Suchergebnisse

This paper examines the role for tax policies in productivity-shock driven economies with catching-up-with-the-Joneses utility functions. The optimal tax policy is shown to affect the economy countercyclically via procyclical taxes, i.e., "cooling down" the economy with higher taxes when it is "overheating" in booms and "stimulating" the economy with lower taxes in recessions to keep consumption up. Thus, models with catching-up-with-the-Joneses utility functions call for traditional Keynesian demand-management policies but for rather unorthodox reasons. (JEL E21, E62, E63)

AbstractThis paper develops an international version of the consumption‐based capital asset pricing (CCAPM), which we refer to as "catching up with the Americans." Previous CCAPM research develops the concept of "catching up with the Joneses," where a representative economic agent exhibits higher marginal utility of consumption as a result of higher past per capita consumption in his own country. Catching up with the Americans, on the other hand, is an international habit‐preference hypothesis. It extends the idea of catching up with the Joneses by stating that consumers of non‐U.S. countries gain higher marginal utility of consumption as a result of higher past American consumption growth. Contrary to much of the CCAPM literature, we test this version of the model using long bond rates rather than equity returns. However, like most of the previous research on the CCAPM, the catching up with the Americans model fails to explain the relationship between consumption and asset returns.

ABSTRACTA recent class of models on 'keeping up with the Joneses' suggests that comparison with the consumption of other individuals affects individual utility. This paper nests three variants of the 'Joneses' effect into an otherwise standard growth model. Under some conditions, growth and distribution are jointly determined, presenting thus a unification of the relevant theories. These variants are however not equivalent in terms of their effects on growth and distribution. It is also shown that, at least if comparisons‐in‐mean predominate, rises in the mean skills level and in the exogenous skills variance increase both growth and inequality with ambiguous effects on aggregate welfare.