Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Consumption function

The consumption function is a foundational concept in that describes the relationship between aggregate and , positing that consumption rises with income but less than proportionately due to a (MPC) that is positive yet less than one. Introduced by British economist in his seminal 1936 book The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money, it underpins by linking household consumption decisions to overall economic output and demand. Typically expressed by the C = a + bY_d, where C represents total expenditure, a denotes autonomous (spending independent of , such as on necessities), b is the MPC (the fraction of additional devoted to ), and Y_d is real , the function highlights how forms a stable but sloped line in graphical representations, with the slope b indicating sensitivity to changes. Keynes emphasized that current is the primary determinant of , influencing and levels in the . The MPC is empirically observed to be positive and less than one (typically 0.5–0.9 across various studies). Key assumptions of the basic Keynesian model include a static relationship between and , with households passively responding to national levels without forward-looking behaviors or effects dominating decisions. The model has been refined through extensions such as the life-cycle and permanent hypotheses, which incorporate lifetime resources and expected . The holds significant implications for , as shifts in the function—upward from factors like rising consumer confidence or falling , or downward from pessimism or credit constraints—can amplify business cycles through multiplier effects on . Policymakers use it to assess fiscal stimuli, such as tax cuts, which boost and thus more effectively among lower- groups with higher MPCs. Despite its simplicity, the framework remains central to modern macroeconomic modeling, informing analyses of recessions, inequality's impact on spending, and the effectiveness of in sustaining demand.

Theoretical Foundations

Definition and Basic Model

The consumption function describes the relationship between household consumption expenditure (C) and (Y_d), positing that consumption rises with income but by less than the full amount of the income increase. This concept serves as a foundational element in , linking individual spending behavior to broader economic activity. introduced the consumption function in his 1936 work, The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money, to model how consumption responds to changes in income and thereby explain fluctuations in economic output. Drawing on what he termed the "," Keynes argued that individuals tend to increase consumption as income rises, though the increment in consumption is smaller than the income gain, leading to higher savings at higher income levels. The basic Keynesian model expresses this relationship linearly as
C = C_0 + c Y_d,
where C_0 represents autonomous consumption—the level of spending that occurs even when is zero, often financed through savings, borrowing, or dissaving to meet essential needs—and c is the (MPC), a constant between 0 and 1 indicating the fraction of additional devoted to . The MPC captures the idea that not all extra income is spent, with the remainder allocated to saving, while autonomous consumption underscores the necessity of baseline expenditures regardless of current earnings. This formulation highlights 's dual nature: partly independent of income and partly responsive to it.

Key Assumptions and Derivation

The basic consumption function proposed by John Maynard Keynes rests on several core behavioral assumptions about household decision-making. Consumers are assumed to base their consumption expenditures primarily on current disposable income, denoted as Y_d, without significant consideration of future income prospects or accumulated wealth. This short-run focus emphasizes immediate income fluctuations over long-term planning or intertemporal optimization. A central tenet is Keynes's "fundamental psychological law of consumption," which posits that as income rises, individuals increase their consumption, but not by as much as the income increase, reflecting habitual spending patterns and a tendency to save more at higher income levels. This law implies that consumption grows less than proportionally with income, leading to a positive but less-than-unity marginal propensity to consume (MPC). The linear form of the consumption function, C = C_0 + c Y_d, can be derived from the budget constraint and these assumptions, where C is , C_0 is autonomous consumption (positive spending even at zero , financed by dissaving or borrowing), and c is the constant MPC with $0 < c < 1. The states that equals plus : Y_d = C + S. Assuming follows a linear rule S = -C_0 + s Y_d, where s is the marginal propensity to save, and noting that s = 1 - c due to the identity between propensities to consume and save, yields Y_d = C + (-C_0 + (1 - c) Y_d ). Rearranging terms gives C = C_0 + c Y_d. This derivation highlights the role of a constant MPC in producing the linear relationship, consistent with the psychological law's emphasis on stable behavioral responses to changes. These assumptions have key implications for the relationship between and . In the consumption-income space, the function appears as a straight line with vertical intercept C_0 and slope c, positioned below the 45-degree line (where C = Y_d), indicating that consumption never fully equals at due to positive . The (), defined as \text{APC} = \frac{C}{Y_d} = \frac{C_0}{Y_d} + c, declines as Y_d rises because the autonomous component \frac{C_0}{Y_d} diminishes, approaching the MPC asymptotically at high levels. In contrast, the MPC remains constant at c = \frac{\partial C}{\partial Y_d}, representing the fixed incremental response of consumption to changes, while the exceeds the MPC at lower incomes but converges toward it over time. This distinction underscores how the assumptions generate a falling , aligning with the psychological law's prediction of increasing shares as grows.

