I want to show mathematically that the lump sum principle does not apply to perfect complements. I was able to show it applied with a specific Cobb-Douglas utility function, but I am not sure how to show it does not apply with a perfect complements utility function: $$ U(x,y)=Min\{ax,by\} $$ or the form I am not sure about: $$ U(x,y)= \lim_{\delta\to-\infty} [ ax^\delta + by^\delta]^{(1/\delta)} $$ Any hints or corrections? Thanks

  • 3
    $\begingroup$ The $\min$ form is fine. But this seems very straightforward; what process did you follow with Cobb-Douglas that does not work with perfect complements? $\endgroup$
    – Giskard
    Oct 5 '21 at 6:59
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ You can't use differentiation with a $\min$-function. Instead, draw the indifference curves and the different budget lines. It should then be easy to see why the principle doesn't apply. Finally, translate the argument into maths. $\endgroup$
    – VARulle
    Oct 5 '21 at 10:57
  • $\begingroup$ @Giskard This was not a generalized proof. I just found the utility difference for a specific example. See my attempt at a generalized proof for perfect substitutes here: math.stackexchange.com/questions/4268077/… $\endgroup$
    – kleinerde
    Oct 5 '21 at 15:53

Your Answer

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

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.