Micro, Mod 3: Readings (seventh edition)


Micro, Mod 3: Readings (seventh edition)

Author
Message
NEAS
Supreme Being
Supreme Being (5.9K reputation)Supreme Being (5.9K reputation)Supreme Being (5.9K reputation)Supreme Being (5.9K reputation)Supreme Being (5.9K reputation)Supreme Being (5.9K reputation)Supreme Being (5.9K reputation)Supreme Being (5.9K reputation)Supreme Being (5.9K reputation)

Group: Administrators
Posts: 4.3K, Visits: 1.3K

Microeconomics, Module 3: "The behavior of Consumers"

Readings: Landsburg, Chapter 3

(The attached PDF file has better formatting.)

Updated: May 25, 2005

Modules 3 and 4 deal with consumer behavior. We begin with indifference curves and their application to microeconomics.

Section 3.1: We model consumers’ tastes with indifference curves. An indifference curve is the locus of points (combinations of goods or baskets of goods) that provide the same level of satisfaction (equal utility).

Definition: The marginal value of good A in terms of good B is the amount of good B that the consumer will trade to get one unit of good A.

This marginal value is the absolute value of the slope of the indifference curve passing through that point (i.e., the point of a given number of units of goods A and B). The indifference curve slopes downward, so its slope is negative; the marginal value is positive.

The simplest indifference curves have the form A × B = k, which has the proper downward slope and convex curvature.

Illustration: Suppose there are only two goods in the economy: bread and wine. Jacob’s indifference curves are of the form W × B = k. Jacob gets the same utility from 8 loaves of bread and 2 flasks of wine, 4 loaves of bread and 4 flasks of wine, or 2 loaves of bread and 8 flasks of wine.

Section 3.2: The budget constraint (budget line) is the locus of points (combinations of goods) that the consumer can purchase. The slope of the budget line reflects the relative prices of the two goods being considered; the consumer’s income determines the distance of the budget line from the origin.

A consumer has 1 budget line and an infinite number of indifference curves. The optimum (the point of maximum utility) is the point of tangency of an indifference curve to the budget line; this is the point where the marginal value of the good equals its relative price.

Final Exam: You will be given the type of indifference curve, such as A × B = k, and a budget line. The budget line may be given as the prices of goods A and B and the income of the consumer. You must find the equilibrium quantity of A and B that the consumer buys. We show the procedure in the practice problems and a homework assignment.

Section 3.3: We can often predict consumer behavior by analyzing changes in the points where utility is maximized. Landsburg uses indifference curves to show that the standard indices of changes in the cost of living are biased.

A Laspeyres index overstates inflation and makes the price changes look worse for the consumer than they really are.

A Paasche index understates inflation and makes the price changes look better for the consumer than they really are.

Jacob: Isn’t this true only if the consumer buys more of a good when its price declines and less of a good when its price rises?

Rachel: Yes; we assume that consumers behave rationally; this is the law of demand.

Final Exam: The current edition of Landsburg’s textbook does not show the mathematics of inflation indices. The practice problems and many past exam problems test the math, but the final exam for this course does not test the mathematics. The CAS transition exam may test the math; candidates taking the exam should review the procedures.

A final example in Landsburg’s text uses indifference curves to show that an income tax lowers consumer welfare more than a head tax that raises the same revenue. This illustration is complex, and the final exam does not test the specifics of this illustration.

Jacob: Why does an income tax reduce consumer utility? Is it because we transfer money to the government?

Rachel: Transferring money to the government is a wealth transfer; economists do not say that it reduces social welfare. But an income tax distorts consumer incentives, leading them to work less. If the consumer paid the same tax to the government with a lump-sum tax instead of an income tax, the consumer would have incentives to work more, get more income, and enjoy higher utility.

