the population. For each person there is a probability π (same for everyone)
that the person becomes ill. In this case the welfare level of the person is
u(y — t) — £ if untreated, where £ may vary among persons. The illness can
be completely cured by a treatment that costs c (same for all treatments).2
The price that a patient must pay for this treatment is p ∈ [0, c].
If a person becomes ill he or she will choose treatment if and only if
u(y — t — p) ≥ u(y — t) — £ (1)
Obviously, a person with £ > 0 will choose to be treated if p is zero or
sufficiently close to zero, no matter how low y is. For higher values of p,
some or even all persons may choose not to be treated. A person is more
likely to choose treatment the higher are y and £ and the lower is p. It is
useful to denote the set of people who choose treatment by Ω(p), i.e.
ОД = {y,£ I u(y — t — p) ≥ u(y — £) — £} (2)
The set Ω(p) obviously depends on how y and £ are distributed in the popu-
lation. We assume that the joint distribution function is F(y, £), and without
loss of generality we assume that all values of y and £ in the population are
in the range [0,1].3
Denoting the expected utility of a person by v(y,£,p), we have
v(y,£,p) = (1 — π)u(y — t) + π max[u(y — t) — £,u(y — t — p)] (3)
The size of the co-payment will affect the revenue requirement of the
government. There are two reasons for this. First, the higher is the co-
payment, the lower is the cost paid by the government per treatment. Second,
the higher is the co-payment, the fewer persons will choose to be treated. We
shall assume that any change in the government’s revenue requirement is met
by a corresponding change in the tax rate t that is the same for everyone. In
2The assumptions of a separable utility function and that the illness can be completely
cured simplify the formal analysis, but are not essential for the main results.
3Formally, we assume F(y, 0) = F(0,t) = 0 V (y,t) ∈ [0,1] and F(1, 1) = 1.
More intriguing information
1. The name is absent2. Biologically inspired distributed machine cognition: a new formal approach to hyperparallel computation
3. The name is absent
4. Can we design a market for competitive health insurance? CHERE Discussion Paper No 53
5. Constructing the Phylomemetic Tree Case of Study: Indonesian Tradition-Inspired Buildings
6. Stakeholder Activism, Managerial Entrenchment, and the Congruence of Interests between Shareholders and Stakeholders
7. The name is absent
8. The name is absent
9. The Evolution
10. How Offshoring Can Affect the Industries’ Skill Composition