Table 3: Determinants for Share of Risky Assets (Tobit Regression); Dependent
Variable: Percent Risky 2 (for definition of variables, see Appendix B)
|
______SCF USA_______ |
______EVS Germany______ | |||
|
coef |
std. err. |
coef |
std. err. | |
|
Age |
0.0143 |
0.0040 *** |
-0.0020 |
0.0018 |
|
Age2 |
-0.0001 |
0.00004 *** |
-0.00003 |
0.00002 |
|
Gender |
0.0533 |
0.0246 ** |
-0.0372 |
0.0097 *** |
|
Education Low |
0.0852 |
0.0368 ** |
-0.0343 |
0.0199 * |
|
Education High |
-0.0521 |
0.0283 * |
0.0096 |
0.0101 |
|
Occupation Retired |
-0.0087 |
0.0371 |
0.0276 |
0.0149 * |
|
Ln(Labor Income) |
-0.0160 |
0.0165 |
-0.0275 |
0.0088 *** |
|
Ln(Net worth) |
0.0735 |
0.0103 *** |
0.2550 |
0.0033 *** |
|
Labor Income / Net worth |
-0.0487 |
0.0083 *** |
0.0001 |
0.00002 *** |
|
Constant |
-0.4316 |
0.1564 *** |
-1.9020 |
0.0959 *** |
|
Pseudo R2 |
0.4040 |
0.3731 | ||
* significant at 10%, ** significant at 5%, *** significant at 1% level
Table 4: Joint Distribution of Labor Income and Net Worth for the United
States and Germany and Indication (Shaded Area) of Potentially Large Welfare
Losses *
SCF USA Net worth Quantile
0-25 25-50 50-75 75-100
|
0-25 g ≡ 25-50 I g ≡ 50-75 j « O 75-100 |
9 |
% 7 %^^M7 |
% |
7% 1% 11% 2% 0% 7% 8% 15% |
|
EVS Germany |
Net worth Quantile | |||
|
0-25 |
25-50 |
50-75 |
75-100 | |
|
0-25 |
13% |
4% |
4% |
3% |
|
g ∈ 25-50 |
7% |
5% |
6% | |
|
S о ≡ 50-75 ι-*-√ ɔ f⅛ |
4% |
8% |
6% | |
|
JZj Ξ O 75-100 |
1% |
6% |
8% |
10% |
*
Note, the distribution shown here refers to the subpopulation aged 50. Preference assumptions and
indication of potentially large welfare losses are based on Figure 3 and Figure 8.
More intriguing information
1. The name is absent2. Housing Market in Malaga: An Application of the Hedonic Methodology
3. Existentialism: a Philosophy of Hope or Despair?
4. Palkkaneuvottelut ja työmarkkinat Pohjoismaissa ja Euroopassa
5. The Values and Character Dispositions of 14-16 Year Olds in the Hodge Hill Constituency
6. The name is absent
7. The name is absent
8. The name is absent
9. Structural Conservation Practices in U.S. Corn Production: Evidence on Environmental Stewardship by Program Participants and Non-Participants
10. Willingness-to-Pay for Energy Conservation and Free-Ridership on Subsidization – Evidence from Germany