# Tag Info

12

As long as the main results/conclusions of your paper don't rely solely on the non-economics literature you cite, you should be okay. In other words, it's perfectly fine to use non-economics literature to motivate or even as part of the support for your thesis, as long as you also include proper economic arguments, i.e. theoretical models or econometric ...

8

Suppose you write some software that you can then freely sell at practically no cost per unit (the wonders of the internet). You want to make as much profit as possible. Since you have almost no per unit cost, maximizing your profit will amount to maximizing the revenue, the price per unit times the number of units sold. Note what did not enter the ...

8

There seem to be two things: The first is that "perceived value" is not something that directly corresponds to something economists usually study. It might be related to, say, marriage patterns and household incomes, political power, or whatnot. If you can show that it is an important aspect of a problem that falls within the (vague) boundaries of ...

8

It follows indeed from the first three conditions, though I did not find a simple proof. Here is a messy one: Observe first that, $v(tx)>p\cdot tx$ with $t>0$ is equivalent to $v(tx)/t>px$. By replacing $p$ by some multiple, we can see that the right-side can take any value without changing the left value. The function $t\mapsto v(tx)$ is strictly ...

5

Your final line This figure is only for representation. pretty much answers your question. When explaining these concepts you want to draw something that is easy to understand, i.e. does not have too many irregularities but is also not too regular. Linearity is a special attribute of functions. General curves show that there is usually no need for this ...

4

To derive the formula for the elasticity of substition I consider a function with two arguments $f(x_1,x_2)$. I then consider a level curve $f(x_1,x_2) = c$ assumed to define $x_2$ as a function of $x_1$. From this it follows that $$\frac{\partial }{\partial x_1} f(x_1,x_2(x_1)) = c \Leftrightarrow \\[8pt] f_1(x_1,x_2) + f_2(x_1,x_2) \frac{\partial x_2}{\... 4 You can do whatever you want, it's your paper. Will it make it more difficult to publish? Yeah. Referees are fickle and easily annoyed. You would not be the first person to go down this route. For example, the term Maskin monotonicity is common place in implementation theory. However, some authors use another term, I believe Maskin invariance. The claim is ... 4 Establishments are business locations (source). The real estate industry does not include construction (under either NAICS or SIC). It’s not really possible to tell what exactly would be included without more detail on the specific industry group you are looking at; it could be anything from realtors’ offices to apartment rental buildings, or both+other ... 3 Given that you already know the welfare maximizing level h=5 from your previous question, another approach would be to just consider that any optimal take-it-or-leave-it offer can be divided into two steps: First, maximize total surplus by setting h=5. Second, extract all surplus by maximizing the price subject to the other's participation constraint. ... 3 Your steps look correct. There is one small typo in the first \frac{\partial \mathcal L}{\partial h}: the term -4h(h-10) should have been -4(h-10). The results also look reasonable: Regardless of who makes the offer, the Pareto optimal level of h is produced. Given how the bargaining procedures are structured, whoever gets to make the offer gets to ... 3 It is this probability that is consistent with shares trading for their expected value. The expected value is given by:$$E(S_1+S_2)=E(S_1)+E(S_2)=p_1 \times1+p_2 \times1=p_1+p_2$$where S_i is the payment of share i, p_i is the probability of payment of share i (due to the sales figure falling in some range). So if the expected value is to equal the ... 3 The uniqueness of z comes from the ND of D^2f I believe. Let z^*(p) be the solution of the problem at price p. Define the function, G(p,z):=p \nabla f(z)-w. From uniqueness we have z=z^*(p) if and only if G(p,z)=0. That is, G(p,z)=0 is an implicit equation which tells us how z^*(p) changes when p does. The IFT gives us a way to find the ... 3 In an experimental setting, how could you prevent the players from adopting a mixed strategy? I don't think you can. Restricting access to mixed strategies is essentially banning the use of any private randomization devices. But since there are various ways to perform mental coin-flips, not all of which are readily observable, it would be prohibitively ... 3 The MU question you quote is poorly worded. Here the proper answer would be: C Indeterminate with the given information First we can visualize it as shown on the diagrams shown below. Consumer surplus is the difference between willingness to pay (given by demand)`and price they actually pay so for all consumers it is the area below demand curve and above ... 2 tl;dr– You can cite whatever you want regardless of field. Of course, any finding that depends on another finding suffers the errors, unreliability, and limitations of its dependencies. Quick comments: You do research, not "Economics research". Classification is a downstream matter that should be largely ignored throughout the research process. ... 2 Your assumption 3 is compatible with corner solutions of the kind y_i=0 for some i, and is not sufficient to avoid corner solutions for some prices small enough. With production functions it is common to assume Inada's conditions to avoid corner solutions. With cost functions, such conditions are quite naturally expressed as$$ \lim_{y_i\rightarrow 0} \...

