Lagraingian constrained optimization problem

adeel
Messages
45
Reaction score
0
Im not sure if this is the right place, but I have an optimization problem where I assume we are supposed to use the Lagraingian method:

Consider the labour supply problem for an individual over an entire year. Suppose the individuals utility is described by the function U = (C^0.5) x (H^0.5). Further, suppose that the individuals combined time/income constraint is given by the equation C + wh = Tw, where T = 8760 is the number of hours in a standard year. Suppose the initial wage rate is $ 10/hour. Suppose that the government imposes a progressive income tax of 10% on all income above $ 25,000. That is, the individual pays no tax on the first $ 25,000 they earn. However, any income above $ 25,000 per year is taxed at a rate of 10%. Given this tax, what are the individuals optimum choices of consumption (C) and leisure (H).

I know how to do the problem without the tax, but i have no idea how to deal with the tax. Any help is greatly appreciated (its going to be on a final i have tomorow, so the faster the better. Thanks.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
any ideas? anyone?
 
It might help if you would tell us what your variables, C, H, wh (or is that c*h?) mean! I can see no relationship between U and the tax!
 
I agree with Hall's, the variables involved are not very clearly explained and the mixed case (H vs h etc) is confusing.

Anyway, I assume the consumption contraint, c = (T-h)w, is just for the non-taxed case. That is where w is a constant of $10.00 per hour.

This case is very easily solved, no need to use Lagrange multiplers (though you can if you wish). You just need to subst the constraint into the functional to make it a simple function of one variable "h" and the find the maxima.

If you do this it will tell you that you have to work 12hrs per day, 7 days per week and 365 days per year just to be maximally happy, Rats! Thank God for taxation however (j/k) because when you repeat the problem with taxation included then at least it tells you to work a little bit less.

To handle the case with taxation it's best to split the problem into two regions (case 1 for annual income <= 25000 and case two for annual income > 25000). Remember that if a local maxima for a given case does not fall within the required region for that case then the actual maximum will occur at the boundary.

For case 2 (income>25000) use the modified constraint of c = 2500 + 9(T-h) ok.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top