2
$\begingroup$

Let $w_t$ denote a consumer's wealth at time $t$ and $c_t$, the amount she chooses to consume, so her savings exiting this time period are $w_t-c_t$. Given this savings decision, her savings $w_{t+1}$ at time $t+1$ are determined by a random process in which $w_{t+1}=\alpha w_t$ or $w_{t+1}=\beta w_t$, where $\alpha,\beta$ are postitive constants, each with probability $\dfrac{1}{2}$ and independent of past rates of return on her savings. At time $t$, when she is choosing $c_t$, she knows $w_t$ but she doesn’t know anything about future returns except the probabilistic law just given; she does know her past consumption decisions, of course, and past rates of return. Considering a log utility, i.e. $u(t)=ln(c_t)$ and assuming that the consumer is impatient, so that he discounts future utility by a factor $b$ each period, where $0 < b < 1$, then the consumer's decision problem can be written as follows: $$v(c_t)=\max_{c_t \geqslant 0}\sum_{t=0}^{T}b^{t}u(c_t)$$

If the consumer can not borrow, then what is the optimal consumption level for the consumer?

$\underline{Note:}$ The problem is based on David M. Kreps' microeconomic theory book, but it is adjusted to be a finite horizon problem. Kreps, in his book, solves this problem in a fuzzy way for $T=3$, that is not obvious to me. However, due to the fact that I know little of dynamic programming, since I am in the begining of examining this topic, I would appreciate it, if someone could provide a solution in the finite horizon. If the problem is not set in a rigorous way, I would be glad too to see somene making any appropriate change. I beleive that it is a classic problem in the field of economics.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Could you elaborate how $w_{t+1}$ evolves? Is it $\alpha w_t$ or $\alpha (w_t - c_t)$ (i.e. pre or post savings)? $\endgroup$ – Walrasian Auctioneer Nov 16 '19 at 5:14
  • $\begingroup$ @Walrasian Auctioneer you are right! It is $\alpha(w_t-c_t)$, post savings! $\endgroup$ – Nav89 Nov 16 '19 at 8:04
  • $\begingroup$ Ok! Since nobody answered the question, I would like to know if there is some kind of cookbook which provides all the techniques for the dynamic programming (from deterministic to stochastic maths)? $\endgroup$ – Nav89 Nov 19 '19 at 23:44
2
$\begingroup$

Your value function is as follows: $$ V_t[w] = \max_{c_t \in[0,w]} \left\{u(c_t) + \frac{1}{2}V_{t+1}[\alpha(w_t - c_t)] + \frac{1}{2}V_{t+1}[\beta(w_t-c_t)] \right\} $$ with the terminal condition $$ V_{T}[w_T] = \max_{c_T \in [0,w_T]} u(c_T) $$

So, we can solve this via backward induction. Clearly, at the final period $T$, since $u$ is monotonic, we consume everything, so $V_T[w_T] = u(w_T) = \ln(w_T)$.

Let us now consider one period previous, so period $T-1$. The value function is: $$ V_{T-1}[w] = \max_{c_{T-1} \in [0,w_{T-1}]} \left\{u(c_{T-1}) + \frac{1}{2}V_{T}[\alpha(w_{T-1} - c_{T-1})] + \frac{1}{2}V_{T}[\beta(w_{T-1}-c_{T-1})] \right\} $$ We already know what $V_T[\cdot]$ is, so substituting, $$ V_{T-1}[w] = \max_{c_{T-1} \in [0,w_{T-1}]} \left\{u(c_{T-1}) + \frac{1}{2}u(\alpha(w_{T-1} - c_{T-1})) + \frac{1}{2}u(\beta(w_{T-1}-c_{T-1})) \right\} $$ considering the case $u(\cdot) = \ln(\cdot)$, $$ V_{T-1}[w] = \max_{c_{T-1} \in [0,w_{T-1}]} \left\{\ln(c_{T-1}) + \frac{1}{2}\ln(\alpha(w_{T-1} - c_{T-1})) + \frac{1}{2}\ln(\beta(w_{T-1}-c_{T-1})) \right\} $$ Take first order conditions, and we can get optimal $c_{T-1}^*(w_{T-1})$.

Then we have solved what $V_{T-1}[\cdot]$ is! We can then do the same procedure by considering $V_{T-2}$. Repeat until we get to $V_0$.