Major Extensions

Permanent Income Hypothesis

The Permanent Income Hypothesis (PIH), proposed by economist , posits that individuals base their consumption decisions primarily on their "permanent ," defined as the long-term average expected , rather than current measured . This distinction arises because can be decomposed into a permanent component, representing stable, anticipated earnings, and a transitory component, consisting of temporary fluctuations such as windfalls or unexpected losses. As a result, the (MPC) out of transitory is low, often near zero, as households tend to save most such income to smooth consumption over time, while the MPC out of permanent is higher and closer to the (APC). Mathematically, the hypothesis formulates consumption as a function of permanent :
C = k Y_p
where C is , Y_p is permanent , and k is the propensity to consume out of permanent , which Friedman argued is relatively stable and approaches 1 over the long run, aligning with observed stable APCs across levels. Permanent itself is estimated using an adaptive expectations model that weights past and current :
Y_{p,t} = (1 - \lambda) Y_{p,t-1} + \lambda Y_t
here, \lambda (between 0 and 1) serves as an adjustment factor reflecting how quickly households update their estimate of permanent based on new observations Y_t. This formulation captures the forward-looking nature of consumer behavior without requiring perfect foresight.
The theoretical motivation underlying the PIH is rooted in the idea that rational consumers aim to maintain stable patterns that match their lifetime resources, using savings and borrowing to buffer against volatility. Transitory , such as bonuses or inheritances, is largely saved rather than spent, preventing sharp consumption swings that would otherwise occur under a strict current- hypothesis. Friedman developed this framework to resolve empirical puzzles in Keynesian theory, particularly the observation that the APC remains roughly constant over time and across groups, rather than declining as rises, which contradicted the . Historically, introduced the PIH in his seminal 1957 book A Theory of the Consumption Function, building on earlier empirical work like studies of veterans' bonuses to illustrate low MPCs from transitory sources. This extension refined the basic consumption function by emphasizing expectations and income classification, providing a microeconomic foundation for aggregate consumption stability.

The (LCH) was initially developed by and Richard Brumberg in the early 1950s, with the core ideas first presented in a 1954 essay that interpreted cross-section data on and savings. This work laid the foundation for understanding how individuals allocate resources over time, challenging the Keynesian emphasis on current as the primary driver of . The hypothesis was formalized and extended to aggregate implications by Albert Ando and Modigliani in 1963, providing a framework that explained the relative stability of aggregate amid income fluctuations across the population. At its core, the LCH posits that rational households plan consumption to maintain a relatively smooth path over their finite lifetime, consuming a constant fraction of total lifetime resources, which encompass both non-human (such as financial assets) and (the present discounted value of expected future earnings). During early adulthood, when income is low, individuals borrow against future earnings to support ; in mid-life, they save actively to accumulate ; and in , they dissave by drawing down assets to sustain spending. This life-cycle planning decouples from current income variations, prioritizing long-term resource availability. Mathematically, in a simplified model assuming a lifespan of T periods and r, consumption at time t is represented as: C_t = \frac{1}{T} \left( W_0 + \sum_{i=1}^T \frac{Y_i}{(1+r)^{i-1}} \right) where W_0 denotes initial and Y_i represents expected in period i. This expression captures the annuitized of lifetime resources, often approximated in more general forms as C = c(W + H), with W as current non-human , H as (the discounted sum of future earnings), and c as a fraction inversely related to lifespan. Key features of the LCH include a hump-shaped consumption profile across age groups, rising with during working years and declining in as savings are depleted, which contrasts with flat income-based patterns. The basic version omits a bequest motive, assuming resources are fully consumed by the end of life to maximize utility from lifetime . The model is sensitive to the r, which discounts future and influences saving incentives, and to lifespan T, which sets the horizon for resource spreading. Unlike the , which relies on an infinite horizon and separates permanent from transitory without age-specific timing, the LCH explicitly models finite and enables distinct phases of borrowing and dissaving tied to demographic stages.

