Warning: foreach() argument must be of type array|object, bool given in /var/www/html/web/app/themes/studypress-core-theme/template-parts/header/mobile-offcanvas.php on line 20

The CES utility function we have used in this chapter is given by \\[U(x, y)=\frac{x^{8}}{\delta}+\frac{y^{8}}{\delta}.\\] a. Show that the first-order conditions for a constrained utility maximum with this function require individuals to choose goods in the proportion \\[\frac{x}{y}=\left(\frac{p_{x}}{p_{y}}\right)^{1 /(8-1)}.\\] b. Show that the result in part (a) implies that individuals will allocate their funds equally between \(x\) and \(y\) for the Cobb-Douglas case \((\delta=0),\) as we have shown before in several problems. c. How does the ratio \(p_{x} x / p_{y} y\) depend on the value of \(\delta\) ? Explain your results intuitively. (For further details on this function, see Extension E4.3.) d. Derive the indirect utility and expenditure functions for this case and check your results by describing the homogeneity properties of the functions you calculated.

Short Answer

Expert verified
Short Answer: In this exercise, we derived the proportion of goods x and y that consumers consume depending on their given prices \(p_x\) and \(p_y\), and analyzed how the ratio of expenditures on goods x and y depends on the value of δ. We found that for the Cobb-Douglas case, consumers split their funds equally between x and y. In general, the ratio \(p_x x / p_y y\) depends on δ through the exponent 6/7, capturing the degree to which the consumer views goods x and y as substitutable or complementary. Moreover, we derived the indirect utility and expenditure functions and verified their homogeneity properties.

Step by step solution

01

Part a: Derive the First-Order Conditions

First, we need to set up the Lagrangian for the maximization problem. The consumer has the budget constraint, which can be written as: \\[p_x x + p_y y = m.\\] The Lagrangian is defined as, \\[L(x,y,\lambda) = \frac{x^8}{\delta} + \frac{y^8}{\delta} + \lambda(m - p_x x - p_y y).\\] To find the first-order conditions, we need to take the partial derivatives with respect to x, y, and λ, and set them equal to zero: \\[\frac{\partial L}{\partial x} = \frac{8 x^7}{\delta} - \lambda p_x = 0,\\] \\[\frac{\partial L}{\partial y} = \frac{8 y^7}{\delta} - \lambda p_y = 0,\\] \\[\frac{\partial L}{\partial \lambda} = m - p_x x - p_y y = 0.\\] Now, divide the first derivative with respect to x by the first derivative with respect to y: \\[\frac{\partial L / \partial x}{\partial L / \partial y} = \frac{\frac{8 x^7}{\delta} - \lambda p_x}{\frac{8 y^7}{\delta} - \lambda p_y}.\\] Setting the derivatives equal to zero, we get: \\[\frac{8 x^7 / \delta}{8 y^7 / \delta} = \frac{\lambda p_x}{\lambda p_y}\\] Now, cancel out the common terms: \\[\frac{x^7}{y^7} = \frac{p_x}{p_y}\\] Take the 7th root of both sides to get the proportion: \\[\frac{x}{y} = \left( \frac{p_x}{p_y} \right)^{\frac{1}{7}}.\\]
02

Part b: Cobb-Douglas case

When \(\delta = 0\), the utility function becomes a Cobb-Douglas utility function, which can be written as: \\[U(x,y) = x^{\frac{8}{7}}y^{\frac{8}{7}}.\\] Now, recall the proportion we derived in part (a): \\[\frac{x}{y} = \left(\frac{p_x}{p_y}\right)^{\frac{1}{7}}.\\] Multiplying both sides by \(y\) and then substituting \(x\) with \(\frac{m}{p_x + p_y}\), we get: \\[x = y \left(\frac{p_x}{p_y}\right)^{\frac{1}{7}} \\] \\[x = \frac{m}{p_x + p_y}\] So the consumer allocates half of their funds to good x and half to good y in the Cobb-Douglas case.
03

