The Role of Immigration in Sustaining the Social Security System: A Political Economy Approach



[F(τ 1 ), F(τ 1)]. Under this condition, if kt [F(τ 1 ), F(τ 1)], the indirect utility
of the young voter is maximized by the "demographic steady" strategy and the
aggregate saving decision rule follows:
S(kt , πt = (τ (kt),1), τt+1 = τ (kt+1))
[
F (τ 1), F (τ 1)]. For kt [F (T 1 ), F (τ 1)]c, the value of the young voter’s indirect
utility function is not lower under the "demographic switching" strategy than
under the "demographic steady" strategy (since for
τt [τ 11]c, the solution
would imply setting the constrained). Thus, if
kt [F(τ 1 ),F(τ 1)]c, the in-
direct utility of the young voter is maximized according to the "demographic
switching" strategy:
πt = (0,Min[γ*, mm]) and the aggregate saving decision
rule follows:
S(ktt = (0,Min[γ*, mn])t+1 = ψψ+1 ). It should be noted that
since the optimal solution changes next period decisive voter from young to old,
for all values of
kt+1(defined according to this aggregate saving decision rule:
S(ktt = (0,Min[γ*, mm])t+1 = ψ+1 )), there are no additional conditions
on
kt+1. These conditions are sufficient to assure that the equilibrium conditions
are satisfied when:
m + n > 0 and n < 0.

If the population growth rates satisfy the properties: n, m > 0, there is a
majority of young in every period.

If kt [F1),F(τ 1)], we must prove that the indirect utility of the young
voter is maximized by setting:
Ψ(τ (kt),1) and the aggregate saving decision rule
follows:
S(ktt = (τ (kt),1)t+1 = τ (kt+1)). Otherwise, If kt [F (τ 1),F (τ 1)]c,
we must prove that the indirect utility of the young voter is maximized by set-
ting:
πt = (0,7*) and the aggregate saving decision rule follows: S(ktt =
(0,Y*) t+1 = 0). The young voter’s indirect utility function can be written in
its Lagrangian form as follows:

L = L(kt) with πt+1 = (τ(kt+1),1)   if kt+1[F(τ 1),F(τ 1)]

(73)


L(kt) with πt+1 = (0*)      otherwise
where L(kt) is as defined in equation (43). Note that the immigration quota
is not restricted (
γt = γ*), since the young decisive voter cannot change next
period decisive voter from young to old. According to proposition II, the in-
direct utility of the young subject to constant next period policy variables, is
maximized by setting:
πt = (0, γ*). Thus, similarly to the previous case, we will
require that the value of the young voter’s indirect utility function under the first
decision rule (
πt = (τ (kt),1)), should not be lower than the value of the young
voter’s indirect utility function under the second decision rule
t = Ψ(0*))

33



More intriguing information

1. Labour Market Institutions and the Personal Distribution of Income in the OECD
2. TECHNOLOGY AND REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT: THE CASE OF PATENTS AND FIRM LOCATION IN THE SPANISH MEDICAL INSTRUMENTS INDUSTRY.
3. The name is absent
4. THE ECONOMICS OF COMPETITION IN HEALTH INSURANCE- THE IRISH CASE STUDY.
5. Does Market Concentration Promote or Reduce New Product Introductions? Evidence from US Food Industry
6. Parallel and overlapping Human Immunodeficiency Virus, Hepatitis B and C virus Infections among pregnant women in the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, Nigeria
7. The name is absent
8. Foreign direct investment in the Indian telecommunications sector
9. On the origin of the cumulative semantic inhibition effect
10. The name is absent
11. Effects of a Sport Education Intervention on Students’ Motivational Responses in Physical Education
12. A model-free approach to delta hedging
13. The name is absent
14. Informal Labour and Credit Markets: A Survey.
15. The name is absent
16. The name is absent
17. Putting Globalization and Concentration in the Agri-food Sector into Context
18. ADJUSTMENT TO GLOBALISATION: A STUDY OF THE FOOTWEAR INDUSTRY IN EUROPE
19. The name is absent
20. SOME ISSUES CONCERNING SPECIFICATION AND INTERPRETATION OF OUTDOOR RECREATION DEMAND MODELS