消费理论的六大难题

是 否 +2 论坛币

k人 参与回答

经管之家送您一份

应届毕业生专属福利!

求职就业群

赵安豆老师微信：zhaoandou666

经管之家联合CDA

送您一个全额奖学金名额~ !

立即领取

感谢您参与论坛问题回答

经管之家送您两个论坛币！

+2 论坛币

哪位高材生或者老师能把这个翻译出来吗？看的实在是一头雾水阿—_—!!!

消费理论六大难题
(1) excess sensitivity puzzle:
If one follows an average household over its life cycle, two main stylized facts
emerge (see Attanasio (1999) for the detailed figures). First, disposable income
follows a hump over the life cycle, with a peak around the age of 45 (the age of
the household is defined by the age of the household head). This finding is hardly
surprising, given that at young ages households tend to obtain formal education
or training on the job and labor force participation of women is low because
of child bearing and rearing. As more and more agents finish their education
and learn on the job as well as promotions occur, average wages within the
cohort increase. Average personal income at age 45 is almost 2.5 times as highas average personal income at age 25. After the age of 45 personal income first
slowly, then more rapidly declines as more and more people retire and labor
productivity (and thus often wages) fall. The average household at age 65 has
only 60% of the personal income that the average household at age 45 obtains.
The second main finding is the surprising finding. Not only personal income,
but also consumption follows a hump over the life cycle. In other words, consumption
seems to track income over the life cycle fairly closely. This is one
statement of the so-called excess sensitivity puzzle: consumption appears
to be excessively sensitive to predicted changes in income. In fact, the two
standard theories of intertemporal consumption allocation we will consider in
the next section both predict that (under specific assumptions spelled out explicitly
below) consumption follows a martingale and current income does not
help to forecast future consumption. The hump-shaped consumption age pro-
…le apparently seems to contradict this hypothesis. Later in the course we will
investigate whether, once we control for household size (which also happens to
follow a hump shape), the hump-shape in consumption disappears or whether
the puzzle persists.

(2). Excess Smoothness Puzzle:
if the stochastic income process of households
is only di¤erence stationary (say, it follows a random walk) then a shock to
current income translates (more than) one to one into a shock to permanent
income and hence should induce a large shock to consumption. With
di¤erence-stationary income processes consumption should be as volatile
as current income, but we saw that, at least on the aggregate level, consumption
is smoother than income. Is in fact consumption “too smooth”.
This is the excess smoothness puzzle

(3). Lack of Decumulation Puzzle:
Household level wealth data show that a
significant fraction of very old households still hold a large portfolio of
financial and real estate assets. Why don’t these households decumulate
their assets and enhance their consumption, as standard life-cycle theory
predicts?

(4). Drop of Consumption Puzzle:
As people retire, their consumption drops by about 15% on average.

(5). Portfolio Allocation Puzzle:
The median wealth US household does not
own stocks, but holds its major fraction of the wealth portfolio concentrated
in its own home and the rest in low-return checking or savings
accounts. This is despite the fact that returns to equity and returns to
human capital (i.e. the households’ wage) are roughly uncorrelated for
this fraction of the population. In addition, Gross and Souleles (2000)
document that a signi…cant fraction of the population has simultaneously
high-interest credit card debt and liquid, low return assets such as a signifi
cantly positive checking account balance.

(6). Default Puzzle:
the US legal system allows private households to file for
personal bankruptcy under Chapter 7 or Chapter 11 of the US Bankruptcy
Code. In particular, under Chapter 7 households are discharged of all their
debts, are not required to use any of their future labor income to repay
the debt and can even keep their assets (financial or real estate) below a
state-dependent exemption level. Whereas about 1% of all households per
year file for personal bankruptcy, White (1998) computes that currently
at least 15% of all US households would financially benefit from filing for
bankruptcy.

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明：姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格，未注明则拒绝

分享0 收藏0 回帖

关键词：消费理论 concentrated SIMULTANEOUS Productivity consumption 理论 难题 消费

4.消费的突然下跌之迷.当人们退休的时候,他们的消费支出将下降平均15个百分点.

呵呵,这个容易,所以我翻译一下

1.过度敏感之谜

如果一个人一辈子生活在一个普通家庭，就会呈现两种主要的固定特征（具体数据见Attanasio(1999))。第一，在整个生命中，可支配收入呈驼峰形，在大约45岁达到顶峰（家庭的年龄是由家长的年龄定义的）。这个结论几乎无可争议，因为年轻家庭想获得正规教育和工作培训，又由于担负生儿育女的责任，妇女的劳动预期也低。当越来越多的人完成教育和工作上的学习并开始升职，这个群体的平均工资开始上升，45岁时个人收入大约是25岁时的2.5倍。45岁以后个人收入开始下降，随着越来越多的人退休和劳动生产率的下降（常常导致工资下降）工资下降也越来越快。65岁的普通家庭的个人收入只相当于他们45岁时收入的60%。第二个结论有些令人惊讶。不仅个人收入，而且连消费在一生中也呈驼峰形变化。换句话说，一生中的消费的变化和收入的变化是紧密联系的。这就是所谓的过度敏感之谜：消费对预期的收入变化极为敏感。

3。未减少资产之谜

家庭整体财富数据表明：相当一部分年老家庭仍让持有大量的金融和房产资本。为什么他们没有按照标准生命周期理论所预期的那样，变卖掉他们的这些资产以提高消费水平呢？

6。违约之谜

美国司法体系允许私人家庭根据美国破产法案第七款和第十一款申请个人破产。特别地，根据第七款，家庭可以任意举债而无需用未来的劳动收入来偿还，甚至可以在国家规定的豁免范围内保留他们的金融资产和不动产。尽管美国每年大约有1%的家庭申请个人破产，但是统计表明当前至少有15%的美国家庭从破产中得到经济实惠。

di¤erence 和Portfolio在这里是什么意思？