early 1930’s!).

For those not familiar with the show-tune “C’est moi!” from Camelot, here the Robert Goulet version in the original Broadway Cast Recording at YouTube.

 

 

Dramatis Personae of Scene 2

Herald: Richard Eckaus

First Peasant: E. Cary Brown

Second Peasant: Del Tapley

Lancelot: Peter Diamond

Scene 2
(A provincial city named after an English philosopher)

A Herald: Hear ye, hear ye. Come one, come all to hearken to the Grand Proclamation of King Arthur.

First Peasant: Man, what’s his bag?

Second Peasant: Something about King Arthur.

First Peasant: Who’s this King Arthur cat?

Second Peasant: It’s some weird kick they got out East.

First Peasant: Do you know I hear there aren’t any chicks at all out there?

Second Peasant: Groovy.

First Peasant: Groovy? What’s your bag, man?

Second Peasant: I am a chick, man. No shut up and listen to the proclamation.

Herald: If you’re ready.

First Peasant: Oh, we’re ready. Don’t stand on your fancy Eastern ways out here.

Herald: King Arthur of M.I.T. offers to all young knights of intellectual errantry the opportunity to join the select long Corridor of economists sworn to uphold true theory, to rescue theorems from rape and pillage at the brutal hands of Midwestern Ph.D.’s, to form a fellowship of intellectual excellence and as much good cheer as can coexist with it.

Second Peasant: “With it” is a pretty weak way to end a sentence, if you ask me.

Herald: Admission to the Long Corridor will be by open combat in a faculty seminar, jousting with mathematical, graphical, and verbal reasoning. Come one, come all. That’s it. Break it up.

First Peasant: Gee whiz.

Second Peasant: What’s that slang jargon you’re talking, man?

First Peasant: Who’s going to go and compete with those fierce Eastern minds?

Second Peasant: Not me, man.

First Peasant: I hope somebody goes out here.

Lancelot: I will.

Second Peasant: You? Who are you?

Lancelot: I am Lancelot du Bay, academic fencer par excellence. I will go.

First Peasant: To M.I.T.? Think twice, man.

Lancelot: (sings)

M.I.T….
M.I.T….
On the West Coast I heard your call.
M.I.T….
M.I.T….
And here am I to give my all.
I know in my soul
What you expect of me
And all that and more I shall be.

A prof of the Corridor Long should be unstoppable
A mind on which less fantastic minds can lean:
Teach a class no one else can teach
Prove a theorem that’s out of reach
Run regressions without the help of a machine.

His logic and argument should be unstoppable
His papers of course always beyond compare.
But where in the world
Is there in the world
A man so extraordinaire?

C’est moi, c’est moi
I’m forced to admit
‘Tis I, I humbly reply
That Ph.D. who
These marvels can do
C’est moi, c’est moi, ‘tis I.

The students say
My lectures are keen
My proofs are fit for a king.
I’ll show a way
Through Pontryagin
To prove most any thing.
C’est moi, c’est moi
My colleagues have fits
Because I never am wrong.
Where will they find brains better than mine
Theoretically wise
Empirically fine
To serve in the Corridor Long? C’est moi.

 

Source: MIT Libraries, Institute Archives and Special Collections, Department of Economics Records, Box 2, Folder “GEA 1961-67”.

Image Source: Robert Goulet as Lancelot in the 1960 Broadway Musical Camelot at Fanpix.net. [A google search did not find an image of Peter Diamond in chain mail and a tunic]

 

 

Categories
Economic History Exam Questions M.I.T.

MIT. Final Examinations for European Economic History. Kindleberger, 1970/74

The M.I.T. graduate economics program of my day (mid-1970s) still offered three courses in economic history: Peter Temin‘s American Economic History, Evsey Domar‘s Russian Economic History and Charles Kindleberger‘s European Economic History. I will confess here that little value-added from his lectures has survived the intervening decades for me  (I did read plenty!). That said, my personal take-away from Kindleberger’s class was that he represented the ideal balance of scholar-gentleman-economist. I suspect he felt as much a dinosaur when he taught us in the mid-1970s as I certainly do now when I eavesdrop on the conversation of graduate students when they mimic their elders, who are now sometimes a full generation younger than me. 

