Consider the model of competitive insurance discussed in lectures (Topic 6.7). Peter is a risk averse individual with the utility function u(w) w05. His current wealth is $300 and with probability 1/2 he will incur a loss of D= $240, but with probability 1/2 he will incur no loss. Ann has the same utility u(w) = w0.5 and current wealth $300 as Peter, but a different probability of loss: she will incur a loss of D- $240 with probability 1/4, and no loss with probability 2/4

Consider the model of competitive insurance discussed in lectures (Topic 6.7). Peter is a risk averse individual with the utility function u(w) w05. His current wealth is $300 and with probability 1/2 he will incur a loss of D= $240, but with probability 1/2 he will incur no loss. Ann has the same utility u(w) = w0.5 and current wealth $300 as Peter, but a different probability of loss: she will incur a loss of D- $240 with probability 1/4, and no loss with probability 2/4

Brief Principles of Macroeconomics (MindTap Course List)

8th Edition

ISBN:9781337091985

Author:N. Gregory Mankiw

Publisher:N. Gregory Mankiw

Chapter9: The Basic Tools Of Finance

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 9PA

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

Consider the model of competitive insurance discussed in lectures (Topic 6.7). Peter is a risk averse individual with the utility function u(w) = w0.5. His current wealth is $300 and with probability 1/2 he will incur a loss of D = $240, but with probability 1/2 he will incur no loss. Ann has the same utility u(w) = w0.5 and current wealth $300 as Peter, but a different probability of loss: she will incur a loss of D = $240 with probability 0.1, and no loss with probability 0.9. As we showed in lectures, in the separating equilibrium Peter is offered actuarially fair full insurance contract, so his wealth is equal to $180, whether loss happens or not. Ann will be offered an insurance contract with the amount of insurance (approximately) equal to Group of answer choices 0 16 36 66 120 240
Consider the model of competitive insurance discussed in lectures (Topic 6.7). Peter is a risk averse individual with the utility function u(w) = w0.5. His current wealth is $300 and with probability 1/2 he will incur a loss of D = $240, but with probability 1/2 he will incur no loss. Ann has the same utility u(w) = w0.5 and current wealth $300 as Peter, but a different probability of loss: she will incur a loss of D = $240 with probability 0.3, and no loss with probability 0.7. As we showed in lectures, in the separating equilibrium Peter is offered actuarially fair full insurance contract, so his wealth is equal to $180, whether loss happens or not. Ann will be offered an insurance contract with the amount of insurance (approximately) equal to 0 O 18 38 O 58 O 120 O 240
Roulan has wealth of $40,000 as long as his business does not burn down. However, there is a 50% probability that his business will burn down and cause a $30,000 loss, leaving her with $10,000 of wealth. Roulan's utility function is given by 0.5 U = W, where W is wealth. What is the maximum price that Roulan would pay for full insurance that covers the potential $30,000 loss? (Hint: The maximum price equals the actuarially fair premium plus the risk premium.) $17,500 $22,500 $12,500 $15,500
Find the Pratt - Arrow risk - aversion function for a utility function U(W) = log(0.5-W + 500), where W is the amount of wealth in €. Suppose that an investor's wealth is subject to outcomes -800 €, 500 €, 500 € and 1, 000 € which affect the initial amount of 2,500 € with probabilities of their occurrence 40%, 15%, 15% and 30%, respectively. a) Using the Taylor approximation to certainty equivalent, calculate an approximate expected utility value. b) Calculate the certain equivalent of the investor's uncertain wealth. Interpret.
Consider the model of competitive insurance. Peter is a risk averse individual with the utility function u(w) = w0.5. His current wealth is $300 and with probability 1/2 he will incur a loss of D = $240, but with probability 1/2 he will incur no loss. Ann has the same utility u(w) = w0.5 and current wealth $300 as Peter, but a different probability of loss: she will incur a loss of D = $240 with probability 0.3, and no loss with probability 0.7. In the separating equilibrium Peter is offered actuarially fair full insurance contract, so his wealth is equal to $180, whether loss happens or not. What amount of insurance (approximately) will Ann be offered an insurance contract with?
