Lecture 4

# Remark note that the logic goes as follows first we

This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: < α < 1 and x1 , x2 ≥ 0 are consumption of good 1 and 2 (such a function is called Cobb-Douglas ). Let p1 , p2 > 0 the price of each good and w > 0 be the wealth. Then the consumer’s utility maximization problem (UMP) is maximize subject to α log x1 + (1 − α) log x2 x1 ≥ 0, x2 ≥ 0, p1 x1 + p2 x2 ≤ w. The budget set {(x1 , x2 ) | x1 ≥ 0, x2 ≥ 0, p1 x1 + p2 x2 ≤ w} is nonempty and compact, and u(x) = α log x1 + (1 − α) log x2 is upper semicontinuous by deﬁning log 0 = −∞. Hence UMP has a solution. Since the constraints are linear, the Guignard constraint qualiﬁcation holds. Therefore we can apply the Karush-Kuhn-Tucker theorem. Let L(x, λ, µ) = α log x1 + (1 − α) log x2 + λ(w − p1 x1 − p2 x2 ) + µ1 x1 + µ2 x2 , where λ ≥ 0 is the Lagrange multiplier corresponding to the budget constraint p1 x1 + p2 x2 ≤ w ⇐⇒ w − p1 x1 − p2 x2 ≥ 0 and µn is the Lagrange multiplier corresponding to xn ≥ 0 for n = 1, 2. By the ﬁrst-order condition, we get ∂ : ∂ x1 ∂ : ∂ x2 α − λp1 + µ1 = 0, x1 1−α − λp2 + µ2 = 0. x2 By the complementary slackness condition, we have λ(w − p1 x1 − p2 x2 ) = 0, µ1 x1 = 0, µ2 x2 = 0. 2014W Econ 172B Operations Research (B) Alexis Akira Toda Since log 0 = −∞, x1 = 0 or x2 = 0 cannot be an optimal solution. Hence x1 , x2 > 0, so by complementary slackness we get µ1 = µ2 = 0. Then by the α ﬁrst order condition we get x1 = λα1 , x2 = 1−2 , so λ > 0. Substituting these p λp into the budget constraint p1 x1 + p2 x2 = w, we get α 1−α 1 + = w ⇐⇒ λ = , λ λ w so the solution is (x1 , x2 ) = αw (1 − α)w , p1 p2 . Remark. • Note that the logic goes as follows. First, we show by some means (e.g., Bolzano-Weierstrass) that an optimal solution exists. Second, we verify that the Karush-Kuhn-Tucker theorem applies and derive the necessary conditions for optimality. Third, since the necessary conditions led to a unique candidate, it must be the solution. • Since log 0 = −∞, we know that the optimal solution cannot be x1 = 0 or x2 = 0, so the constraints x1 ≥ 0, x2 ≥ 0 never binds at the solu...
View Full Document

## This document was uploaded on 02/18/2014 for the course ECON 172b at UCSD.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online