EBK INTERMEDIATE MICROECONOMICS AND ITS
12th Edition
ISBN: 9781305176386
Author: Snyder
Publisher: YUZU
expand_more
expand_more
format_list_bulleted
Concept explainers
Question
Chapter 4, Problem 5RQ
To determine
To explain: The reason that makes the given statement true.
Expert Solution & Answer
Want to see the full answer?
Check out a sample textbook solution
Students have asked these similar questions
From utility theory, the demand for insurance depends on the level of risk aversion (i.e. how much you hate uncertainty), the cost of insurance (i.e. if it is within your willingness to pay), as well as wealth. Can you think of anything else that affects demand for insurance?
Nathan's income in a typical year is 75,000. There is a 10 percent chance that Nathan will be seriously ill next year, incurring 15,000 in medical expenses. Samantha also earns 75,000 in a typical year. Her chance of becoming seriously ill next year and incurring ur 15,000 in medical expenses is 20 percent. a. Calculate the actuarially fair premium for full insurance for (i) Nathan and (ii) Samantha. b. Suppose that a private insurance firm cannot distinguish between Nathan and Samantha in terms of their risk and assumes the risk of being seriously ill in the general population is 10%. In this context, discuss the adverse selection problem the firm might face. c. Can a compulsory, government - run health insurance program avoid the problem of adverse selection? Explain why or why not.
The lecture mentions that diminishing marginal utility applies to the consumption of money as well as the consumption of certain food. Can you give another example where diminishing marginal utility applies? Can you think of any example where diminishing marginal utility does not apply?
From utility theory, the demand for insurance depends on the level of risk aversion (i.e. how much you hate uncertainty), the cost of insurance (i.e. if it is within your willingness to pay), as well as wealth. Can you think of anything else that affects demand for insurance?
One of the predictions of prospect theory is that we tend to be overly concerned with relatively small risk. Can you think of any example (besides those given in the lecture) that either speaks to this or is an exception?
Chapter 4 Solutions
EBK INTERMEDIATE MICROECONOMICS AND ITS
Ch. 4.1 - Prob. 1MQCh. 4.1 - Prob. 2MQCh. 4.1 - Prob. 3MQCh. 4.2 - Prob. 1TTACh. 4.2 - Prob. 2TTACh. 4.2 - Prob. 1MQCh. 4.3 - Prob. 1TTACh. 4.3 - Prob. 2TTACh. 4.3 - Prob. 1MQCh. 4.3 - Prob. 2MQ
Ch. 4.3 - Prob. 3MQCh. 4.3 - Prob. 1.1TTACh. 4.3 - Prob. 1.2TTACh. 4.3 - Prob. 2.1TTACh. 4.3 - Prob. 2.2TTACh. 4.3 - Prob. 1.1MQCh. 4.3 - Prob. 2.1MQCh. 4.3 - Prob. 3.1MQCh. 4.4 - Prob. 1TTACh. 4.4 - Prob. 2TTACh. 4 - Prob. 1RQCh. 4 - Prob. 2RQCh. 4 - Prob. 3RQCh. 4 - Prob. 4RQCh. 4 - Prob. 5RQCh. 4 - Prob. 6RQCh. 4 - Prob. 7RQCh. 4 - Prob. 8RQCh. 4 - Prob. 9RQCh. 4 - Prob. 10RQCh. 4 - Prob. 4.1PCh. 4 - Prob. 4.2PCh. 4 - Prob. 4.3PCh. 4 - Prob. 4.4PCh. 4 - Prob. 4.5PCh. 4 - Prob. 4.6PCh. 4 - Prob. 4.7PCh. 4 - Prob. 4.8PCh. 4 - Prob. 4.9PCh. 4 - Prob. 4.10P
Knowledge Booster
Learn more about
Need a deep-dive on the concept behind this application? Look no further. Learn more about this topic, economics and related others by exploring similar questions and additional content below.Similar questions
- Why do economists say that people tend to be risk-averse?arrow_forwardIn the summer of 1984, Nicholai opened a small art gallery in the West Village and amassed a collection worth $2,60,000. An insurance company figured there was a 5% chance the collection would be destroyed and worth $0. Nicholai has utility u(x) = x0.5. If Nicholai purchases full insurance at a fair price, his expected utility would be ___. while if he declines the insurance he would face an expected utility of а. 1,487.5; 1,531.8 b. 1,487.5; 1,444.9 с. 1,571.6;B 1,531.8 d. 1,571.6; 1,444.9arrow_forwardIs the decision to buy pet insurance strictly an economic decision? Explain.arrow_forward
- Describe the difference between risk and uncertainty. Which one is more preferable and why?arrow_forwardSuppose that a person's utility function is the square root of wealth. Suppose the person earns $100,000 per year. He or she has an illness with a probability of 0.2, and the cost of the treatment is $30,000. Would the person pay $6,000 for insurance? Why or why not? What is the most this person would pay to be insured (hint: equate expected utility to utility with certainty)? Suppose their utility function changed to wealth squared (hint: are they now risk averse?). Would they pay $6,000 for insurance? Why or why not?arrow_forwardYou see an advertisement for a used car. The owner has not set a price but asks for people to make him an offer. You inspect the car and believe that the true value is equally likely