Lotteries for consumers versus lotteries for firms

Lars Ljungqvist, Thomas Sargent

    Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

    Abstract

    Edward C. Prescott emphasizes similarities between lotteries that smooth nonconvexities for firms and for consumers–workers. We emphasize their differences. We also argue that models with employment lotteries that are used to generate unemployed individuals in a frictionless framework can have implications very different from those of models embodying frictional unemployment. As an illustration, models with employment lotteries predict effects from job destruction taxes that are the opposite of those in search models. James Tobin said that good macroeconomic analysis ignores distribution effects. But in general equilibrium theory, distribution effects usually can't be ignored. Edward Prescott's paper is an elegant summary of a very successful research agenda that manages to apply general equilibrium theory to macroeconomics by carefully setting up redistribution arrangements to smooth the nonconvexities that are confronted by both firms and households, which thereby deliver both a stand-in household and a stand-in firm. Prescott's work continues the Tobin tradition not by ignoring distribution effects but by designing them to facilitate aggregate analysis. There is much to admire and to copy in Prescott's work in general and in this paper in particular. This is a perfect paper to assign to graduate students. A beautiful aspect of the paper is that because it adheres to the rules for describing competitive equilibria, everything is in the open. We take advantage of this openness to emphasize and challenge an important aspect of Prescott's analysis.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Title of host publicationFrontiers in Applied General Equilibrium Modeling: In Honor of Herbert Scarf
    PublisherCambridge University Press
    Pages119-126
    Number of pages8
    ISBN (Electronic)9780511614330
    ISBN (Print)9780521825252
    DOIs
    StatePublished - Jan 1 2005

    Fingerprint

    Lottery
    General equilibrium theory
    Non-convexity
    Macroeconomics
    Household
    Graduate students
    Research agenda
    Redistribution
    Competitive equilibrium
    Tax
    Openness
    Unemployment
    Job destruction

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Economics, Econometrics and Finance(all)

    Cite this

    Ljungqvist, L., & Sargent, T. (2005). Lotteries for consumers versus lotteries for firms. In Frontiers in Applied General Equilibrium Modeling: In Honor of Herbert Scarf (pp. 119-126). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511614330.007

    Lotteries for consumers versus lotteries for firms. / Ljungqvist, Lars; Sargent, Thomas.

    Frontiers in Applied General Equilibrium Modeling: In Honor of Herbert Scarf. Cambridge University Press, 2005. p. 119-126.

    Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

    Ljungqvist, L & Sargent, T 2005, Lotteries for consumers versus lotteries for firms. in Frontiers in Applied General Equilibrium Modeling: In Honor of Herbert Scarf. Cambridge University Press, pp. 119-126. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511614330.007
    Ljungqvist L, Sargent T. Lotteries for consumers versus lotteries for firms. In Frontiers in Applied General Equilibrium Modeling: In Honor of Herbert Scarf. Cambridge University Press. 2005. p. 119-126 https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511614330.007
    Ljungqvist, Lars ; Sargent, Thomas. / Lotteries for consumers versus lotteries for firms. Frontiers in Applied General Equilibrium Modeling: In Honor of Herbert Scarf. Cambridge University Press, 2005. pp. 119-126
    @inbook{a9f1120686ff482ea79406a1ed1badd5,
    title = "Lotteries for consumers versus lotteries for firms",
    abstract = "Edward C. Prescott emphasizes similarities between lotteries that smooth nonconvexities for firms and for consumers–workers. We emphasize their differences. We also argue that models with employment lotteries that are used to generate unemployed individuals in a frictionless framework can have implications very different from those of models embodying frictional unemployment. As an illustration, models with employment lotteries predict effects from job destruction taxes that are the opposite of those in search models. James Tobin said that good macroeconomic analysis ignores distribution effects. But in general equilibrium theory, distribution effects usually can't be ignored. Edward Prescott's paper is an elegant summary of a very successful research agenda that manages to apply general equilibrium theory to macroeconomics by carefully setting up redistribution arrangements to smooth the nonconvexities that are confronted by both firms and households, which thereby deliver both a stand-in household and a stand-in firm. Prescott's work continues the Tobin tradition not by ignoring distribution effects but by designing them to facilitate aggregate analysis. There is much to admire and to copy in Prescott's work in general and in this paper in particular. This is a perfect paper to assign to graduate students. A beautiful aspect of the paper is that because it adheres to the rules for describing competitive equilibria, everything is in the open. We take advantage of this openness to emphasize and challenge an important aspect of Prescott's analysis.",
    author = "Lars Ljungqvist and Thomas Sargent",
    year = "2005",
    month = "1",
    day = "1",
    doi = "10.1017/CBO9780511614330.007",
    language = "English (US)",
    isbn = "9780521825252",
    pages = "119--126",
    booktitle = "Frontiers in Applied General Equilibrium Modeling: In Honor of Herbert Scarf",
    publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
    address = "United Kingdom",