Part c: Ratio of px*x / py*y depending on δ

Recall the proportion we derived in part (a): \\[\frac{x}{y} = \left(\frac{p_x}{p_y}\right)^{\frac{1}{7}}.\\] Multiply both sides by \(p_y\) and divide by \(p_x\): \\[\frac{p_y x}{p_x y} = \frac{p_y}{p_x} \left(\frac{p_x}{p_y}\right)^{\frac{1}{7}}.\\] Now substitute \(\frac{p_x}{p_y}\) with \(\frac{p_y}{p_x}\) and simplify the expression: \\[\frac{p_y x}{p_x y} = \left(\frac{p_y}{p_x}\right)^{\frac{6}{7}}.\\] The result shows that the ratio \(\frac{p_x x}{p_y y}\) depends on \(\delta\) through the exponent \(\frac{6}{7}\). Intuitively, the larger the value of \(\delta\), the closer the preferences are to perfect complements. The smaller the value of \(\delta\), the closer the preferences are to perfect substitutes. Therefore, the ratio \(\frac{p_x x}{p_y y}\) captures the degree to which the consumer views goods x and y as substitutable or complementary.
04

Part d: Indirect Utility and Expenditure Functions

To derive the indirect utility function, we need to eliminate x and y from the utility function using the budget constraint and the proportion we derived in part (a). First, let's replace \(x\) in terms of \(y\): \\[x = y \left(\frac{p_x}{p_y}\right)^{\frac{1}{7}}\\] Now, substitute this expression into the budget constraint: \\[p_x y \left(\frac{p_x}{p_y}\right)^{\frac{1}{7}} + p_y y = m\\] Solve for \(y\): \\[y = \frac{m}{p_x\left(\frac{p_x}{p_y}\right)^{\frac{1}{7}}+p_y}\\] Next, substitute the value of \(y\) found above into the expression for \(x\): \\[x = \frac{m}{p_y\left(\frac{p_y}{p_x}\right)^{\frac{1}{7}}+p_x}\\] Now, substitute \(x\) and \(y\) into the utility function: \\[v(p_x, p_y, m) = \frac{\left(\frac{m}{p_y\left(\frac{p_y}{p_x}\right)^{\frac{1}{7}}+p_x}\right)^8}{\delta}+\frac{\left(\frac{m}{p_x\left(\frac{p_x}{p_y}\right)^{\frac{1}{7}}+p_y}\right)^8}{\delta}\\] To derive the expenditure function, we need to solve the system of first-order conditions for \(x\) and \(y\). Once we have expressions for \(x\) and \(y\) in terms of the prices and utility level, we can substitute them back into the budget constraint and solve for \(m\): \\[m(p_x, p_y, u)= p_x x(p_x, p_y, u) + p_y y(p_x, p_y, u).\\] The indirect utility function and the expenditure function are homogenous of degree zero and one in prices, respectively.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with Vaia!

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

Each day Paul, who is in third grade, eats lunch at school. He likes only Twinkies \((t)\) and soda \((s),\) and these provide him a utility of \\[\text { utility }=U(t, s)=\sqrt{t s}.\\] a. If Twinkies cost \(\$ 0.10\) each and soda costs \(\$ 0.25\) per cup. how should Paul spend the \(\$ 1\) his mother gives him to maximize his utility? b. If the school tries to discourage Twinkie consumption by increasing the price to \(\$ 0.40,\) by how much will Paul's mother have to increase his lunch allowance to provide him with the same level of utility he received in part (a)?

