IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Judging Social Welfare Policy with the Solving of the Bargaining Problem

Listed author(s):
  • Joseph E. Mullat

    (idependent researcher, 1979-1980 assoc. Prof. Economic Division Tallinn Technical University; Estonia)

Registered author(s):

    Current analysis addresses an apparently critical issue of wealth circulation in the society. In the form of three persons game, we put the welfare-related burden on taxpayers. The Negotiator No.1 stands up for citizens’ legal and moral right to social services. The Negotiator No.2 proceeds from the needs of citizens for the provision of public goods. Quite the opposite, the Player, called No.3, gives the private consumption a preference over social services and public goods, i.e., the citizens-taxpayers try to reduce their tax obligations being accumulated into the general account of negotiators No.1 and No.2. In fact, the voters-citizens fulfil their expectations about taxes by a threat to acknowledge or to reject the bargaining agreement, e.g. a welfare committee must approve a motion against big taxes by unanimous vote. The government assesses and controls the wealth circulation by poverty line parameter. We provide an evidence for claim that 50% median income is an ideal solution.

    If 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.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by EconWPA in its series Game Theory and Information with number 0207003.

    in new window

    Date of creation: 17 Jul 2002
    Date of revision: 18 Apr 2005
    Handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpga:0207003
    Note: Type of Document - Acrobat PDF; prepared on Adobe ver. 4.0; to print on transparent/device-independent; pages-30; tables-1, figures-3. Earlier version of this paper was presented at the Third International Conference on Public Economics, PET02, Paris, July 4th – 6th 2002,,, Research Announcements, Economics Bulletin,Vol. 28 no. 22, 2001, current version has been presented at the Conference of Economic Design, SED04, Mallorca, June 29th – July 2nd 2004,
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    References listed on IDEAS
    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.:

    in new window

    1. Lars P. Feld & Bruno S. Frey, 2002. "Trust breeds trust: How taxpayers are treated," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 87-99, July.
    2. Atkinson, A B, 1987. "On the Measurement of Poverty," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(4), pages 749-764, July.
    3. Malcomson, James M., 1986. "Some analytics of the laffer curve," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 263-279, April.
    4. Nash, John, 1950. "The Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 18(2), pages 155-162, April.
    5. Frances Stewart, 2003. "Income distribution and development," Chapters,in: Trade and Development, chapter 10 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Peter Saunders, 1993. "Economic Adjustment and Distributional Change: Income Inequality and Poverty in Australia in the Eighties," Discussion Papers 0047, University of New South Wales, Social Policy Research Centre.
    7. J. A. Mirrlees, 1971. "An Exploration in the Theory of Optimum Income Taxation," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 38(2), pages 175-208.
    8. Rapoport, Anatol, 1994. "Problems of normative and descriptive decision theories," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 31-47, February.
    9. Sen, Amartya K, 1976. "Poverty: An Ordinal Approach to Measurement," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 44(2), pages 219-231, March.
    10. Roberts, Kevin W. S., 1977. "Voting over income tax schedules," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 329-340, December.
    11. Cremer, Helmuth & Gahvari, Firouz, 1997. "In-kind transfers, self-selection and optimal tax policy," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 97-114, January.
    12. Reiner Eichenberger & Felix Oberholzer-Gee, 1998. "Rational moralists: The role of fairness in democratic economic politics," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 94(1), pages 191-210, January.
    13. Berliant, M. & Gouveia, M., 1990. "Incentive Compatible Income Taxation, Individual Revenue Requirements And Welfare," RCER Working Papers 234, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpga:0207003. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (EconWPA)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.