2

A payoff pair $(x,y)$ is Pareto efficient if it is not Pareto dominated. This means that there does not exist another payoff pair $(x', y')$ such that $x < x'$ and $y < y'$. (Depending on the exact definition, sometimes of of the two inequalities can be weak). All payoffs in the payoff matrix except for $(C,\beta), (B, \beta)$ and $(C, \delta)$ are ...

2

A good balance of intuition and rigour is given by a text called Chicago Price Theory and an accompanying YouTube series from Chicago Economics Dept. https://home.uchicago.edu/cbm4/cpt/index.html My only criticism of the YouTube series would be that the ordering of the videos is very poor. It would therefore require simultaneously consulting the text.

2

Almost correct. Setting $W(h)=0$ is wrong (but inconsequential for the solutions). Checking the SOC for completeness should be included, but is somewhat obvious here. Correctness of 3. holds only under the assumption that the consumer owns no shares of the firm, which seems to hold in this exercise.

2

This has nothing to do with any specific model. For any event $A$, let $I_A$ be the indicator function such that $I_A(\omega)=1$ if $\omega\in A$ and $I_A(\omega)=0$ if $\omega\notin A.$ Then $\mathbb{P}(A)=\mathbb{E}[I_A],$ and here the expectation is given in terms of a density function.

2

The short answer is no. Reveal preference only determines which combination of goods is preferred, it does not affect in any way the allocation of goods, which has more to do with the functional form of the utility function, the types of goods and the types of changes made. For example, the 2 budget lines represent different budget sets when there is a ...

1

In your maximization problem the resident chooses the level of pollution $u$. If he can really do this then the maximization problem has no solution, since $U$ becomes infinite for $u\rightarrow 0$. I guess actually the resident doesn't choose the level of pollution, which rather seems to be an exogenously given parameter here. But then $(x^*,k^*)$ doesn't ...

1

I think that you need to also assume that the utilities are non-decreasing in the goods. That is, if $x'_1>x_1$, then $u(x'_1,x_2)>u(x_1,x_2)$. The utility functions having the "same preferences" means $\forall (x_1,x_2), (x'_1,x'_2): u(x_1,x_2) > u (x'_1,x'_2) \text{ iff } v(x_1,x_2) > v(x'_1,x'_2)$ So let's assume $u(x_1,x_2) > u (... 1 The formula you already have there is a general formula for elasticity of substitution, but I can see that it might be difficult to apply to your problem here given that$MU_{x_2}=1$. There is also another way how formula for elasticity of substitution can be expressed. You can use 'partial derivative formula' (e.g. see Sydsaeter et al. EMEA pp 430) which is ... 1 In the comments @henry already provided you with the correct conceptual answer, I will try to offer some extra intuition and way how this could be modeled. Currency exchange is a combination of a retail market with service market so here if you would want to visualize it with supply and demand you would have to use two diagrams for both parts of the market. ... 1 "Is this reasoning correct" No. The reason why this reasoning is incorrect is that the expected value here depends on the probabilities that envelope 2 contains$2x$or$x/2$. You have assumed that this is 50/50, but this cannot possibly be the case for all$x$. To see this, suppose that you open envelope 1 and find \$10. You assume that envelope ...

1

There is also Felix Muñoz-Garcia: advanced microeconomic theory (this comes with a book of solved practice questions) and Silberberg: The structure of economics (old but written so well where much the needed math is explained along with the economics) For consumer choice - no firm theory - the book by Deaton and Muellbauer: Economics and consumer behavior is ...

1

Probably, the author probably is assuming $x_i$ and $y_i$ are independent in addition to the stated assumption on pg. 7 that types "are orthogonal" (which merely means uncorrelated.) (However, since they are also uniformly distributed, we have, $f_{X,Y}(x,y)=f_X(x)f_Y(y)\equiv 1, \forall x,y$, meaning they are independent.) Assuming independence, ...

1

This is probably an old question. However there is a book on PDE's and game theory. Game Theory and Partial Differential Equations, Pablo Blanc and Julio Daniel Rossi. If you found other books on this matter, I would like to know as well.

Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible