






















|
Warm Memories of Bill Vickrey
Mason Gaffney
[Reprinted from Land & Liberty, Winter
1997]
The evening of the day Bill Vickrey won his Nobel I impulsively,
hesitantly, dialed his home. His phone surprised me by ringing unbusy,
and Bill surprised me more by answering, and sounding unhurried. After
congratulations, I asked "Bill, was this for a lifetime of
achievement, or some specific work?" "I don't know," he
replied. "Well," I persisted, "is there a citation?
What does it say?" "Yes," he said, "there is one,
but I can't understand it." If you and I find it a puzzle, we
have good company.
Mission performed, I hastened to ring off, but Bill kept me on the
line. To Bill, the transaction was incomplete -- too onesided. He
turned things around and said "Tell me about yourself. What are
you working on now?" I told him as briefly as I could, and he
immediately offered to help. It was not a perfunctory sham offer, he's
helped me before. "How are the wife and children?" He really
wanted to know, and report back to Cele. That was Bill, thinking of
others in the time of his greatest triumph, at the end of a long,
wearying day of praise and celebration. What a saint! And I thank that
other saint, my wife, who nudged me to call right away: two days later
Bill left us forever.
Bill was born in Victoria. B.C., his mother's home. His middle name
was Spencer, as in Spencer's Stores; they had merged with, I believe
he said, Baton's. From the Spencer side he got his sense of how
business works. His father was a preacher from Illinois who raised
money for starving Armenians -- literally. From him Bill got his firm
sense of social justice, plus a reflex against spending money on his
own creature comforts. At professional meetings he sought out cheaper
lodgings than anyone else, though his expenses were covered. He did it
inconspicuously so as not to make others uncomfortable: his humility
was not for flaunting, he just lived it. Again, what a saint!
Bill had a degree in mathematics from Yale, before turning to
economics at Columbia. He was not one to hide behind phony
mathematics, as most economists do now, nor to intimidate others; but
none could snow or intimidate him, although many tried. In spite of
the phonies, genuine maths can be truly useful, and that's when he
drew on this skill plus his insight and talent, which went far deeper
than mere skill. He gave freely of them. At one point he dashed off a
mathematical appendix to an article I had struggled over for months.
His page of squiggles pretty well comprehended, tied together and
validated all the points I had spread over 50 pages. He gave it to me
gratis - - that was Bill. For him, it was effortless: "Just
a matter of inverting the order of integration," he explained
casually. What a saint!
Bill had high standards, but no false standards. He feared no
contamination nor loss of caste by consorting with less renowned
economists, or supporting ideas that lacked mainline 'respectability'
and 'prestige'. If he had a fault, it was projecting his own virtues
onto others. He was delightfully ingenuous in personal dealings, and
could not impute base, careerist motives to social and professional
climbers.
It was in 1964 or so that I called Bill impulsively and hesitantly
the first time. Art Becker, Weld Carter and I were growing a committee
of economists to meet annually and produce a modern Georgist
literature, but who were we in the world? Bill had published works on
financing mass transit that breathed a distinct sweet odour of
Georgism. Like a bee to a flower, I buzzed him. It was a good impulse;
he accepted, suddenly we were somebodies, and other somebodies joined
up too. Soon we had our academic-Georgist Camelot, if only for one
brief shining moment. Our committee, named TRED, produced about ten
volumes of neo-Georgist literature, published by the University of
Wisconsin Press. Bill had a chapter in our first volume, and also
helped me, as editor, straighten out a headstrong contributor who
insisted on turning rents into earned incomes. When Bill wrote, people
heeded, and Bill was ever ready to lend a hand. I thought of him as a
big brother to call on in need. How I shall miss my big brother!
At Columbia, Bill rubbed elbows with Harold Hotelling, the most
brilliant and creative economist of his generation. Hotelling was a
closet Georgist who never fully came out, even after a lifetime of
professional acclaim for his technical triumphs -- a measure of the
pressure used to squelch academic Georgists. The nearest he came was
to let Will Lissner include him on a roster of "Editorial
Advisers" to the AJES. Francis A. Walker, first President of the
American Economic Association in 1885, had written "I will not
insult my readers by discussing a project so steeped in infamy"
as taxing land values. Bill Vickrey, President of the same Association
106 years later, wrote on the same subject that we should tax 'em to
the max. He joined Nic Tideman in composing a letter to Gorbachev
advising the then-Soviets to base their privatization strategy on
taxing land values. Together they signed up 20-30 highly visible
economists, including four earlier Nobel laureates. This did not stop
Bill from winning his Nobel in 1996. Perhaps our cause has progressed
within the ivied walls, after all; or perhaps that is just a measure
of Vickrey's personal courage and conscience, and the power of courage
and conscience to overcome fear and win confidence -- even of Nobel
prize committees.
A reporter asked Bill what he would do with his prize money. Bill
said he didn't care about the money, and he spoke truly, for his
conscience would not let him live it up while others were down. He
said he valued the "bully pulpit" the prize gave him to
spread his ideas. He didn't say which ideas; he had many. I am morally
certain, however, that near the top of his list was implementing
George's proposal to raise public revenues by taxing land values. The
last thing he asked me before hanging up was, "Will I see you at
the TRED meeting?" Bill never missed.
Bill died, as you know by now, en route to that meeting. He drove at
night, true to his principle of easing peak-hour congestion. Had he
arrived, I know he would have raised his head from the doze he
affected and told some unwary journeyman, "This paper would
benefit from an application of Henry George's idea of taxing land
values." How do I know? Because he always did. I imagine by now
he has mentioned it to God, too; and God has said "Actually,
Bill, that's how we've always done it here; but thank you for urging
folks to have my will done on earth as it is in Heaven."
|