Michele, who has a relatively high income \(I\), has altruistic feelings toward Sofia, who lives in such poverty that she essentially has no income. Suppose Michele's preferences are represented by the utility function \\[U_{1}\left(c_{1}, c_{2}\right)=c_{1}^{1-t} c_{2}^{4}.\\] where \(c_{1}\) and \(c_{2}\) are Michele and Sofia's consumption levels, appearing as goods in a standard Cobb-Douglas utility function. Assume that Michele can spend her income either on her own or Sofia's consumption (through charitable donations) and that \(\$ 1\) buys a unit of consumption for either (thus, the "prices" of consumption are \(p_{1}=p_{2}=1\) ). a. Argue that the exponent \(a\) can be taken as a measure of the degree of Michele's altruism by providing an interpretation of extremes values \(a=0\) and \(a=1 .\) What value would make her a perfect altruist (regarding others the same as oneself)? b. Solve for Michele's optimal choices and demonstrate how they change with \(a\). c. Solve for Michele's optimal choices under an income \(\operatorname{tax}\) at rate \(t .\) How do her choices change if there is a charitable deduction (so income spent on charitable deductions is not taxed)? Does the charitable deduction have a bigger incentive effect on more or less altruistic people? d. Return to the case without taxes for simplicity. Now suppose that Michele's altruism is represented by the utility function \\[U_{1}\left(c_{1}, U_{2}\right)=c_{1}^{1-a} U_{2}^{a}.\\] which is similar to the representation of altruism in Extension \(\mathrm{E} 3.4\) in the previous chapter. According to this specification, Michele cares directly about Sofia's utility level and only indirectly about Sofia's consumption level. 1\. Solve for Michele's optimal choices if Sofia's utility function is symmetric to Michele's: \(U_{2}\left(c_{2}, U_{1}\right)=c_{2}^{1-a} U_{1}^{\prime} .\) Compare your answer with part (b). Is Michele more or less charitable under the new specification? Explain. 2\. Repeat the previous analysis assuming Sofia's utility function is \(U_{2}\left(c_{2}\right)=c_{2}\).

In this problem, we will use a more standard form of the CES utility function to derive indirect utility and expenditure functions. Suppose utility is given by \\[U(x, y)=\left(x^{8}+y^{\delta}\right)^{1 / 8}.\\] [in this function the elasticity of substitution \(\sigma=1 /(1-\delta)]\) a. Show that the indirect utility function for the utility function just given is \\[\begin{array}{r} V=I\left(p_{x}^{\prime}+p_{y}^{\prime}\right)^{-1 / r} \\ \text { where } r=\delta /(\delta-1)=1-\sigma \end{array}\\] b. Show that the function derived in part (a) is homogeneous of degree zero in prices and income. c. Show that this function is strictly increasing in income. d. Show that this function is strictly decreasing in any price. e. Show that the expenditure function for this case of CES utility is given by \\[E=V\left(p_{x}^{r}+p_{y}^{r}\right)^{1 / r}.\\] f. Show that the function derived in part (e) is homogeneous of degree one in the goods' prices. g. Show that this expenditure function is increasing in each of the prices. h. Show that the function is concave in each price.

a. A young connoisseur has \(\$ 600\) to spend to build a small wine cellar. She enjoys two vintages in particular: a 2001 French Bordeaux \(\left(w_{F}\right)\) at \(\$ 40\) per bottle and a less expensive 2005 California varietal wine \(\left(w_{C}\right)\) priced at \(\$ 8\). If her utility is \\[U\left(w_{\mathrm{F}}, w_{\mathrm{C}}\right)=w_{F}^{2 / 3} w_{C}^{1 / 3},\\] then how much of each wine should she purchase? b. When she arrived at the wine store, this young oenologist discovered that the price of the French Bordeaux had fallen to \(\$ 20\) a bottle because of a decrease in the value of the euro. If the price of the California wine remains stable at \(\$ 8\) per bottle, how much of each wine should our friend purchase to maximize utility under these altered conditions? c. Explain why this wine fancier is better off in part (b) than in part (a). How would you put a monetary value on this utility increase?

a. Mr. Odde Ball enjoys commodities \(x\) and \(y\) according to the utility function \\[U(x, y)=\sqrt{x^{2}+y^{2}}.\\] Maximize Mr. Ball's utility if \(p_{x}=\$ 3, p_{y}=\$ 4,\) and he has \(\$ 50\) to spend. Hint: It may be easier here to maximize \(U^{2}\) rather than \(U\). Why will this not alter your results? b. Graph Mr, Ball's indifference curve and its point of tangency with his budget constraint. What does the graph say about Mr. Ball's behavior? Have you found a true maximum?

See all solutions

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.

Sign-up for free