Review Figure 9.18, which depicts a separating equilibrium breaking down. In this states? Again, support your answer graphically. figure, the separating equilibrium breaks down because the zero-profit line is too far to the right. But this is not the only way that a separating equilibrium can fail. a Draw a version of the Rothschild-Stiglitz model where a separating equilibrium holds, but just barely (the robust-type indifference curve should almost touch the aggregate zero-profit line).

Review Figure 9.18, which depicts a separating equilibrium breaking down. In this states? Again, support your answer graphically. figure, the separating equilibrium breaks down because the zero-profit line is too far to the right. But this is not the only way that a separating equilibrium can fail. a Draw a version of the Rothschild-Stiglitz model where a separating equilibrium holds, but just barely (the robust-type indifference curve should almost touch the aggregate zero-profit line).

Microeconomic Theory

12th Edition

ISBN:9781337517942

Author:NICHOLSON

Publisher:NICHOLSON

Chapter7: Uncertainty

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 7.4P

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

Question 3 Consider a medieval Italian merchant who is a risk averse expected utility maximiser. Their wealth will be equal to y if their ship returns safely from Asia loaded with the finest silk. If the ship sinks, their income will be y − L. The chance of a safe return is 50%. (i) Draw and carefully label the merchant’s endowment point, their expected income, and their cer- tainty equivalent income in a 2-dimensional state-contingent consumption space. (ii) Use the diagram to illustrate and explain how the merchant would benefit from buying insurance in a competitive insurance market. At which point a risk-neutral insurance firm would maximise their profits by offering the merchant full insurance?
Why can a pooling equilibrium be sustained in Spence’s signaling model but not in the Rothschild-Stiglitz screening model? Explain why in both models, the “good” type (high productivity in Spence, or low risk in Rothschild-Stiglitz) lose out in a separating equilibrium.
5. A tax on healthy people. Consider the basic Rothschild-Stiglitz model with asymmetric information and robust and frail customers. a. Suppose the government imposes a Wellness Tax τ > 0, on robust and frail types but collects on this tax only when they are healthy (that is, there is no tax if they turn out to be sick). Will a separating equilibrium still be possible? Draw a version of the Rothschild-Stiglitz diagram to support your answer. b. Will a separating equilibrium be possible if the tax τ > 0, is imposed on all customers in both sick and healthy states? Again, support your answer graphically.
Say there are two individuals; Hala and Anna who are deciding on either to buy health insurance on a pooling arrangement basis or otherwise. Both face a 30% probability of losing RM40 on medical services and 70% of losing nothing. With these information discuss whether Hala and Anna should join this arrangement or pay the medical services costs out of their own pocket money.
Now suppose agent C can produce private information about the true realization x at t=1 at the cost γ=4. Suppose lA=lB=φA=φB=1 and x is either 40 or 100 with equal probability and w=70. - At t=1, agent B owns the bond. What is the maximum amount LB that agent B can borrow with probability 1?- At t=0, what amount LA can agent A borrow from agent B in a repo trade at t=0 and what is the haircut in equilibrium?
Now,suppose N=3 with a market clearing interest rate. The first two agents are the same as earlier. The third agent has an endowment of 20 in the first period and consumes 15 in the second period. If the first two agents each consumed 21 units in the first period, how much did the third agent consume in the first period? Plz do fast
Look again at Figure 21.12. It appears that the investor in panel b can't lose and the investor in panel a can' t win. Is that correct? Note: The solution should not be hand written.
Suppose that the buyers do not know the quality of any particular bicycle for sale, but the sellers do knowthe quality of the bike they sell. The price at which a bike is traded is determined by demand and supply.Each buyer wants at most one bicycle.(ii) Assuming that each buyer purchases a bike only if its expected quality is higher than the price,and each seller is willing to sell their bike only if the price exceeds their valuation, what is theequilibrium outcome in this market?
Use the following information for questions 12-14. Assume that there are two parties, I and V. I engages in an activity that tends to injure V. V and I both can take care to reduce the expected harm from accidents. Specifically, suppose that if I takes no care (i.e., spends $0 on accident precautions), expected injury to V is $25. If I spends $5 on accident precautions, however, the expected injury to V is reduced to $18. Further suppose that V has a choice between taking no care or spending $4 in care to avoid accidents. If V spends $4 in care, V’s expected harm falls by $2 regardless of the level of care that I takes. Assume that courts adopt the socially-optimal level of injurer care as the negligence standard. That is, if I takes less than the socially-optimal level of care, she will be found negligent and must pay for all damages to V. If I takes at least the socially optimal level of care, she will not have to compensate V for his damages. What is the Nash equilibrium of this…
Use the following information for questions 12-14. Assume that there are two parties, I and V. I engages in an activity that tends to injure V. V and I both can take care to reduce the expected harm from accidents. Specifically, suppose that if I takes no care (i.e., spends $0 on accident precautions), expected injury to V is $25. If I spends $5 on accident precautions, however, the expected injury to V is reduced to $18. Further suppose that V has a choice between taking no care or spending $4 in care to avoid accidents. If V spends $4 in care, V’s expected harm falls by $2 regardless of the level of care that I takes. Assume that courts adopt the socially-optimal level of injurer care as the negligence standard. That is, if I takes less than the socially-optimal level of care, she will be found negligent and must pay for all damages toV. If I takes at least the socially optimal level of care, she will not have to compensate V for his damages. Under a negligence standard, what is…
Use the following information for questions 12-14. Assume that there are two parties, I and V. I engages in an activity that tends to injure V. V and I both can take care to reduce the expected harm from accidents. Specifically, suppose that if I takes no care (i.e., spends $0 on accident precautions), expected injury to V is $25. If I spends $5 on accident precautions, however, the expected injury to V is reduced to $18. Further suppose that V has a choice between taking no care or spending $4 in care to avoid accidents. If V spends $4 in care, V’s expected harm falls by $2 regardless of the level of care that I takes. Assume that courts adopt the socially-optimal level of injurer care as the negligence standard. That is, if I takes less than the socially-optimal level of care, she will be found negligent and must pay for all damages toV. If I takes at least the socially optimal level of care, she will not have to compensate V for his damages. Under a negligence standard, what are…
Constructing an equilibrium Households live two periods and have prefernces U(c1)+βU(c2) where 0<β<1 and U is the utility function and satisfies our usual assumptions. There are N households in the economy. N1 of these have endowments y1 in the first period and no endowment in the second-these agents are called "Type 1". The remaining N2 have no endowment in the firs period and y2 in the second period- these agents are called "Type 2". Hencethe resources of the economy are N1y1 in the first period and N2y2 in the second, where N=N1+N2 Households have access to a credit market where the can borrow (s<0) or save s<0. The type 1 agent faces budget constraints y1=c11+s1 rs1=c21 where the consumption for the type i agent in period j is denoted cji. The type 2 agent faces budget constraints 0=c12+s2 y2+rs2=c22 The resource constraints are N1y1=N1c11+N2c12 N2y2=N11c21+N2c22 a) state the maximization problem solved by each type of agent and derive the fist order and second order…