Empirical Evidence

Early Studies and Validation

Early empirical research on the consumption function sought to validate John Maynard Keynes's basic model, which posited that consumption is a stable function of with a (MPC) between 0 and 1. Simon Kuznets's analysis of U.S. time-series data from national income accounts spanning 1869 to 1938 revealed a remarkably stable (APC) of approximately 0.88 to 0.90 over the long run, despite rising real , challenging the short-run prediction of a declining APC but supporting the notion of a proportional long-run relationship. This stability was evident even through major economic fluctuations, such as the , where transitory negative income shocks temporarily elevated consumption ratios. Complementing time-series evidence, early cross-section studies using U.S. family budget data provided direct estimates of responses to variations. The 1935–1936 Study of Consumer Purchases, a comprehensive survey of over 300,000 families by the and , yielded MPC estimates ranging from 0.7 to 0.9 across classes, with nonfarm households showing an APC of about 0.89 and an MPC of 0.73. These findings, derived from regressions of on , indicated a strong positive relationship, though MPCs were lower than APCs, consistent with Keynes's framework, and elasticities hovered around 0.80 to 0.87 for nonfarm groups. Milton Friedman's 1957 empirical analysis further advanced validation by addressing discrepancies between time-series and cross-section results through the (PIH). He demonstrated that cross-section data, which often showed lower MPCs due to measurement errors in capturing permanent versus transitory , underestimated long-run responses, while aggregate time-series data from fit the PIH better, with consumption closely tracking permanent and yielding elasticities near 0.80 over extended periods like 1897–1949. Friedman's regressions on U.S. data, incorporating a 3- to 5-year horizon, achieved high correlation coefficients (around 0.80–0.84), explaining why transitory fluctuations, such as those during wars, distorted short-run estimates but not the underlying stable function. Franco Modigliani and collaborators provided additional support through the life-cycle hypothesis, using 1950s–1960s panel data from U.S. household surveys to illustrate consumption smoothing over lifetimes. In their 1954 interpretation of cross-section data, Modigliani and Richard Brumberg showed that age-related income profiles led to dissaving in retirement, with empirical fits confirming higher consumption relative to current income for older households, aligning with observed patterns in family budget studies. Albert Ando and Modigliani's 1963 aggregate tests on U.S. data from 1897–1953 further validated this, revealing stable APCs and evidence of lifecycle-driven saving, with regressions indicating consumption adjusted to expected lifetime resources rather than annual income alone. Methodological approaches in these studies relied heavily on aggregate consumption data from national income and product accounts, enabling simple linear regressions of (C) on (Y_d), often with lags to approximate forward-looking . For instance, Friedman's analyses produced R² values exceeding 0.90 in long-run specifications, underscoring the model's explanatory power despite data limitations like incomplete transitory components. Cross-section work, drawing from surveys like the 1935–1936 study, used to estimate parameters, prioritizing representative samples over exhaustive metrics to capture behavioral patterns. A pivotal test occurred during the post-World War II economic boom, when U.S. surged due to and growth, yet rose proportionally without the predicted decline in APC, affirming the long-run stability observed in Kuznets's and Friedman's frameworks. Aggregate data from 1946–1950 showed APCs holding near 0.92, defying short-run Keynesian expectations of reduced spending amid high incomes and validating the function's robustness to large transitory positive shocks.

