0
$\begingroup$

Question

Answer

page 1 page 2 page 3 page 4 page 5 page 6 page 7 page 8

Hello, I upload the actual question with my 8-pages answer. Please can you check it. Is there a corner dissolution for $c=\gamma$. Please share your ideas. Thanks.

$\endgroup$
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ X-posted: math.stackexchange.com/q/3405439/339790 $\endgroup$ – Rodrigo de Azevedo Oct 23 '19 at 9:33
  • $\begingroup$ How do you know there's a corner solution? $\endgroup$ – Art Oct 23 '19 at 15:42
  • $\begingroup$ @Art nothing. I do just solve its interior solutions. But I have learnt that I need to find its corner solutions as well. But I don’t know (no idea) about how to find corner solution. Please can you help me? $\endgroup$ – B11b Oct 23 '19 at 15:46
  • $\begingroup$ Don´t we have here an equation as a constraint, $h+l=T$? $\endgroup$ – callculus Oct 23 '19 at 16:36
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ This is potentially a great question but currently I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it fails to follow site policy on home work: "Do not merely post a scan or image of the whole question, nor of your attempted answer. Enter your question, and the work you've done to try to answer it, as text." $\endgroup$ – BKay Oct 23 '19 at 20:55
3
$\begingroup$

Here is the formulation of the problem : \begin{eqnarray*} \max_{c, h, l} \ & \ln (c - \gamma) + \beta l + \theta h \\ \text{s.t.} & l + h = 1, \\ & c \leq \omega h + \rho, \\ \text{and} & l, h \geq 0, c \geq \gamma \end{eqnarray*}

Substituting $l = 1 - h$, we can rewrite the above problem as : \begin{eqnarray*} \max_{c, h} \ & \ln (c - \gamma) + \beta + (\theta -\beta)h \\ \text{s.t.} & 0 \leq h \leq 1 \\ \text{and} & \gamma \leq c \leq \omega h + \rho\end{eqnarray*}

Since utility is increasing in $c$, $c = \omega h + \rho$ will hold in optimum. So we can further reduce the problem to :

\begin{eqnarray*} \max_{h} \ & \ln (\omega h + \rho - \gamma) + \beta + (\theta -\beta)h \\ \text{s.t.} & 0 \leq h \leq 1 \\ \text{and} & \gamma \leq \omega h + \rho\end{eqnarray*}

Please note that we'll assume $\omega + \rho \geq \gamma$. This is because when $\omega + \rho < \gamma$, there is no feasible solution. In other words, there does not exist any $h$ satisfying the constraints.

To solve this problem, we'll consider two cases :

  • Case 1: $\rho \geq \gamma$

In this case problem can be written as :

\begin{eqnarray*} \max_{h} \ & \ln (\omega h + \rho - \gamma) + \beta + (\theta -\beta)h \\ \text{s.t.} & 0 \leq h \leq 1 \end{eqnarray*}

Derivative of the objective with respect to $h$ is $\frac{\omega}{\omega h + \rho - \gamma} + (\theta -\beta)$ which yields the following solution :

\begin{eqnarray*} h = \begin{cases} 1 & \text{if } \frac{\omega}{\omega + \rho - \gamma} + (\theta -\beta) \geq 0 \\ 0 & \text{if } \frac{\omega}{\rho - \gamma} + (\theta -\beta) \leq 0 \\ \frac{1}{\beta -\theta} - \frac{\rho - \gamma}{\omega} & \text{otherwise} \end{cases} \end{eqnarray*}

  • Case 2: $\rho < \gamma$

In this case problem can be written as :

\begin{eqnarray*} \max_{h} \ & \ln (\omega h + \rho - \gamma) + \beta + (\theta -\beta)h \\ \text{s.t.} & \frac{\gamma - \rho}{\omega} \leq h \leq 1 \end{eqnarray*}

Derivative of the objective with respect to $h$ is $\frac{\omega}{\omega h + \rho - \gamma} + (\theta -\beta)$ which yields the following solution :

\begin{eqnarray*} h = \begin{cases} 1 & \text{if } \frac{\omega}{\omega + \rho - \gamma} + (\theta -\beta) \geq 0 \\ \frac{1}{\beta -\theta} - \frac{\rho - \gamma}{\omega} & \text{otherwise} \end{cases} \end{eqnarray*}

Combining the two cases, we can write the solution as :

\begin{eqnarray*} h = \begin{cases} 1 & \text{if } \frac{\omega}{\omega + \rho - \gamma} + (\theta -\beta) \geq 0 \\ 0 & \text{if } \frac{\omega}{\rho - \gamma} + (\theta -\beta) \leq 0 \text{ and } \rho \geq \gamma \\ \frac{1}{\beta -\theta} - \frac{\rho - \gamma}{\omega} & \text{otherwise} \end{cases} \end{eqnarray*}

Using $c = \omega h + \rho$ and $l = 1 -h$ we can get optimal values of $c$ and $l$ in each of the cases.

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I donu Knopf how to thank you!! You are the best and your solution is so clever and perfect !! Thanks again Amit $\endgroup$ – B11b Nov 8 '19 at 23:49
1
$\begingroup$

The corner solution is not $c=a$ it cannot be because the marginal utility of even a tiny bit of consumption is unbounded there. However, you can have a corner solution where $h=0$. Since the agent has non-labor income $p$, the budget line has a kink. That is, if the agent receives a lot of income even without working, they may choose not to work, and fully enjoy leisure.

After solving for the optimal $l$, $c$ and $h$ I am sure that the optimal $h$ is defined by the difference between two terms. Since you cannot work negative hours, the corner solution occurs whenever your equation for $h$ goes negative.

If you are not sure what I mean, simply update your question with the actual formulas you obtained, I can provide further comments and guide you to find the corner solution.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, I could not find for $c=a$. But, someone says there exist. Can I upload my solution by hand-writing? Because solution is too long and my writing is very readable and good. Do you accept dear Regio? $\endgroup$ – B11b Oct 23 '19 at 19:05
  • $\begingroup$ @user315 " Can I upload my solution by hand-writing? " Yes, you can do that by editing your question. $\endgroup$ – callculus Oct 23 '19 at 19:11
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks a lot... $\endgroup$ – B11b Oct 23 '19 at 19:13
  • $\begingroup$ @callculus I uploaded. Please check it. And please tell me whether it is correct or not. Thanks a lot. $\endgroup$ – B11b Oct 23 '19 at 19:28
  • $\begingroup$ @Regio I added my solution. $\endgroup$ – B11b Oct 23 '19 at 19:28

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.