    }

    TY - CHAP

    T1 - Lotteries for consumers versus lotteries for firms

    AU - Ljungqvist, Lars

    AU - Sargent, Thomas

    PY - 2005/1/1

    Y1 - 2005/1/1

    N2 - Edward C. Prescott emphasizes similarities between lotteries that smooth nonconvexities for firms and for consumers–workers. We emphasize their differences. We also argue that models with employment lotteries that are used to generate unemployed individuals in a frictionless framework can have implications very different from those of models embodying frictional unemployment. As an illustration, models with employment lotteries predict effects from job destruction taxes that are the opposite of those in search models. James Tobin said that good macroeconomic analysis ignores distribution effects. But in general equilibrium theory, distribution effects usually can't be ignored. Edward Prescott's paper is an elegant summary of a very successful research agenda that manages to apply general equilibrium theory to macroeconomics by carefully setting up redistribution arrangements to smooth the nonconvexities that are confronted by both firms and households, which thereby deliver both a stand-in household and a stand-in firm. Prescott's work continues the Tobin tradition not by ignoring distribution effects but by designing them to facilitate aggregate analysis. There is much to admire and to copy in Prescott's work in general and in this paper in particular. This is a perfect paper to assign to graduate students. A beautiful aspect of the paper is that because it adheres to the rules for describing competitive equilibria, everything is in the open. We take advantage of this openness to emphasize and challenge an important aspect of Prescott's analysis.

    AB - Edward C. Prescott emphasizes similarities between lotteries that smooth nonconvexities for firms and for consumers–workers. We emphasize their differences. We also argue that models with employment lotteries that are used to generate unemployed individuals in a frictionless framework can have implications very different from those of models embodying frictional unemployment. As an illustration, models with employment lotteries predict effects from job destruction taxes that are the opposite of those in search models. James Tobin said that good macroeconomic analysis ignores distribution effects. But in general equilibrium theory, distribution effects usually can't be ignored. Edward Prescott's paper is an elegant summary of a very successful research agenda that manages to apply general equilibrium theory to macroeconomics by carefully setting up redistribution arrangements to smooth the nonconvexities that are confronted by both firms and households, which thereby deliver both a stand-in household and a stand-in firm. Prescott's work continues the Tobin tradition not by ignoring distribution effects but by designing them to facilitate aggregate analysis. There is much to admire and to copy in Prescott's work in general and in this paper in particular. This is a perfect paper to assign to graduate students. A beautiful aspect of the paper is that because it adheres to the rules for describing competitive equilibria, everything is in the open. We take advantage of this openness to emphasize and challenge an important aspect of Prescott's analysis.

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84926119864&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84926119864&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1017/CBO9780511614330.007

    DO - 10.1017/CBO9780511614330.007

    M3 - Chapter

    SN - 9780521825252

    SP - 119

    EP - 126

    BT - Frontiers in Applied General Equilibrium Modeling: In Honor of Herbert Scarf

    PB - Cambridge University Press

    ER -