Modern Findings and Challenges

Contemporary on the consumption function has highlighted several puzzles and extensions to traditional models, particularly through tests of predictability and sensitivity to changes. The excess sensitivity puzzle arises from Hall's (1978) framework, which posits that under the with , consumption growth should follow a martingale process and thus be unpredictable from past information on or . However, subsequent studies have found evidence of partial predictability, challenging this implication. Campbell and Mankiw (1989) documented that responds excessively to predictable changes in , estimating that approximately 50% of consumers behave as rule-of-thumb individuals who consume their current , while the remainder follow the ; this suggests an aggregate (MPC) out of transitory shocks of around 0.5, often attributed to liquidity-constrained households with higher MPCs ranging from 0.5 to 0.8. Incorporating precautionary savings motives has further refined understandings of consumption dynamics, especially under income uncertainty. Carroll (1997) developed models showing that precautionary saving due to transitory and permanent income risks elevates the effective MPC out of permanent income shocks, as households buffer against uncertainty rather than fully smoothing consumption. Empirical evidence from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID) supports this, revealing higher MPCs during economic downturns; for instance, during the 2008 Great Recession, MPC estimates rose to around 0.15 for low-wealth homeowners facing heightened liquidity constraints and uncertainty, compared to baseline values of about 0.08 in normal times. Cross-country analyses underscore the heterogeneity in MPCs, influenced by and financial infrastructure. Studies indicate that MPCs out of transitory tend to be higher in developing economies than in advanced ones, reflecting greater reliance on current due to limited credit access and higher income volatility. The rise of payments has amplified consumption responses in recent years; empirical work from India's 2016 demonetization shows that increased payment adoption boosted spending by 2.38% for every 10 percentage point rise in prior cash dependence, facilitating faster and more responsive MPCs through reduced transaction frictions. Developments in the , particularly post-COVID, have tested consumption models amid unprecedented fiscal interventions. IMF analyses of stimulus checks during the estimate MPCs out of these transitory transfers at 0.3 to 0.6 on average, with higher values (up to 0.6) among low-income households, though much of the spending was front-loaded due to . Recent 2025 studies, including randomized experiments, estimate average one-month MPCs out of transitory transfers at 0.2-0.3, with higher values for uncertain households, highlighting ongoing heterogeneity. Climate-related shifts in consumption patterns, such as increased demand for resilient goods amid , remain underexplored and not yet systematically integrated into standard consumption functions, posing a challenge for model robustness. Methodological advances in micro-econometrics have enhanced the precision of MPC estimates by leveraging granular data and quasi-experimental designs. Scanner data from sources, such as Nielsen panels, allow for high-frequency tracking of spending responses to variations, revealing heterogeneous MPCs across product categories and demographics. Natural experiments, including lottery winnings as exogenous transitory shocks, consistently show strong consumption responses; for example, winners in spent about 50% of prizes within 12 months, confirming MPCs of 0.4-0.6 out of windfalls and highlighting deviations from full predictions. These approaches address issues in , though challenges persist in scaling findings to macroeconomic aggregates amid ongoing debates over heterogeneity and error.

Applications and Implications

Role in Macroeconomic Models

The consumption function plays a central role in the IS-LM model, which formalizes Keynesian ideas by depicting equilibrium in the goods and money markets. In this framework, consumption forms a key component of , contributing to the IS (investment-savings) curve, where planned output equals : Y = C + I + G, with C depending positively on Y - T and the c (where $0 < c < 1). An increase in shifts the IS curve rightward by boosting consumption, while higher interest rates reduce investment (and indirectly consumption through income effects), shifting the IS curve leftward. This integration allows the model to analyze how fiscal shocks are amplified via the Keynesian multiplier k = \frac{1}{1 - c}, where changes in autonomous spending (e.g., expenditure) lead to larger output adjustments due to induced consumption. In the aggregate demand-aggregate supply (AD-AS) framework, the consumption function drives the downward-sloping AD curve, representing total spending on : AD = C + I + G + NX, where consumption responds positively to levels. As rises, higher consumption increases AD, creating loops that determine short-run output where AD intersects the AS curve; for instance, an autonomous rise in consumption shifts AD rightward, elevating output and prices in the short run. This mechanism underscores consumption's role in stabilizing or destabilizing economic fluctuations through -induced spending dynamics. Dynamic stochastic general equilibrium (DSGE) models incorporate the via the , derived from optimization under . The , C_t^{-\eta} = \beta E_t [C_{t+1}^{-\eta} R_{t+1}], where \eta is the coefficient of relative risk aversion, \beta is the discount factor, and R_{t+1} is the gross , links current C_t to expected future and returns, reflecting intertemporal . In (RBC) theory, a foundational DSGE approach, shocks propagate through this to generate fluctuations in and output, emphasizing supply-side drivers over demand-side interventions. At the aggregate level, the consumption function highlights key implications such as the , where a simultaneous increase in saving reduces overall and thus , leading to lower output and income despite individual intentions to save more. This occurs because reduced spending lowers incomes economy-wide, contracting further via the multiplier, potentially deepening recessions as seen in demand-driven downturns where falling exacerbates output gaps. Historically, the consumption function has been integral to post-1930s macroeconomic policy modeling in the United States, particularly through the (CEA), established by the Employment Act of 1946 to advise on economic stabilization. The CEA incorporated Keynesian consumption functions into forecasts and analyses of , using multiplier effects to evaluate fiscal policies and potential output; for example, postwar reports assessed consumption responses to tax changes, such as the 1964 tax cut, to predict growth impacts under induced spending assumptions. This application shifted macroeconomic forecasting toward , influencing presidential economic reports through the mid-20th century.

