Figure 2: Expected utility as a function of the severity of the illness

Δ = H⅜)>'(y — t) У δ(u)dF(y, €)
— [1+ t'(p)]u'(У — t — P) 2" δ(υ)dF(y,€) (15)
Moreover, (13) can in this case be written as
ʃ δ(υ)dF(y,€) = ʃ δ(υ)dF(y,€) < 0
(16)
since δ(v) > 0 for € > L. The first integral in (15) is in other words negative.
The second integral in (15) is positive, since δ(v~) > 0 for € > L. Since the
terms [—t'(p)] and [1 + t'(p)] are both positive, it follows that Δ < 0 in the
present case. From our previous discussion we thus have the the following
proposition:
10
More intriguing information
1. The name is absent2. Needing to be ‘in the know’: strategies of subordination used by 10-11 year old school boys
3. The Economic Value of Basin Protection to Improve the Quality and Reliability of Potable Water Supply: Some Evidence from Ecuador
4. The InnoRegio-program: a new way to promote regional innovation networks - empirical results of the complementary research -
5. The name is absent
6. The name is absent
7. The name is absent
8. The name is absent
9. Fiscal Sustainability Across Government Tiers
10. Regionale Wachstumseffekte der GRW-Förderung? Eine räumlich-ökonometrische Analyse auf Basis deutscher Arbeitsmarktregionen