Exercise 5: Insurance Consider two individuals, Dave and Eva. Both Dave and Eva have initial wealth 810,000 and face a 40% chance of losing L = 450, 000. Dave has von Neumann-Morgenstern utility function up(x) = x and Eva has von Neumann-Morgenstern utility function uf (x) = VT. 1. What do you know about Dave's and Eva's risk preferences? 2. What is the most Dave would be willing to pay for complete insurance against the loss? 3. What is the most Eva would be willing to pay for complete insurance against the loss? Suppose they are each able to choose insurance with any coverage level z E [0, 1] (i.e. 0 0. 6. Is Eva's optimal choice full insurance, i.e. z = 1?
Exercise 5: Insurance Consider two individuals, Dave and Eva. Both Dave and Eva have initial wealth 810, 000 and face a 40% chance of losing L = 450, 000. Dave has von Neumann-Morgenstern utility function up(x) = r and Eva has von Neumann-Morgenstern utility function uf(x) = VT. 1. What do you know about Dave's and Eva's risk preferences? 2. What is the most Dave would be willing to pay for complete insurance against the loss? 3. What is the most Eva would be willing to pay for complete insurance against the loss? Suppose they are each able to choose insurance with any coverage level z E [0, 1] (i.e. 0 0. 6. Is Eva's optimal choice full insurance, i.e. z = 1?
Exercise 5: Insurance Consider two individuals, Dave and Eva. Both Dave and Eva have initial wealth 810, 000 and face a 40% chance of losing L = 450, 000. Dave has von Neumann-Morgenstern utility function up(x) = x and Eva has von Neumann-Morgenstern utility function ug(x) = VT. 1. What do you know about Dave's and Eva's risk preferences? 2. What is the most Dave would be willing to pay for complete insurance against the loss? 3. What is the most Eva would be willing to pay for complete insurance against the loss? Suppose they are each able to choose insurance with any coverage level z E [0, 1] (i.e. 0 0. 6. Is Eva's optimal choice full insurance, i.e. z = 1?
Exercise 5: Insurance Consider two individuals, Dave and Eva. Both Dave and Eva have initial wealth 810,000 and face a 40% chance of losing L = 450, 000. Dave has von Neumann-Morgenstern utility function up(x) = x and Eva has von Neumann-Morgenstern utility function ug (x) = VT. 1. What do you know about Dave's and Eva's risk preferences? 2. What is the most Dave would be willing to pay for complete insurance against the loss? 3. What is the most Eva would be willing to pay for complete insurance against the loss? Suppose they are each able choose insurance with any coverage level z [0, 1] (i.e. 0 0. 6. Is Eva's optimal choice full insurance, i.e. z = 1?
Exercise 7: Insurance Consider two individuals, Dave and Eva. Both Dave and Eva have initial wealth 810, 000 and face a 40% chance of losing L = 450,000. Dave has von Neumann-Morgenstern utility function up(x) = x and Eva has von Neumann-Morgenstern utility function uê(x) = √x. 1. What do you know about Dave's and Eva's risk preferences? 2. What is the most Dave would be willing to pay for complete insurance against the loss? 3. What is the most Eva would be willing to pay for complete insurance against the loss?
David is an expected-utility maximizer that likes to drive fast (and reckless at times), so his probability of an accident is 2/3. David's preferences over wealth are u(w) = vw. Suppose that David's initial wealth is $100. If David has an accident, he incurs a $51 loss. How much is the risk premium David willing to pay to be as well off in case of accident or not?
Jamal has a utility function U = W1/2, where W is his wealth in millions of dollars and U is the utility he obtains from that wealth. In the final stage of a game show, the host offers Jamal a choice between (A) $4 million for sure, or (B) a gamble that pays $1 million with probability 0.6 and $9 million with probability 0.4. (1) Does A or B offer Jamal a higher expected utility? Explain your reasoning with calculations. (2) Should Jamal pick A or B? Why? I would like help with the unanswered last parts of the questions.