Policy Relevance

The consumption function provides critical insights for designing fiscal policies aimed at stimulating through targeted interventions that leverage the (MPC). Tax cuts and direct transfers are particularly effective when directed toward households with high MPCs, as these measures increase and thereby boost spending. For instance, the 2008 U.S. Economic Stimulus Act, which distributed approximately $100 billion in tax rebates, was informed by estimates of an MPC around 0.5, leading to projected fiscal multipliers of 1.5 to 2 during , amplifying the initial spending impact on output. Progressive taxation schemes further enhance stability by moderating fluctuations in the (APC), as higher marginal tax rates on upper incomes reduce the tendency for APC to decline during expansions and rise during contractions, thereby dampening volatility. Monetary policy transmission mechanisms also rely on consumption function dynamics, with adjustments influencing household spending via changes in borrowing s for durables and , as well as wealth effects from asset price variations. Lowering policy rates reduces the of , encouraging among indebted households, while actions that elevate stock and values can raise perceived and support spending. (QE) programs, such as those implemented by the [Federal Reserve](/page/Federal Reserve) post-2008, affect by signaling sustained low rates and boosting asset values, which align with the by enhancing households' expectations of long-term income and thereby increasing current . Countercyclical fiscal tools, including automatic stabilizers, draw on consumption function principles to mitigate downturns without discretionary intervention. Unemployment insurance benefits, for example, automatically increase (Yd) for affected households during recessions, raising consumption levels and preventing sharper declines in , with studies estimating that such programs reduce output sensitivity to shocks by supporting high-MPC recipients. In recent applications up to 2025, the Union's and Resilience Facility (2020-2024), valued at €723 billion in current prices, prioritized grants and loans to low-income groups and regions with elevated MPCs—often exceeding 0.5 for vulnerable households—to maximize consumption-led recovery from the crisis. This contributed to an estimated 0.4-0.9% higher euro area GDP level by 2026, according to ECB projections as of late 2024. As of the Commission's Autumn 2025 Economic Forecast, the RRF continues to support amid challenges, with euro area GDP projected to grow 0.8% in 2024 and further in 2025, partly attributed to ongoing disbursements. Inflation-targeting regimes, adopted by major central banks, incorporate consumption responses by calibrating rate hikes to curb while accounting for how higher rates dampen borrowing-driven spending, ensuring that policy tightening does not overly suppress household consumption. Policy design faces challenges in effectively targeting liquidity-constrained households, who exhibit the highest MPCs (often near 1) due to limited access to , as broad-based stimuli may dilute impact on these groups; thus, means-tested transfers a higher "" in stimulating compared to uniform distributions.

Criticisms and Alternatives

Limitations of Traditional Models

The traditional Keynesian consumption function, which posits a linear relationship between consumption and , overlooks intertemporal substitution effects, whereby consumers adjust their spending based on rates and expected future rather than current alone. This static fails to for dynamic optimization over time, leading to inconsistencies with forward-looking behavior observed in . Additionally, the (MPC) implied by the Keynesian model is often unstable across business cycles, with empirical estimates showing higher MPCs during recessions due to uncertainty and constraints, contrary to the assumption of a . Aggregation problems further undermine the model, as it assumes homogeneity among households, ignoring heterogeneity in preferences, risks, and borrowing capacities that distort the from micro to behavior. The (PIH) and (LCH) extend the basic framework but inherit similar theoretical shortcomings. Both assume perfect foresight regarding future and prices, which is unrealistic given pervasive , and neglect constraints that prevent borrowing against future , leading to excess sensitivity of to current shocks. They also fail to explain the "excess " of aggregate , where changes in are smaller than predicted by innovations, as documented in postwar U.S. data. Moreover, these models overlook bequest motives, where households save to transfer wealth to heirs rather than solely for , and social influences such as size or cultural norms that alter saving patterns across life stages. Measurement challenges plague empirical tests of traditional consumption models. Distinguishing permanent from transitory income components is difficult due to noisy data on expectations and infrequent income shocks, often resulting in biased estimates of the MPC. Endogeneity arises in regressions of on , as unobserved factors like preferences or shocks correlate with both variables, necessitating instrumental variables that are hard to identify credibly. At the macroeconomic level, traditional linear models fail to capture inconsistencies like the , where levels achieved during expansions do not fully revert during contractions due to formation and relative concerns, leading to asymmetric adjustments over cycles. Pre-1980s models, including Keynesian, PIH, and LCH formulations, undervalued the role of and financial frictions, such as borrowing limits and asymmetric , which amplify volatility and were later incorporated in models like the financial .