I posted a few of his favorite stories from his days at Columbia University. Here an outline biography of Charles Kindleberger at the MIT economics department.

__________________________

December 12, 1974
8:30-10:30

Informal Final Examination
14.733
European Economic History

 

Answer any three questions (forty minutes each), but be certain that not all your answers refer exclusively to Great Britain or the Continent of Europe.

 

  1. It was said that the Holy Roman Empire was neither Holy, Roman nor an Empire.
    to what extent was the Industrial Revolution a) Industrial? b) a Revolution?
    Explain at some length, and indicate which Industrial Revolution, if there are more than one, you are referring to.
  1. Compare and contrast one pair, at least twenty-five years apart, from the following list:
    1. financial crises in Europe
    2. economic booms
    3. recoveries from war
    4. reparation transfers
  1. Evaluate the role of tariff policy in the economic growth or the economic development of one or more countries of Europe over some period of time which you specify.
  1. Compare the profiles of economic development over the nineteenth century of one of the pairs of countries below, and account for the major differences:
    1. Netherlands — Britain
    2. Britain — Germany
    3. France — Germany
    4. Italy — other country of your choice

__________________________

14.733 FINAL EXAMINATION
December 23, 1970 9AM
Three hours

 

Answer any four questions […illegible…] but at least one from each group.

 

Group I

  1. Describe the course and causes of the Industrial revolution in one country in Europe.
  2. Compare and contrast Rostow’s Stages and Gerschenkron’s discontinuity in economic growth, illustrating your answer with material from European history.
  3. Discuss the role in the early industrialization of one country of Europe of a) labor; b) capital; or c) technology.

 

Group II

  1. To what do you ascribe the business cycle in the 19th century Europe? Explain.
  2. Argue for or against the advantage of backwardness and the penalty of the head start, illustrating your argument with 19th century economic data from Europe.
  3. How do you account for the limited movement toward free trade in Europe after 1869. what did it accomplish, and why did it end?

 

Group III

  1. Did Europe grow rich on imperialistic exploitation of the rest of the world in the last quarter of the 19th century? Support your answer fully.
  2. Compare German recoveries after World War I and after World War II.
  3. Discuss the role of Europe in the 1929 depression.
  4. Compare and contrast the role of London in world finance before and after 1913.

 

Source: Personal copies of Irwin Collier.

 

Categories
Economists M.I.T.

MIT. Suggestions for New Fields. Domar, Kuh, Solow, Adelman, 1967

The following set of memoranda from the MIT economics department is found in a folder marked “Correspondence: Peter Temin” in Evsey Domar’s papers. The bulk of the material in the folder are letters of support that Domar solicited for the committee he chaired (which consisted of Domar, Charles Kindleberger and Frank Fisher) to review Peter Temin for tenure. It thus appears that Domar’s proposal to strengthen economic history at MIT in February 1967 was seen (at least by him) to have led later to granting Peter Temin tenure at MIT. See Peter Temin’s reflections on “The Rise and Fall of Economic History at MIT.”

In response to a request by the Head of the department, E. Cary Brown, for input to a long-range plan (1967-1975), we have here not only Evsey Domar’s response but also memos from Edwin Kuh (more econometrics!), Robert Solow (“poverty-manpower” or “a really high-class macro-numbers man”) and M. A. Adelman (energy economics).

Even Robert Solow’s intradepartmental memos sparkle with wit!

_________________________________

February 7, 1967

MEMORANDUM

 

To: Members of the Economics Department
From: E. Cary Brown
Subject: Long-Range Departmental Plans

President H. Johnson has asked that Departments submit long-range plans – by two-year intervals through the academic year 1974-5. The basic constraints, other than budgetary, are that the undergraduate student body is to remain fixed at its present level and that graduate students at M.I.T. Grow at only a 3% rate per year. The projection desired is of the expansion in existing fields, into new fields, the population of the department – faculty, staff, students, post-doctorals, and administration and supporting staff.