A common theme of Landsburg’s text, Barro’s text, and much economic analysis is that most taxes distort consumers’ incentives, change their behavior, and reduce social welfare. This does not mean that taxes are necessarily bad; certain government services are essential and someone must pay for them. But some types of taxes reduce social welfare more than others. An economic goal is to obtain the benefits of government services with the least reduction in social welfare.

Jacob: Does Landsburg say that a head tax is better than an income tax? But a head tax is regressive, whereas an income tax is progressive. A head tax which is the same for all citizens can’t raise much money, since most citizens are not that wealthy.

Rachel: Landsburg is not comparing an income tax with a head tax that is the same for all citizens. He is comparing an income tax with a head tax that equals the income tax that citizen would pay if we used an income tax.

Jacob: If the tax is the same, why is one better than the other?

Rachel: With the head tax, consumers work more, since there is no disincentive to work.


Attachments
Micro.Module3.readings.pdf (1K views, 30.00 KB)
Edited 6 Years Ago by NEAS
NessaT23
Junior Member
Junior Member (23 reputation)Junior Member (23 reputation)Junior Member (23 reputation)Junior Member (23 reputation)Junior Member (23 reputation)Junior Member (23 reputation)Junior Member (23 reputation)Junior Member (23 reputation)Junior Member (23 reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 23, Visits: 1
I assume that we're not responsible for the Appendix to Chapter 3?
MichelleL
Forum Newbie
Forum Newbie (8 reputation)Forum Newbie (8 reputation)Forum Newbie (8 reputation)Forum Newbie (8 reputation)Forum Newbie (8 reputation)Forum Newbie (8 reputation)Forum Newbie (8 reputation)Forum Newbie (8 reputation)Forum Newbie (8 reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8, Visits: 1

I doubt that Appendix 3 is required - the "Readings" documents are pretty explicit about what we need to read (and what we don't need to read).  Since we were not instructed to read Appendix 3, I highly doubt that we need to be concerned with it.

[NEAS: Correct; Appendix 3 is not required.]


Rick Sutherland
Forum Guru
Forum Guru (67 reputation)Forum Guru (67 reputation)Forum Guru (67 reputation)Forum Guru (67 reputation)Forum Guru (67 reputation)Forum Guru (67 reputation)Forum Guru (67 reputation)Forum Guru (67 reputation)Forum Guru (67 reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 53, Visits: 1

Question for our NEAS instructor: In the posting directly above, you indicate that Appendix 3 in Chapter 3 of the textbook is not required for this course. But, in the "Additional Illustrative Test Questions" topic for this same module, question 3.8 asks about utility and marginal utility, which is content that is only covered in Appendix 3. I had assumed that the "Illustrative Test Questions" were all examples of questions that could appear on our final exam, but now I'm confused. Should we invest time learning how to answer questions about utility and marginal utility, or not?

[NEAS: We often include material in the practice problems and illustrative test questions that may be asked on the CAS transition exam for the VEE requirements, even if they are not on the NEAS on-line course syllabus.]


samuel
Junior Member
Junior Member (21 reputation)Junior Member (21 reputation)Junior Member (21 reputation)Junior Member (21 reputation)Junior Member (21 reputation)Junior Member (21 reputation)Junior Member (21 reputation)Junior Member (21 reputation)Junior Member (21 reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 25, Visits: 1
In the Readings, it says, "

Rachel: ... economists do not say that it (taxes) reduces social welfare...

A common theme of Landsburg’s text, Barro’s text, and much economic analysis is that most taxes distort consumers’ incentives, change their behavior, and reduce social welfare...

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

NEAS: Can you please clarify your position on this? Are you trying to say that taxes reduce social welfare (but for some reason) economists say that it doesn't. But if Barro is an economist, he would seem to be breaking the rule.
GO
Merge Selected
Merge into selected topic...



Merge into merge target...



Merge into a specific topic ID...





Reading This Topic


Login
Existing Account
Email Address:


Password:


Social Logins

  • Login with twitter
  • Login with twitter
Select a Forum....











































































































































































































































Neas-Seminars

Search