Behavioral and Other Approaches

introduces insights into consumer decision-making that challenge the assumptions of perfect rationality in traditional consumption models, emphasizing where individuals deviate from optimal choices due to cognitive limitations. , developed by Kahneman and Tversky, posits that people evaluate gains and losses relative to a reference point rather than final outcomes, leading to where losses loom larger than equivalent gains, which influences spending patterns by making consumers more reluctant to spend on non-essential items during uncertain times. This framework also incorporates , where individuals categorize money into separate mental "accounts" (e.g., treating windfalls differently from regular income), resulting in inconsistent consumption behaviors that do not align with lifetime utility maximization. Additionally, describes how people overweight immediate rewards over future ones, creating that reduces saving rates as consumers prioritize short-term gratification over long-term financial stability. The , proposed by Duesenberry, argues that consumption levels are influenced not just by absolute but by comparisons with peers and past standards, fostering social emulation. In this view, individuals strive to "keep up with " by matching or exceeding the of their group, which can lead to higher aggregate spending and lower savings rates during economic expansions. Duesenberry's model also explains the , where rises with but does not fall proportionally during downturns, as maintain aspirational standards set by peak experiences, contributing to persistent habits even under financial strain. Other approaches extend these ideas by incorporating evolving consumption paradigms and psychological mechanisms. Access-based consumption, as explored in the context of the since the 2010s, shifts focus from ownership to temporary access to goods and services, such as car-sharing platforms, allowing consumers to meet needs without long-term commitments and potentially altering traditional saving for durable goods. Habit formation models posit that current consumption C_t depends on past consumption C_{t-1}, creating internal reference points that make adjustments to spending sticky and path-dependent, as individuals derive utility relative to recent habits rather than absolute levels. further links brain responses to consumption decisions, revealing that regions like the activate during reward anticipation from purchases, influencing impulsive buying and highlighting neural bases for deviations from rational . Integrating these behavioral elements into consumption frameworks presents challenges, as they often conflict with , requiring hybrid models that blend psychological realism with economic structure. For instance, buffer-stock saving models under incorporate precautionary motives where consumers maintain liquid assets to buffer against income shocks, combining elements of impatience and of shortfall in a way that accommodates without full optimization. Such hybrids address limitations in purely rational models by allowing for realistic responses to , though calibrating the relative weights of behavioral versus rational components remains empirically demanding. In the 2020s, digital nudges have emerged as practical tools to influence and behaviors, particularly through app-based prompts that encourage immediate actions like rounding up purchases for savings, thereby boosting the marginal propensity to save out of transitory in targeted ways. These interventions, often leveraging notifications and personalized recommendations, have shown potential to increase saving rates among younger demographics by countering , though their long-term effects on overall functions are still being explored in contexts.