In order to get a dialogue started, I suggest that each of you send me a note on the need for new fields, the expansion of existing ones, and your views about our undergraduate and graduate size. I can then prepare an agenda for a meeting or two on this matter.

_________________________________

 

[Evsey Domar response]

  1. New Fields, etc.
    1. Economic History. Could tie in very well with our economic developers. Also help to create a better balance in the Department.
    2. Economics and Technology (Mansfield, etc.) MIT should be just the place for it.
    3. I hope Max continues to be interested in South-East Asia. The US will be involved there for a long time. Any chances for a South-east. Asia Center or something?
  2. Number of Students
    No strong feelings. A larger number of both faculty and students allows us to offer a greater variety of courses.

As you know, Economic History is my main concern.

_________________________________

 

[Edwin Kuh response]

February 13, 1967

MEMORANDUM

TO:                 Professor E. Cary Brown
FROM:          Professor Edwin Kuh
SUBJECT:     Some Economics Department Needs in the Long Run

Let me first grind my own econometric axe. We need additional support in two econometric areas. The first pertains to support for quantitative theses; Frank Fisher, Bob Solow and I carry a heavy load in this connection, which is unlikely to diminish. Second, we ought to have more strength than we do in econometric time series analysis, an important topic not covered by existing faculty. Marc Nerlove, for instance, ranks high on both counts. Less senior individuals include David Grether who combines both aspects (Stanford Ph.D. going to Yale this fall) and possibly Joseph Kadane also at Yale, who is more the statistician. Jim Durbin and Bill Phillips would be fine, too, qua statisticians contributing to econometrics.

Next, suppose we are fortunate enough to attract both Ken Arrow and C. V. Wiesacker [sic] ; the net balance in favor of theory would then become heavy indeed. There will be no need to panic and for instance, proceed instantly to hire Arthur Burns. But even so, it will behoove the department to push relentlessly on expanding the more empirical side. Since all tenure slots by then will have been sewed up, I don’t see how this can readily be done.

Finally, the department ought to raise more finance for computation. The burden has been disproportionately assumed by the Sloan School, even though several Economics Department research projects have made highly welcome and substantial contributions to the installation downstairs. In this connection, the department should seriously consider acquiring the long run services of someone with a major interest [in] computer systems; very different and high qualified individuals such as Mark Eisner or Don Carroll come to mind. The department will lag behind seriously unless it expands in this direction.

This has not been a balanced presentation of needs. I shall leave that to more balanced individuals.

 

_________________________________

 

[Robert M. Solow response]

MEMORANDUM TO: E. Cary Brown, Head
FROM: Robert M. Solow
SUBJECT: Yours of February 7

 

  1. Undergraduate program. I suppose basically we just passively accept as many majors as come along. We might attract more by improving the teaching and brightening up the course offering. So far we have got along just fine with a pretty dreary undergraduate program, and previous attempts to Do Something have petered out. Is history trying to tell us something? The only reason I can think of for trying again is this: if the department faculty is going to state bigger, especially among assistant professors, then we probably need some decent undergraduate teaching for them to do. (Not only them – I would volunteer to do some too.) Why not let the assistant professors do the planning – they probably have more ideas. Suggestions: new undergraduate subjects in mathematical economics, econometrics, “poverty”, transportation (or public investment); cancel one of the current Labor subjects (or convert to “poverty”), maybe cancel 14.06, 14.09; organize research seminar on one-big-project basis; keep 3 or 4 of the best seniors on as PhD candidates as a matter of course.
  1. Graduate program. Does it have to expand to justify slightly enlarged faculty? If so, then accept universe, but fight like hell for adequate space, scholarships, research funds. If not, think carefully. If faculty enlarges and improves, we should be able to do better on admissions. There will always be some lemons admitted; but it is a question whether one would not prefer current size of enrollment with improved bottom half to enlarged enrollment with current quality. If we get Arrow and Weizsäcker, and keep half-dozen assistant professors, some growth of graduate student body probably inevitable. But I’d keep it slow, and in line with admission quality, space, scholarships, research money. Aim for entering class of 40 by 1975? Certainly no more.
  1. New fields. If MIT goes into Urban Studies, I think we ought to move too. This means some joint research, perhaps offering a few fellowships specifically in urban economics, some new appointments (transportation, poverty, local finance), probably young guys. (I’d like to see Mike Piore and Frank Levy free to start something.) (Would Bill Pounds like to hire Joe Kershaw?) Maybe we ought to start looking next fall. This complex could be a major counterweight to theory. We could make a senior appointment, but I doubt we could find a good enough man. We also lack a really high-class macro-numbers man – like Art Okun or Otto Eckstein or George Perry. Should we try Les Thurow? Or try eventually for Steve Goldfeld? Goldfeld would help with Money, but Thurow would fit into poverty-manpower bit. I think I might seriously favor going for Thurow now if we can afford it.