EDIT to reflect comment. You now know that $c^*_{T−1}(w_{𝑇−1})=\frac{\alpha\beta}{1 + \alpha \beta}w_{T-1}$. Plugging back into $V_{T-1}$, we have solved for the value of $V_{T-1}$, \begin{align} V_{T-1}[w] &= \ln(\frac{\alpha\beta}{1 + \alpha \beta}w_{T-1}) + \frac{1}{2}\ln(\alpha(w_{T-1} - \frac{\alpha\beta}{1 + \alpha \beta}w_{T-1})) + \frac{1}{2}\ln(\beta(w_{T-1}-\frac{\alpha\beta}{1 + \alpha \beta}w_{T-1})) \\ &=\ln(\frac{\alpha\beta}{1 + \alpha \beta}w_{T-1}) + \frac{1}{2}\ln(\alpha(\frac{w_{T-1}}{1 + \alpha \beta})) + \frac{1}{2}\ln(\beta(\frac{w_{T-1}}{1 + \alpha \beta})) \end{align}

Finally, lets now go to $T-2$. The value function is $$ V_{T-2}[w] = \max_{c_{T-2} \in[0,w_{T-2}]} \left\{\ln(c_{T-2}) + \frac{1}{2}V_{T-1}[\alpha(w_{T-2} - c_{T-2})] + \frac{1}{2}V_{T-1}[\beta(w_{T-2}-c_{T-2})] \right\} $$ We just solved what $V_{T-1}$ is! Plug it in, and repeat.

This expression will probably blow up quite quickly, so it will be a pain to solve analytically.

| improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Walrasian Auctioneer thank you very much! Does any book have these techiques gathered all together so as not to disturb anyone in the future :) for such a problem? $\endgroup$ – Nav89 Nov 21 '19 at 10:26
  • $\begingroup$ Well, if we solve thr FOC for $V_{T-1}$, we can take that $c^{*}_{T-1}(w_{T-1})=\dfrac{\alpha\beta}{1+\alpha\beta}w_{T-1}$. But, I am a little confused, about how to apply this result to find $V_{T-2}$ and so on until I find $V_0$ $\endgroup$ – Nav89 Nov 21 '19 at 23:12
  • $\begingroup$ @Nav89 Hopefully the edited answer will be useful. As for techniques, Recursive Macroeconomic Theory Ljungqvist and Sargent is a standard graduate level textbook, but I think googling for lecture notes will be more useful. $\endgroup$ – Walrasian Auctioneer Nov 22 '19 at 19:18
  • $\begingroup$ Walrasian Auctioneer Thank you for everything! I need to get back to the work! $\endgroup$ – Nav89 Nov 22 '19 at 23:05
-4
$\begingroup$

I still can't comment, so this is not another answer it is adding some math to the given answer Since

$ Log X*Y = log X + log Y $

$ Log(X ^ i) = i * log X $

So substituting

$ Ln Z +1/2 Ln X + 1/2 Ln Y = Ln (z * Srqt(X*Y)) $

will simplify the expression a lot, but I have to reduce it in handwritten form because I'm writing from a phone now

You will reach

$ max [ w*(w-c)] $

which clearly happens at

$ c=w/2 $

(try any values)

2- Also, are you sure of ur use of the term "dynamic programming"???

3- And I don't understand from where came the term

$ [ Alpha*Beta / (Alpha*Beta +1)] $ , that's why I substituted twice (in the original formula before this reduction too)

4- Finally, I don't see why didn't u substitute $ V(t) = u(t) $ from the beginning to simplify things? I simplified ur formulas mathematically, but I don't get how u reached the EQ (I admit I'm not specialized in ur field I came for an interdisciplinary problems). I get that

$ Saving(t) = Return_of_Saving(t-1) + w(t)- c(t) $ Then u say her expected wealth "w" at time t+1 is an average of two values. So
$ W(t+1)= (alpha + beta) /2 * W(t) + Income(t+1) - C(t+1) $ - that u have to add a factor for the decrease of money value & the increase of prices with time, that's ur "b" in the maximization formula right?

Anyways, if u don't care to explain just be informed of these logarithmic relations & use them to simplify

enter image description here

| improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Welcome! Please make an effort to make this answer useful. $\endgroup$ – emeryville Apr 18 at 9:48
  • $\begingroup$ What should I do? $\endgroup$ – ShAr Apr 18 at 18:28
  • $\begingroup$ Please read this economics.stackexchange.com/help/formatting and also use LaTeX commands, e.g. alpha should be written $\alpha$ to get $\alpha$. Also write down in the post all the results in the image. $\endgroup$ – emeryville Apr 18 at 19:17
  • $\begingroup$ This could be a side note about the write format yes, but I was expecting comments on the topic & points discussed. $\endgroup$ – ShAr Apr 19 at 3:46

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.