and
t>2 = In [0.450 + 0.5τ — τ2 + 0.05p] (22)
It is easily verified that v1 > v2 for all τ ∈ [0, 0.25] and p ∈ [0,1] . In
the social welfare function group 2 should therefore be given at least as large
weight as group 1. Since there are only two groups, it is easier to work with
exogenous welfare weights than the concave function used in Sections 3-4.
The social welfare function is thus
W = υ1 + 7v2
(23)
where 7 ≥ 1.
The optimal value of W is obtained by solving the following equations:
∂W
dp
∂W
∂τ
0.045 0.095 + 0.057 = 0
У1 У1 — P У2
0.9(—0.5 — 2 τ) 0.1(—0.5 — 2 τ) 7 (0.5 — 2 τ)
У1 У1 — P У2
for p ∈ [0,1], τ ∈ [0, 0.25], given 7. A numerical solution for the optimizing
problem for different values of 7 is found using Maple (s.t. τ ∈ [0, 0.25] and
p ∈ [0,1]):
τ p W
7 = 1 .1062872413 .6703546385 -.3575958178
7 = 1.5 .1357928137 .8486112171 -.6707438076
7 = 1.75 .1455947627 .9067929325 -.8227024058
From this table it is clear that as the concern for equity (measured by
7) increases, we get an increase in both the optimal marginal tax and the
optimal co-payment.
18
More intriguing information
1. The name is absent2. The name is absent
3. The name is absent
4. Foreign direct investment in the Indian telecommunications sector
5. Whatever happened to competition in space agency procurement? The case of NASA
6. Innovation Trajectories in Honduras’ Coffee Value Chain. Public and Private Influence on the Use of New Knowledge and Technology among Coffee Growers
7. The name is absent
8. Mortality study of 18 000 patients treated with omeprazole
9. Credit Markets and the Propagation of Monetary Policy Shocks
10. The name is absent