References

  1. [1]
    Consumption Function: Formula, Assumptions, and Implications
    Aug 23, 2025 · Also called the Keynesian consumption function, it tracks the proportion of income used to purchase goods and services. Put simply, it can be ...What Is the Consumption... · Its Dynamics · Assumptions and Implications
  2. [2]
    Consumption function definition - Economics Help
    Apr 16, 2019 · The Keynesian consumption function expresses the level of consumer spending depending on three factors.Implications Of Consumption... · Shift In The Consumption... · Increased Marginal...
  3. [3]
    [PDF] 16 THEORIES OF CONSUMPTION AND SAVING - Reed College
    Keynes's basic model of consumption was that current consumption expenditures are determined mainly by current disposable income. The Keynesian consumption func ...
  4. [4]
    Chapter 8. The Propensity to Consume: I. The Objective Factors
    In this book we shall consider the former, namely what factors determine the sum which will be spent on consumption when employment is at a given level; and in ...
  5. [5]
    [PDF] Consumption: Basic Permanent Income Model
    Keynes (1936, p. 96):. The fundamental psychological law, upon which we are entitled to depend with great confidence both a priori and from our knowledge.
  6. [6]
    [PDF] The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money
    employment is a function of the expected consumption and the expected investment, consumption is, cet. par., a function of net income, i.e. of net ...
  7. [7]
    [PDF] KEYNES' CONSUMPTION FUNCTION - Gyan Sanchay
    Keynes's Law is based on the following assumptions: 1. It assumes a Constant Psychological and Institutional Complex :This law is based on the assumption that ...
  8. [8]
    [PDF] A Theory of the Consumption Function, With and Without Liquidity ...
    Jul 6, 2001 · Friedman, Milton A. (1953): Essays in Positive Economics. University of Chicago. Press, Chicago. (1957): A Theory of the Consumption Function.
  9. [9]
    [PDF] Life Cycle – Individual Thrift and the Wealth of Nations - Nobel Prize
    Introduction. This paper provides a review of the theory of the determinants of individual and national thrift that has come to be known as the Life Cycle ...
  10. [10]
    The "Life Cycle" Hypothesis of Saving: Aggregate Implications ... - jstor
    Because of the untimely death of Richard Brumberg in August 1954, the original paper by Modigliani and Brumberg [34] has never been published, and it is not.
  11. [11]
    [PDF] A Theory Of The Consumption Function
    I. The object of the National Bureau of Economic Research is to ascertain and to present to the public important economic facts and their interpretation in ...
  12. [12]
    Study of Consumer Purchases in the United States, 1935-1936
    In 1935, the principal investigators interviewed a national sample of all families in the United States to ascertain for the first time in a single national ...Missing: cross- MPC 1935-1941
  13. [13]
    [PDF] The Collected Papers of Franco Modigliani
    Aug 15, 2009 · He completed the last paper, “The Chinese. Saving Puzzle and the Life-Cycle Hypothesis” on September 24, 2003. On Sep- tember 25, he did not ...
  14. [14]
    [PDF] Introduction to "A Theory of the Consumption Function"
    This monograph presents yet another hypothesis to explain the observed relation between consumption expenditure and income. The justification for doing so is ...Missing: original | Show results with:original
  15. [15]
    [PDF] Stochastic Implications of the Life Cycle-Permanent Income ...
    This paper takes an alternative econometric approach to the study of the life cycle-permanent income hypothesis by asking exactly what can be learned from a ...Missing: rational | Show results with:rational
  16. [16]
    [PDF] Consumption, Income, and Interest Rates: Reinterpreting the Time ...
    When we look at the data, we find that a substantial fraction of income accrues to rule-of-thumb consumers, indicating an economically important deviation from ...
  17. [17]
    [PDF] Precautionary Saving and the Marginal Propensity to Consume out ...
    However, this paper shows that if consumers are impatient and are subject to transitory as well as permanent shocks, the optimal marginal propensity to consume ...
  18. [18]
    [PDF] Marginal propensities to consume before and after the Great ...
    A key implication of higher MPCs with the Great Recession, especially for homeowners with lower levels of liquid wealth, is larger consumption elasticities with ...
  19. [19]
    Consumption: What's (wealth) got to do with it? - Allianz.com
    Jan 27, 2023 · The marginal propensity to consume (MPC) per 1% difference in disposable income is 0.21% for France, 0.71% for Germany, 0.78% for Spain and 0.35 ...Missing: cross- OECD IMF<|separator|>
  20. [20]
    Digital Payments and Consumption: Evidence from the 2016 ...