to be anywhere in the range of $1,000 to $9,000 (so your calculation of the average of this value is $5,000). The current owner knows the exact true value, and he will for sure accept your offer if it is higher than the true value (but not if it is lower than that value). If your offer is accepted and you get the car, then you will find out the true value. But you know in advance that your amazing car repair skills can increase the value of the car by 25% of whatever its true value is. What is your expected profit if you offer $5,000? Round your answer to the nearest dollar (e.g. 500). If you expect to make a loss, add a minus sign (e.g. -500, please do not include space between minus sign and the number if the answer is negative). Note:- Do not provide handwritten solution. Maintain accuracy and quality…arrow_forward
- 1. Priyanka has an income of £90,000 and is a von Neumann-Morgenstern expected utility maximiser with von Neumann-Morgenstern utility index . There is a 1 % probability that there is flooding damage at her house. The repair of the damage would cost £80,000 which would reduce the income to £10,00 A. Would Priyanka be willing to spend £500 to purchase an insurance policy that would fully insure her against this loss? Explain. B. What would be the highest price (premium) that she would be willing to pay for an insurance policy that fully insures her against the flooding damage?arrow_forwardEconomists define the ‘certainty equivalent’ of a risky stream of income as the amount of guaranteed money an individual would accept instead of taking a risk. The certainty equivalent varies between individuals based on their risk preference. Consider a risky bet that involves a 25% chance of losing $5,000 or a 75% winning $5,000 for an individual with starting income of $50,000. Calculate the certainty equivalent income that provides the same utility as this bet for individuals with these different utility functions: 1. U(I) = I 2. U(I) = I–√ 3. U(I) = ln(I)where ln represents the natural logarithm function Type the numerical answers in the corresponding numbered boxes below. Round your answers to two decimal places. Do not use $ or , in your answers. (for example, enter 45223.45 or 46500.00) What can you conclude about the relative level of risk aversion for these three individuals? Explain.arrow_forwardEconomists define the 'certainty equivalent' of a risky stream of income as the amount of guaranteed money an individual would accept instead of taking a risk. The certainty equivalent varies between individuals based on their risk preference. Consider a risky bet that involves a 50-50 chance of losing $5,000 or winning $5,000 for an individual with starting income of $50,000. Calculate the certainty equivalent income that provides the same utility as this bet for individuals with these different utility functions: a. U(1) Vi b. U(1) = In(1) where In represents the natural logarithm function C. U(I) = -1/1 d. What can you conclude about the relative level of risk aversion for these three individuals? e What would be the certainty equivalent income for this bet for a risk neutral individual? f. What is the likelihood that a profit maximizing risk neutral insurance company would be willing and able to purchase these bets from the individuals in a, b and c? Explain.arrow_forward
- If you understand the principles of insurance, you will understand why it probably makes sense to purchase insurance to guard against large losses, like the destruction of a home you own, but probably does not make sense to purchase insurance to guard against small losses, like the failure of a TV you buy.arrow_forwardEconomics 2. Suppose that a farmer usually makes profit of $120,000 per year. Let's say that there is a 2% chance that a tornado will hit the farm. This would strongly hurt farmer's profit, leading to losses of $96,000 with 2% probability. a. What is the actuarially fair insurance? b. Assume that the farmer utility is given by u = 7 0.5 where 7t represents profit. What is the farmer's expected utility with no insurance? c. How much would the farmer be willing to pay to have insurance? d. Assume that the farmer expects that the tornado's effect to your farm is lower, only leading to losses of $70,000. i. What is the actuarially fair insurance? ii. What is the farmer's expected utility with no insurance? iii. How much would the farmer be willing to pay to have insurance? iv. What is the risk premium?arrow_forwardWhat is an insurance premium?arrow_forward
arrow_back_ios
SEE MORE QUESTIONS
arrow_forward_ios
Recommended textbooks for you
Economics (MindTap Course List)EconomicsISBN:9781337617383Author:Roger A. ArnoldPublisher:Cengage Learning
Economics (MindTap Course List)
Economics
ISBN:9781337617383
Author:Roger A. Arnold
Publisher:Cengage Learning