Consumer Debt is 130% of Income: Avoiding Budget Constraint Orthodoxy
AbstractConsumer theory still maximizes utility subject to a budget constraint, when in fact 2008 data show that consumer debt is 130% of disposable income. Granger-causality tests confirm Consumption precedence over income. We discuss several features of newer US data, such as the ability to start /stop part-time /full time work /school, allowing families a greater control on the timing and level of income. Hence, our Wiener-Hopf-Whittle model uses 'target-seeking' optimization, while our two-equation system makes both consumption and income endogenous, similar to quantities and prices in a demand system. The new model provides estimates of shadow prices of income level and adjustment costs, and is shown to help resolve five old 'puzzles' from the consumer theory literature.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Fordham University, Department of Economics in its series Fordham Economics Discussion Paper Series with number dp2008-13.
Date of creation: 2008
Date of revision:
Stochastic dynamic optimum; Target seeking; VAR; Wiener-Hopf-Whittle; Causality testing;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- E21 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Consumption, Saving, Production, Employment, and Investment - - - Consumption; Saving; Wealth
- E63 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Macroeconomic Policy, Macroeconomic Aspects of Public Finance, and General Outlook - - - Comparative or Joint Analysis of Fiscal and Monetary Policy; Stabilization; Treasury Policy
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Christopher D. Carroll & David N. Weil, 1993.
"Saving and growth: a reinterpretation,"
Working Paper Series / Economic Activity Section
140, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
- Carroll, Christopher D. & Weil, David N., 1994. "Saving and growth: a reinterpretation," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 133-192, June.
- S. Grossman & R. Shiller, .
"The Determinants of the Variability of Stock Market Price,"
Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research Working Papers
18-80, Wharton School Rodney L. White Center for Financial Research.
- Grossman, Sanford J & Shiller, Robert J, 1981. "The Determinants of the Variability of Stock Market Prices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(2), pages 222-27, May.
- Sanford J. Grossman & Robert J. Shiller, 1981. "The Determinants of the Variability of Stock Market Prices," NBER Working Papers 0564, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Campbell, John Y, 1987.
"Does Saving Anticipate Declining Labor Income? An Alternative Test of the Permanent Income Hypothesis,"
Econometric Society, vol. 55(6), pages 1249-73, November.
- John Y. Campbell, 1988. "Does Saving Anticipate Declining Labor Income? An Alternative Test of the Permanent Income Hypothesis," NBER Working Papers 1805, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Kasey Buckles, 2008. "Understanding the Returns to Delayed Childbearing for Working Women," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(2), pages 403-07, May.
- John Y. Campbell & N. Gregory Mankiw, 1991.
"Permanent Income, Current Income, and Consumption,"
NBER Working Papers
2436, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Bernanke, Ben S, 1984.
"Permanent Income, Liquidity, and Expenditure on Automobiles: Evidence from Panel Data,"
The Quarterly Journal of Economics,
MIT Press, vol. 99(3), pages 587-614, August.
- Ben S. Bernanke, 1981. "Permanent Income, Liquidity, and Expenditure on Automobiles: Evidence from Panel Data," NBER Working Papers 0756, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Flavin, Marjorie A, 1981. "The Adjustment of Consumption to Changing Expectations about Future Income," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 89(5), pages 974-1009, October.
- Árpád Ábrahám & Nicola Pavoni, 2005. "The Efficient Allocation of Consumption under Moral Hazard and Hidden Access to the Credit Market," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 3(2-3), pages 370-381, 04/05.
- Caballero, R.J., 1988.
"Consumption Puzzles And Precautionary Savings,"
1988_05, Columbia University, Department of Economics.
- Steven J. Davis, 2008. "The Decline of Job Loss and Why It Matters," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(2), pages 263-67, May.
- Dynan Karen & Elmendorf Douglas & Sichel Daniel, 2012.
"The Evolution of Household Income Volatility,"
The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy,
De Gruyter, vol. 12(2), pages 1-42, December.
- María José Luengo-Prado & Bent E. Sørensen, 2008.
"What Can Explain Excess Smoothness and Sensitivity of State-Level Consumption?,"
The Review of Economics and Statistics,
MIT Press, vol. 90(1), pages 65-80, February.
- Bent E. Sørensen & Maria Jose Luengo-Prado, 2005. "What Can Explain Excess Smoothness and Sensitivity of State-Level Consumption?," Working Papers 2005-03, Department of Economics, University of Houston.
- Philip N. Jefferson, 2008. "Poverty Volatility and Macroeconomic Quiescence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(2), pages 392-97, May.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Fordham Economics).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.