_________________________________

 

[M. A. Adelman response]

March 16, 1967

Memorandum to:     Professor E. Cary Brown
From:                         M.A. Adelman
Subject:  President H. W. Johnson’s request to submit long-range plans: industrial organization field

  1. Enrollment in the graduate course has declined to the point where it is best given in alternate years. Theses written have not decreased, and there are six now in preparation. I wish to use the time made available to teach the course on energy economics when Paul Rodan retires. The remaining time is best devoted to undergraduate teaching (see below).
  2. Undergraduate enrollment seems to be on the increase in 14.02, 14.04, and 14.22. With the appointment of Robert Crandall, we are fully staffed. I would wish to have 14.02 taught exclusively by lecture and sections (teaching assistants) except where the undergraduates’ program will not permit it. Where we are compelled to fill in with three-recitation sections, I strongly urge that they should not be taught by teaching assistants. Since the transfer to lectures economizes manpower, these two changes should be offsetting, but will take more of my own time.
  3. I have given a joint seminar with Harvard (Economics Department and Middle East Center) on Eastern Hemisphere Oil, and will repeat it next year. It is still an uncertain venture, however, in a sensitive area, and the fuss about CIA influence in academic research may kill it.
  4. I join in concern over our weakness in economic history. East European economics might best be treated as an expansion of our current offering in Soviet economics, since there is sufficient unity of geography and practice. I wish some encouragement could be given to East Asian especially Japanese studies, where English sometimes suffices, but would not care to have it as a field of specialization.

 

Source: Duke University, Rubenstein Library. Evsey D. Domar papers, Box 7, Folder “Peter Temin” [apparently misfiled].

Image Source: MIT 1959 Technique (Yearbook).

Categories
Economists M.I.T.

MIT. Department of Economics Group Photo, 1976

Back Row:  Harold FREEMAN, Hal VARIAN, Jerome ROTHENBERG, Peter DIAMOND, Jerry HAUSMAN

4th Row: Paul JOSKOW, Anne FRIEDLAENDER, JOHN R. MORONEY (VISITOR TO DEPARTMENT)

3rd Row: Stanley FISCHER, Jagdish BHAGWATI, Rudiger DORNBUSCH, Robert SOLOW, Robert HALL

2nd Row: Edward KUH, Morris ADELMAN, Abraham J. SIEGEL, Richard ECKAUS, Martin WEITZMAN

1st Row: Evsey DOMAR, Paul SAMUELSON, Charles KINDLEBERGER, E. Cary BROWN, Franco MODIGLIANI, Sydney ALEXANDER, Robert BISHOP

1976_MITEcon_blogCopy

Apparently didn’t get the memo and/or not pictured: Michael PIORE, Frank FISHER, Peter TEMIN.

Thanks to Robert Solow, the photo-bomber standing to Solow’s left in the picture has been identified as a guest from Tulane University, John Moroney. It is possible that I forgot some other person not included in this faculty picture.

I note that the entire front row has gone to that great Department of Economics in the Cloud.

Source: A graduate student buddy of mine who entered the MIT Ph.D. program in 1975/76.

______________________

If you find this posting interesting, here is the complete list of “artifacts” from the history of economics I have assembled of which this is the 250th. You can subscribe to Economics in the Rear-View Mirror below. There is also an opportunity for comment following each posting….