    Digital payment use rose by 2.94 percentage points, and monthly spending increased by 2.38% for an additional 10 percentage points in prior cash dependence.
  21. [21]
    [PDF] The Consumption Response to Coronavirus Stimulus Checks
    We estimate that the combination of expanded unemployment insurance benefits and stimulus payments should be sufficient to expect a swift recovery in consumer.
  22. [22]
    Integrating Climate Change into Macroeconomic Analysis: A Review ...
    Aug 26, 2025 · This paper reviews (i) climate change and related policies' channels of impact on the real, fiscal, external, monetary, and financial sectors ...Missing: consumption function 2020s
  23. [23]
    [PDF] Regional Consumption Responses and the Aggregate Fiscal Multiplier
    Our consumer spending data come from two separate sources. First, we collect store-level information on retail purchases from the Nielsen Retail Scanner data.
  24. [24]
    [PDF] Consumption responses to income shocks through lottery winning
    Abstract. We study the effects of lottery winning on consumption spending using newly available household survey data in Singapore.
  25. [25]
    HET: Hicks-Hansen IS-LM Model
    The crucial feature of the Keynesian system Hicks and Hansen concentrated on when formulating the simple IS-LM is the interaction between the real and monetary ...
  26. [26]
    Understanding the IS-LM Model: Curves, Characteristics, and ...
    The IS-LM model, introduced by economist John Hicks, illustrates the interactions between the real economy and financial markets to determine equilibrium ...
  27. [27]
    Aggregate Demand-Aggregate Supply (AD-AS) Approach
    Mar 22, 2023 · Consumption Expenditure (C): This expenditure changes directly with income; i.e., consumption rises as income rises. · Investment Expenditure (I) ...
  28. [28]
    [PDF] 9. The Real Business Cycle Model and DSGE Modelling - Karl Whelan
    It is a consumption Euler equation with a backward-looking element added to it. This represents “habit formation” so that a term of the form Ct − λCt−1 replaces ...
  29. [29]
    Wait, Is Saving Good or Bad? The Paradox of Thrift | St. Louis Fed
    May 1, 2012 · A controversial Keynesian economics theory, which proposes that if everyone tries to save more during a recession, then aggregate demand will fall.
  30. [30]
    [PDF] Postwar Macroeconomics: The Evolution of Events and Ideas
    Starting with the 1977 Economic Report of the President the official Council of Economic Advisers' estimate of potential real GNP has been revised downward.
  31. [31]
    Council of Economic Advisers – EH.net
    The Council of Economic Advisers was established by the Employment Act of 1946 to provide the President with objective economic analysis and advice.Missing: consumption forecasting post-
  32. [32]
    The Intertemporal Keynesian Cross | Journal of Political Economy
    Oct 24, 2024 · From a modern perspective, the static consumption function underlying the Keynesian cross has serious flaws. It does not respect intertemporal ...
  33. [33]
    [PDF] Franco Modigliani and the life-cycle theory of consumption*
    MODIGLIANI, F. and R. H. BRUMBERG (1954), “Utility analysis and the consumption function: an interpretation of cross-section data”, in K.K. Kurihara ed., Post.
  34. [34]
    Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk
    Mar 1, 1979 · This paper presents a critique of expected utility theory as a descriptive model of decision making under risk, and develops an alternative model, called ...
  35. [35]
    [PDF] Income Saving And The Theory Of Consumer Behavior - Archive
    INCOME, SAVING. AND THE THEORY OF. CONSUMER BEHAVIOR. James S. Duesenberry. HARVARD UNIVERSITY. HARVARD UNIVERSITY PRESS. CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS. Page 9 ...
  36. [36]
    Access-Based Consumption: The Case of Car Sharing
    Access has emerged as a way to manage the challenges of a liquid society (Bardhi, Eckhardt, and Arnould 2012). The popularity of access also coincides with the ...Abstract · Conceptual Foundations · Method · The Nature of Car Sharing
  37. [37]
    Neuroeconomics: The neurobiology of value-based decision-making
    In this review we propose a framework for thinking about decision-making that allows us to bring together recent findings in the field, highlight some of the ...
  38. [38]
    [PDF] saving and liquidity constraints - by angus deaton 1
    When consumers are relatively impatient, and when labor income is independently and identically distributed over time, assets act like a buffer stock,.
  39. [39]
    Combining nudges and boosts to increase precautionary saving
    May 3, 2022 · We incorporated multiple evidence-based “nudges” and “boosts” into a savings account application form at a major commercial bank and designed ...Missing: prompts MPC 2020s