We examine the ability of expected utility function ofthe Friedman-Savage type to account for gambling when consumers also have opportunities for intertemporal substitutions. When the time horizon is infinite, we demonstrate that even in intra-period utility functions have the Friedman-savage shape, borrowing and lending without gambling is weakly preferable to gambling provided the rate of interest and time preference are equal. This is true even if any actuarially fair gamble is available; if all gambles are unfair, the preference is strict. When the rates of interest and time preference differ and borrowing, lending and gambling are permitted, a demand for gambles arise. However, it is never optimal to gamble in more than one period. This is apparently at odds with observed behaviour of gamblers and cast considerable doubts on the explanatory power of the Friedman-Savage approach.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
file. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Length: 25 pages Date of creation: Nov 2000 Date of revision: Handle: RePEc:kee:keeldp:2000/08
Contact details of provider: Postal: Department of Economics, University of Keele, Keele, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG - United Kingdom Phone: +44 (0)1782 584581 Fax: +44 (0)1782 717577 Email: Web page: http://www.keele.ac.uk/depts/ec/cer/ More information through EDIRC
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Martin E. Diedrich).
Related research
Keywords:
Other versions of this item:
Cited by: (explanations, 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.)