IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/1911.12490.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Contribution to Theory of Factor Income Distribution, Cambridge Capital Controversy and Equity Premium Puzzle

Author

Listed:
  • Xiaofeng Liu

Abstract

Under very general conditions, we construct a micro-macro model for closed economy with a large number of heterogeneous agents. By introducing both financial capital (i.e. valued capital---- equities of firms) and physical capital (i.e. capital goods), our framework gives a logically consistent, complete factor income distribution theory with micro-foundation. The model shows factor incomes obey different distribution rules at the micro and macro levels, while marginal distribution theory and no-arbitrage princi-ple are unified into a common framework. Our efforts solve the main problems of Cambridge capital controversy, and reasonably explain the equity premium puzzle. Strong empirical evidences support our results.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiaofeng Liu, 2019. "A Contribution to Theory of Factor Income Distribution, Cambridge Capital Controversy and Equity Premium Puzzle," Papers 1911.12490, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2019.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:1911.12490
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1911.12490
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Avi J. Cohen, 2003. "Retrospectives: Whatever Happened to the Cambridge Capital Theory Controversies?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 17(1), pages 199-214, Winter.
    2. Stephen A. Ross, 2013. "The Arbitrage Theory of Capital Asset Pricing," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 1, pages 11-30, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. Xavier Gabaix, 2016. "Power Laws in Economics: An Introduction," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 30(1), pages 185-206, Winter.
    4. Stokey, Nancy L, 1988. "Learning by Doing and the Introduction of New Goods," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 96(4), pages 701-717, August.
    5. Mantel, Rolf R., 1974. "On the characterization of aggregate excess demand," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 348-353, March.
    6. Alan P. Kirman, 1992. "Whom or What Does the Representative Individual Represent?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 6(2), pages 117-136, Spring.
    7. Thomas Piketty & Emmanuel Saez, 2003. "Income Inequality in the United States, 1913–1998," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 118(1), pages 1-41.
    8. Luigi L. Pasinetti, 1962. "Rate of Profit and Income Distribution in Relation to the Rate of Economic Growth," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 29(4), pages 267-279.
    9. A. Cohen & G. Harcourt., 2009. "Whatever Happened to the Cambridge Capital Theory Controversies?," VOPROSY ECONOMIKI, N.P. Redaktsiya zhurnala "Voprosy Economiki", vol. 8.
    10. Sonnenschein, Hugo, 1973. "Do Walras' identity and continuity characterize the class of community excess demand functions?," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 6(4), pages 345-354, August.
    11. Luigi L. Pasinetti, 1966. "New Results in an Old Framework: Comment on Samuelson and Modigliani," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 33(4), pages 303-306.
    12. Rajnish Mehra, 2003. "The Equity Premium: Why is it a Puzzle?," NBER Working Papers 9512, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Pierangelo Garegnani, 2013. "On the Present State of the Capital Controversy," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Enrico Sergio Levrero & Antonella Palumbo & Antonella Stirati (ed.), Sraffa and the Reconstruction of Economic Theory: Volume One, chapter 1, pages 15-37, Palgrave Macmillan.
    14. Joseph E. Stiglitz, 2019. "An Agenda for Reforming Economic Theory," Frontiers of Economics in China-Selected Publications from Chinese Universities, Higher Education Press, vol. 14(2), pages 149-167, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lu Zhang, 2017. "The Investment CAPM," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 23(4), pages 545-603, September.
    2. Michaelis Nikiforos, 2018. "Distribution-led growth through methodological lenses," FMM Working Paper 24-2018, IMK at the Hans Boeckler Foundation, Macroeconomic Policy Institute.
    3. Jose Apesteguia & Miguel A. Ballester, 2016. "Stochastic representatitve agent," Economics Working Papers 1536, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    4. Sabiou M. Inoua & Vernon L. Smith, 2020. "The Classical Theory of Supply and Demand," Working Papers 20-11, Chapman University, Economic Science Institute.
    5. Kewei Hou & Haitao Mo & Chen Xue & Lu Zhang, 2017. "The Economics of Value Investing," NBER Working Papers 23563, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Joseph E Stiglitz, 2018. "Where modern macroeconomics went wrong," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 34(1-2), pages 70-106.
    7. Icefield, William, 2020. "On treatment of interests, profits and equilibrium non-existence in general equilibrium models," MPRA Paper 99625, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Antonio Cutanda & José M. Labeaga & Juan A. Sanchis-Llopis, 2020. "Aggregation biases in empirical Euler consumption equations: evidence from Spanish data," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 58(3), pages 957-977, March.
    9. Simone Landini & Mauro Gallegati & J. Barkley Rosser, 2020. "Consistency and incompleteness in general equilibrium theory," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 205-230, January.
    10. Hodgson, Geoffrey M., 1997. "Economics and the return to Mecca: The recognition of novelty and emergence," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 399-412, October.
    11. Vernon L. Smith & Sabiou M. Inoua, 2019. "Classical Economics: Lost and Found," Working Papers 19-15, Chapman University, Economic Science Institute.
    12. D. Wade Hands, 2012. "The Rise and Fall of Walrasian Microeconomics: The Keynesian Effect," Chapters, in: Microfoundations Reconsidered, chapter 3, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    13. INOSE Junya, 2014. "Representative Agent in a Form of Probability Distribution," Discussion papers 14038, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    14. Przemysław Włodarczyk, 2016. "Modele reprezentatywnych podmiotów gospodarczych jako narzędzie analizy w nowej syntezie neoklasycznej," Bank i Kredyt, Narodowy Bank Polski, vol. 47(6), pages 553-584.
    15. Yariv, Leeat & Jackson, Matthew O., 2018. "The Non-Existence of Representative Agents," CEPR Discussion Papers 13397, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    16. Momi, Takeshi, 2010. "Excess demand function around critical prices in incomplete markets," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 293-302, May.
    17. Ghiglino, Christian & Tvede, Mich, 1997. "Multiplicity of Equilibria," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 1-15, July.
    18. Da Silva, Sergio, 2009. "Does Macroeconomics Need Microeconomic Foundations?," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 3, pages 1-11.
    19. Antoine Mandel & Carlo Jaeger & Steffen Fürst & Wiebke Lass & Daniel Lincke & Frank Meissner & Federico Pablo-Marti & Sarah Wolf, 2010. "Agent-based dynamics in disaggregated growth models," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00542442, HAL.
    20. Charalambos Aliprantis & Kim Border & Owen Burkinshaw, 1996. "Market economies with many commodities," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 19(1), pages 113-185, March.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:1911.12490. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.