Discussion of “Has consumption inequality mirrored income inequality?” by Mark Aguiar and Mark Bils NBER Economic Fluctuations and Growth Program Meeting July 2011, Cambridge MA Jonathan A. Parker Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University
25
Embed
Discussion of “Has consumption inequality mirrored income inequality?” by Mark Aguiar and Mark Bils NBER Economic Fluctuations and Growth Program Meeting.
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Discussion of “Has consumption inequality mirrored income
inequality?”by
Mark Aguiar and Mark Bils
NBER Economic Fluctuations and Growth Program MeetingJuly 2011, Cambridge MA
Jonathan A. ParkerKellogg School of Management, Northwestern University
I. Background
Krueger Perri (2003, 2006)
Possible explanations
1. Near-complete consumption insurance
2. Self-insurance • Increase in Var(ln y) due to transitory shocks to income
(Krueger Perri)• Income changes expected (Primiceri van Rens)
3. CEX under-measures increase in consumption inequality• And so do related expenditure datasets
Three possible problems with CEX
1. Decreasing coverage or participation of high-consumption householdsCannot explain
2. Decreasing coverage/measurement of luxury goods
3. Decreasing measurement or coverage of all expenditures of high-consumption households
II. Bils and Aguiar
In the CEX, • There is not increasing under-measurement of
luxuries vs. necessities• But there is increasing under-measuring of the
all expenditures of high-consumption households over time . .
• So consumption inequality has actually increased as much as income inequality
Bottom line: I think this is probably correct
Log budget share of good: ln wi = ln (xi /X )
Log total real expenditure:
X = xLux+xNormal+xNecln X10 ln X90 ln X90
Estimated Engel curve for luxury
Estimated Engel curve for normal good
ln X90
Observed 1980
Observed2006
Inferred2007
The essence of the exercise
Inferred adjustment to ln X90
ln X10
III. Two key assumption in method1. Prices don’t matter
+ Restrictions of demand theory– The danger: In AB framework, real shares could vary due to
substitution due to changes in relative prices– Partly an issue of question, partly of restricting data– Dora Costa and James Hamilton infer bias in CPI assuming
well-measured total and shares• Infer pt from parameters and xi,t and Xi,t
• If AB had blamed under-measurement of luxuries, this would be more of a worry
2. Elasticities are well-measuredTypical demand system x,X nominal expenditures: