POPULAR IN THE LAST WEEK- Minutes Calculator: See How Many Minutes are Between Two Times
- Hours Calculator: See How Many Hours are Between Two Times
- Week Calculator: How Many Weeks Between Dates?
- Income Percentile Calculator for the United States
- Month Calculator: Number of Months Between Dates
- Height Percentile Calculator for Men and Women in the United States
- S&P 500 Return Calculator, with Dividend Reinvestment
- Years Calculator: How Many Years Between Two Dates
- Age Difference Calculator: Compute the Age Gap
- Household Income Percentile Calculator for the United States
- Income Percentile by Age Calculator for the United States
- Least to Greatest Calculator: Sort in Ascending Order
- Net Worth by Age Calculator for the United States
- Average, Median, Top 1%, and all United States Household Income Percentiles
- Net Worth Percentile Calculator for the United States
- Income Percentile by State Calculator
- Stock Total Return and Dividend Reinvestment Calculator (US)
- Bond Yield to Maturity (YTM) Calculator
CLASSICS ON THE SITE- Average, Median, Top 1%, and Income Percentile by City
- How Many Millionaires Are There in America?
- Stock Return Calculator, with Dividend Reinvestment
- Historical Home Prices: Monthly Median Value in the US
- Bond Pricing Calculator
Don't Quit Your Day Job...Permanent-Income Hypothesis- Reference work entry
- First Online: 01 January 2018
- pp 10216–10220
- Cite this reference work entry
![development of permanent income hypothesis development of permanent income hypothesis](https://media.springernature.com/w72/springer-static/cover-hires/book/978-1-349-95189-5?as=webp) - Mark Aguiar 1 &
- Erik Hurst 1
125 Accesses The permanent income hypothesis (PIH) is a theory that links an individual’s consumption at any point in time to that individual’s total income earned over his or her lifetime. The hypothesis is based on two simple premises: (1) that individuals wish to equate their expected marginal utility of consumption across time and (2) that individuals are able to respond to income changes by saving and dis-saving. In this article we present the intuition and empirical implications of the PIH in several standard contexts. This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access. Access this chapterSubscribe and save. - Get 10 units per month
- Download Article/Chapter or eBook
- 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
- Cancel anytime
- Available as PDF
- Read on any device
- Instant download
- Own it forever
- Available as EPUB and PDF
- Durable hardcover edition
- Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
- Free shipping worldwide - see info
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout Purchases are for personal use only Institutional subscriptions Similar content being viewed by othersIncome tax progressivity, growth, income inequality and welfare. ![development of permanent income hypothesis development of permanent income hypothesis](https://media.springernature.com/w215h120/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1057%2Feej.2014.48/MediaObjects/41302_2015_Article_BFeej201448_Fig1_HTML.jpg) The Financial Biography of an Economist: Income, Saving, and Wealth (Mostly Pension Wealth)![development of permanent income hypothesis development of permanent income hypothesis](https://media.springernature.com/w92h120/springer-static/cover-hires/book/978-3-642-35588-2?as=webp) The Determinants of Income DynamicsBibliography. Aguiar, M., and E. Hurst. 2005. Consumption vs. expenditure. Journal of Political Economy 113: 919–948. Article Google Scholar Aguiar, M., and E. Hurst. 2007. Lifecycle prices and production. American Economic Review 97(5): 1533–1559. Attanasio, O., and M. Browning. 1995. Consumption over the life cycle and over the business cycle. American Economic Review 85: 1118–1137. Google Scholar Attanasio, O.P., and G. Weber. 1995. Is consumption growth consistent with intertemporal optimization? Evidence from the consumer expenditure survey. Journal of Political Economy 103: 1121–1157. Attanasio, O., J. Banks, C. Meghir, and G. Weber. 1999. Humps and bumps in lifetime consumption. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 17: 22–35. Becker, G. 1965. A theory of the allocation of time. Economic Journal 75: 493–508. Bernheim, B.D., J. Skinner, and S. Weinberg. 2001. What accounts for the variation in retirement wealth among U.S. households? American Economic Review 91: 832–857. Browning, M., and D. Collado. 2001. The response of expenditures to anticipated income changes: Panel data estimates. American Economic Review 91: 681–692. Carroll, C. 2001. A theory of the consumption function, with and without liquidity constraints. Journal of Economic Perspectives 15: 23–45. Cochrane, J. 1991. A simple test of consumption insurance. Journal of Political Economy 99: 957–976. Friedman, M. 1957. A theory of the consumption function . Princeton: Princeton University Press. Gourinchas, P.-O., and J. Parker. 2002. Consumption over the life-cycle. Econometrica 70: 47–89. Hall, R. 1978. Stochastic implications of the life cycle-permanent income hypothesis: theory and evidence. Journal of Political Economy 86: 971–987. Hsieh, C.-T. 2003. Do consumers react to anticipated income changes? Evidence from the Alaska permanent fund. American Economic Review 93: 397–405. Modigliani, F., and R. Brumberg. 1954. Utility analysis and the consumption function: An interpretation of the cross section data. In Post-Keynesian economics , ed. K. Kurihara. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press. Parker, J. 1999. The reaction of household consumption to predictable changes in payroll tax rates. American Economic Review 89: 959–973. Shea, J. 1995. Union contracts and the life-cycle/permanent income hypothesis. American Economic Review 85: 186–200. Souleles, N. 1999. The response of household consumption to income tax refunds. American Economic Review 89: 947–958. Townsend, R. 1994. Risk and insurance in village India. Econometrica 62: 539–591. Zeldes, S. 1989. Consumption and liquidity constraints: An empirical investigation. Journal of Political Economy 97: 305–346. Download references Author informationAuthors and affiliations. http://link.springer.com/referencework/10.1057/978-1-349-95121-5 Mark Aguiar & Erik Hurst You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar Editor informationCopyright information. © 2018 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. About this entryCite this entry. Aguiar, M., Hurst, E. (2018). Permanent-Income Hypothesis. In: The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-95189-5_2801 Download citationDOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-95189-5_2801 Published : 15 February 2018 Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, London Print ISBN : 978-1-349-95188-8 Online ISBN : 978-1-349-95189-5 eBook Packages : Economics and Finance Reference Module Humanities and Social Sciences Reference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences Share this entryAnyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content: Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article. Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative Policies and ethics - Find a journal
- Track your research
![development of permanent income hypothesis SPUR ECONOMICS](https://spureconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/scaled-Logo-Transparent.png) Permanent Income Hypothesis- Post author: Viren Rehal
- Post published: August 16, 2022
- Post category: Consumption function / Macroeconomics
- Post comments: 0 Comments
Empirical studies and observations exposed the shortcomings of the absolute income hypothesis . It failed to explain the patterns of consumption over a long period of time. It did not consider the role of business cycles or wealth as a factor in determining consumption. As a result, several other theories emerged which attempted to explain the behaviour of consumption, such as the Permanent Income Hypothesis. Permanent income and consumptionThe permanent income hypothesis was introduced by Milton Friedman. It is based on the assumption that individuals aim for utility maximization. According to Friedman, permanent consumption is a function of the permanent income of a consumer. ![development of permanent income hypothesis](https://spureconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/permanent-income-and-consumption-1024x200.png) Here, “ theta ” explains the proportion of permanent income used in permanent consumption, which turns out to be simply the ratio of permanent consumption to the permanent income of the consumer. The actual value of this ratio depends on several factors including the rate of interest, tastes and preferences of the given consumer and expected income. Relationship between permanent and total income/consumptionThis permanent income and permanent consumption are different from total income and total consumption in a given time period. The relationship between these can be illustrated as follows: ![development of permanent income hypothesis](https://spureconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/permanent-and-total-income-and-consumption-1024x782.png) The transitory income and transitory consumption are random deviations from permanent income and permanent consumption respectively, which leads to differences in total income and consumption. This transitory income and consumption can be positive, negative or zero. The sum of transitory and permanent elements makes up the total income and consumption in a given time period for each individual. assumptions made by FriedmanFriedman made some assumptions about all the above components and the way they are related to each other. These assumptions help explain the behaviour of consumption and can be stated as follows: - There is no relationship between transitory income and permanent income. Hence, total income fluctuates randomly around the permanent income with zero covariance between the total and permanent income of different individuals.
- Similarly, there is no correlation between transitory consumption and permanent consumption. Total consumption is a random fluctuation around permanent consumption. Therefore, the covariance between total and permanent consumption is zero.
- There is no relationship between transitory income and transitory consumption. The covariance of transitory income and transitory consumption is zero. This is true because Friedman includes the purchase of non-durable goods only and not the purchase of durable goods in consumption. The usage of durable goods is included in consumption through depreciation. Therefore, if consumers purchase durable goods from transitory income, it does not have a significant effect on consumption because only usage of durables is included in consumption, not their purchase.
Empirical Evidence and explanation using Permanent Income HypothesisMpc < apc in cross-sectional studies. ![development of permanent income hypothesis](https://spureconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/permanent-income-consumption-in-cross-sectional-groups-1024x366.png) However, transitory consumption has no relationship with transitory income or permanent consumption. The average transitory consumption of every income group will be zero. As a result, average permanent consumption will be equal to average total consumption in every income group. ![development of permanent income hypothesis](https://spureconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/average-permanent-consumption-1024x73.png) An income group ‘b’, which has an average income higher than the average population income, will have a positive average transitory income. That is, the average permanent income of that group will be less than the average total income. This difference is equal to the value of average transitory income. Since the average transitory consumption will be zero, the average permanent and average total consumption of group ‘b’ will be equal. It is shown by point “B” in the diagram. On the other hand, income group ‘a’ has a negative average transitory income implying that the average permanent income is greater than the average total income in that case. The average total and average permanent consumption will be equal, corresponding to point A. Similarly, the income group with an average income equal to the average population income has zero transitory income. At this point, the average permanent income is equal to the average total income of the group. ![](//writinghelp.online/777/templates/cheerup/res/banner1.gif) Cross-sectional consumption functionThis gives rise to the cross-sectional consumption function which is shown by ‘C’. In the case of high-income group ‘b’, APC is observed at point B. Point B lies below the population consumption line, hence, APC at point B is less than the overall APC of the population which is equal to theta . Conversely, APC at point A corresponding to group ‘a’ lies higher than the population consumption line. APC is greater than the constant APC of the population (theta). Hence, APC is falling as we move from low to high-income groups and MPC<APC on the consumption function ‘C’. The slope of the cross-sectional consumption function is less than the population consumption line. As the economy grows and average permanent income rises for all groups, this consumption function ‘C’ keeps shifting upwards along the trend, which is the population consumption line. In the long run, the observed consumption function is the population consumption line of “ theta ” with a constant APC. Long-run and cyclical fluctuationsThe explanation of consumption over a long run and short run fluctuation due to business cycles is similar to that of cross-sectional groups. ![development of permanent income hypothesis Permanent Income Hypothesis in the long-run and cyclical fluctuations](https://spureconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/permanent-income-hypothesis-long-run-and-cyclical-fluctuations-1024x859.png) Instead of the high-income group, we have a period of boom in the economy at point B when the average transitory income is positive. The average permanent income is, therefore, less than the average total income in the economy. On the opposite end, we have a period of slump in the economy at point A. Average transitory income is negative and average permanent income is greater than the average total income in the economy. These points A and B corresponding to periods of slump and boom, show us the short-run consumption function ‘C’. At point A, APC is greater than long-run APC ( theta ) and APC at point B is less than long-run APC. Therefore, MPC < APC in the short run corresponds to each business cycle when the slope of ‘C‘ is less than the trend line. The long-run consumption is shown by the trend line with APC = MPC at constant theta . This trend line or long-run permanent consumption is observed over a long period as the economy grows and the short-run consumption function goes on shifting upwards. determining permanent income: adaptive expectationsThis approach by Friedman divides total income into permanent income and transitory income. In reality, these two components are not observed separately, but, only the total income is observed. Therefore, Friedman used the method of adaptive expectations to separate permanent income from transitory income. Using adaptive expectation, permanent income can be extracted from total income in actual time series data as follows: ![development of permanent income hypothesis](https://spureconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/adaptive-expectations-1-period-1024x254.png) Therefore, if gamma is closer to zero, it implies that we are giving less weightage to the last period error (transitory income) and relying more on the actual income in the previous time period. On the contrary, if gamma is close to 1, we are giving high weightage to the error in determining permanent income. At gamma = 0, we completely ignore the past error. At gamma = 1, we don’t change expectations at all as we assume error will be exactly the same as last period. The above equation shows that the permanent income in the current period depends only on past incomes. Similarly, permanent income in the previous time period (t-1) can be expressed as follows: ![development of permanent income hypothesis](https://spureconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/adaptive-expectations-1024x398.png) criticism of Permanent Income Hypothesis- It does not explicitly account for wealth or the role of assets. It implicitly includes assets as part of consumption through the ‘usage’ of assets, measured by depreciation and rate of interest.
- In adaptive expectations, only previous period income is used to determine current permanent income. Whereas, income is a function of many factors apart from previous incomes.
- It includes the consumption of durables only through depreciation and rate of interest. The purchase of durables from transitory income or windfall gains is not considered.
- The theory assumes APC to be constant at “ theta ” while estimating permanent consumption. However, it does not have to be constant even within an income group. APC is expected to fall as income increases because lower-income groups have to spend a greater portion of their income to meet their needs.
You Might Also LikeFiscal responsibility: meaning and importance, stagflation: meaning, causes and consequences, monetary policy: meaning, objectives and types, leave a reply cancel reply. ![development of permanent income hypothesis SPUR ECONOMICS](https://spureconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Spur-Economics-Logo-scaled.jpg) To provide the best experiences, we and our partners use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us and our partners to process personal data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site and show (non-) personalized ads. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions. Click below to consent to the above or make granular choices. Your choices will be applied to this site only. You can change your settings at any time, including withdrawing your consent, by using the toggles on the Cookie Policy, or by clicking on the manage consent button at the bottom of the screen. Permanent Income Hypothesis: Definition, Dynamics, and Real-World InsightsLast updated 03/19/2024 by Fact checked by Key concepts of the permanent income hypothesisCore principles, consumer spending dynamics, origins and development of the permanent income hypothesis, implications for economic policy, spending habits and anticipated income, income bonuses, inheritances and expenditure, liquidity’s role in the permanent income hypothesis. - Provides a long-term perspective on consumer spending
- Emphasizes the importance of managing future expectations
- Encourages economic policies focused on sustained income growth
- May not offer immediate solutions for economic stimulus
- Assumes rational and forward-looking consumer behavior
- Challenges traditional Keynesian economic theories
Applications of the permanent income hypothesisHomeownership and pih, investment strategies, comparative analysis: pih vs. keynesian economics, time horizon in consumption decisions, policy implications, the bottom line, frequently asked questions, what is the primary criticism against the permanent income hypothesis (pih), how does the permanent income hypothesis impact government economic policies, can the permanent income hypothesis be applied to assess the impact of tax cuts on consumer spending, are there real-world examples where the permanent income hypothesis accurately predicted consumer behavior, how does the liquidity of an individual play a role in the permanent income hypothesis, can the permanent income hypothesis coexist with other economic theories, key takeaways. - The permanent income hypothesis proposes that individuals spend money based on their expected long-term average income.
- Milton Friedman developed the theory, challenging Keynesian ideas about immediate consumption based on current after-tax income.
- Consumer spending dynamics under the hypothesis are influenced by anticipated income changes, including bonuses and inheritances.
- Liquidity plays a crucial role in shaping expectations and adjustments in permanent income.
Community reviews are used to determine product recommendation ratings, but these ratings are not influenced by partner compensation. SuperMoney checks for and removes fake reviews when identified. Loading results ... Show Article SourcesYou might also like. Absolute, Relative and Permanent Income Hypothesis (With Diagram)![development of permanent income hypothesis development of permanent income hypothesis](https://www.economicsdiscussion.net/wp-content/themes/avada-child/createimage.php?author=Nikita Dutta&height=20&width=150) 1. Absolute Income Hypothesis:Keynes’ consumption function has come to be known as the ‘absolute income hypothesis’ or theory. His statement of the relationship between income and consumption was based on the ‘fundamental psychological law’. He said that consumption is a stable function of current income (to be more specific, current disposable income—income after tax payment). Because of the operation of the ‘psychological law’, his consumption function is such that 0 < MPC < 1 and MPC < APC. Thus, a non- proportional relationship (i.e., APC > MPC) between consumption and income exists in the Keynesian absolute income hypothesis. His consumption function may be rewritten here with the form C = a + bY, where a > 0 and 0 < b < 1. ADVERTISEMENTS: It may be added that all the characteristics of Keynes’ consumption function are based not on any empirical observation, but on ‘fundamental psychological law’, i.e., experience and intuition. (i) Consumption Function in the Light of Empirical Observations:Meanwhile, attempts were made by the empirically-oriented economists in the late 1930s and early 1940s for testing the conclusions made in the Keynesian consumption function. (ii) Short Run Budget Data and Cyclical Data:Let us consider first the budget studies data or cross-sectional data of a cross section of the population and then time-series data. The first set of evidence came from budget studies for the years 1935-36 and 1941-42. These budget studies seemed consistent with the Keynes’ own conclusion on consumption-income relationship. The time-series data of the USA for the years 1929-44 also gave reasonably good support to the Keynesian theoretical consumption function. Since the time period covered is not long enough, this empirical consumption function derived from the time- series data for 1929-44 may be called ‘cyclical’ consumption function. Anyway, we may conclude now that these two sets of data that generated consumption function consistent with the Keynesian consumption equation, C = a + bY. Further, 0 < b < 1 and AMC < APC. (iii) Long Run Time-Series Data:However, Simon Kuznets (the 1971 Nobel prize winner in Economics) considered a long period covering 1869 to 1929. His data may be described as the long run or secular time-series data. This data indicated no long run change in consumption despite a very large increase in income during the said period. Thus, the long run historical data that generated long run or secular consumption function were inconsistent with the Keynesian consumption function. From Kuznets’ data what is obtained is that: (a) There is no autonomous consumption, i.e., ‘a’ term of the consumption function and (b) A proportional long run consumption function in which APC and MPC are not different. In other words, the long run consumption function equation is C = bY. As a = 0, the long run consumption function is one in which APC does not change over time and MPC = APC at all levels of income as contrasted to the short run non-proportional (MPC < APC) consumption-income relationship. Being proportional, the long run consumption function starts form the origin while a non-proportional short run consumption function starts from point above the origin. Keynes, in fact, was concerned with the long run situation. But what is baffling and puzzling to us that the empirical studies suggest two different consumption functions a non-proportional cross-section function and a proportional long run time-series function. 2. Relative Income Hypothesis:Studies in consumption then were directed to resolve the apparent conflict and inconsistencies between Keynes’ absolute income hypothesis and observations made by Simon Kuznets. Former hypothesis says that in the short run MPC < APC, while Kuznets’ observations say that MPC = APC in the long run. One of the earliest attempts to offer a resolution of the conflict between short run and long run consumption functions was the ‘relative income hypothesis’ (henceforth R1H) of ).S. Duesenberry in 1949. Duesenberry believed that the basic consumption function was long run and proportional. This means that average fraction of income consumed does not change in the long run, but there may be variation between consumption and income within short run cycles. Duesenberry’s RIH is based on two hypotheseis first is the relative income hypothesis and second is the past peak income hypothesis. Duesenberry’s first hypothesis says that consumption depends not on the ‘absolute’ level of income but on the ‘relative’ income— income relative to the income of the society in which an individual lives. It is the relative position in the income distribution among families influences consumption decisions of individuals. A households consumption is determined by the income and expenditure pattern of his neighbours. There is a tendency on the part of the people to imitate or emulate the consumption standards maintained by their neighbours. Specifically, people with relatively low incomes attempt to ‘keep up with the Joneses’—they consume more and save less. This imitative or emulative nature of consumption has been described by Duesenberry as the “demonstration effect.” The outcome of this hypothesis is that the individuals’ APC depends on his relative position in income distribution. Families with relatively high incomes experience lower APCs and families with relatively low incomes experience high APCs. If, on the other hand, income distribution is relatively constant (i.e., keeping each families relative position unchanged while incomes of all families rise). Duesenberry then argues that APC will not change. Thus, in the aggregate we get a proportional relationship between aggregate income and aggregate consumption. Note MPC = APC. Hence the R1H says that there is no apparent conflict between the results of cross-sectional budget studies and the long run aggregate time-series data. In terms of the second hypothesis short run cyclical behaviour of the Duesenberry’s aggregate consumption function can be explained. Duesenberry hypothesised that the present consumption of the families is influenced not just by current incomes but also by the levels of past peak incomes, i.e., C = f(Y ri , Y pi ), where Y ri is the relative income and Y pi is the peak income. This hypothesis says that consumption spending of families is largely motivated by the habitual behavioural pattern. It current incomes rise, households tend to consume more but slowly. This is because of the relatively low habitual consumption patterns and people adjust their consumption standards established by the previous peak income slowly to their present rising income levels. On other hand, if current incomes decline these households do not immediately reduce their consumption as they find if difficult to reduce their consumption established by the previous peak income. Thus, during depression consumption rises as a fraction of income and during prosperity consumption does increase slowly as a fraction of income. This hypothesis thus generates a non-proportional consumption function. Duesenberry’s explanation of short run and long run consumption function and then, finally, reconciliation between these two types of consumption function can now be demonstrated in terms of Fig. 3.39. Cyclical rise and fall in income levels produce a non-proportional consumption-income relationship, labelled as C SR . In the long run as such fluctuations of income levels are get smoothened, one gets a proportional consumption-income relationship, labelled as C LR . ![Duesenbrry's Consumption Function Duesenbrry's Consumption Function](https://www.economicsdiscussion.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/clip_image002_thumb24.jpg) As national income rises consumption grows along the long run consumption, C LR . Note that at income OY 0 aggregate consumption is OC 0 . As income increases to OY 1 , consumption rises to OC 1 . This means a constant APC consequent upon a steady growth of national income. Now, let us assume that recession occurs leading to a fall in income level to OY 0 from the previously attained peak income of OY 1 . Duesenberry’s second hypothesis now comes into operation: households will maintain the previous consumption level what they enjoyed at the past peak income level. That means, they hesitate in reducing their consumption standards along the C LR . Consumption will not decline to OC 0 , but to OC’ 1 (> OC 0 ) at income OY 0 . At this income level, APC will be higher than what it was at OY 1 and the MPC will be lower. If income rises consequent upon economic recovery, consumption rises along C SR since people try to maintain their habitual or accustomed consumption standards influenced by previous peak income. Once OY 1 level of income is reached consumption would then move along C LR . Thus, the short run consumption is subject to what Duesenberry called ‘the ratchet effect’. It ratchets up following an increase in income levels, but it does not fall back downward in response to income declines. 3. Permanent Income Hypothesis:Another attempt to reconcile three sets of apparently contradictory data (cross-sectional data or budget studies data, cyclical or short run time-series data and Kuznets’ long run time-series data) was made by Nobel prize winning Economist, Milton Friedman in 1957. Like Duesenberry’s RIH, Friedman’s hypothesis holds that the basic relationship between consumption and income is proportional. But consumption, according to Friedman, depends neither on ‘absolute’ income, nor on ‘relative’ income but on ‘permanent’ income, based on expected future income. Thus, he finds a relationship between consumption and permanent income. His hypothesis is then described as the ‘permanent income hypothesis’ (henceforth PIH). In PIH, the relationship between permanent consumption and permanent income is shown. Friedman divides the current measured income (i.e., income actually received) into two: permanent income (Y p ) and transitory income (Y t ). Thus, Y = Y p + Y t . Permanent income may be regarded as ‘the mean income’, determined by the expected or anticipated income to be received over a long period of time. On the other hand, transitory income consists of unexpected or unanticipated or windfall rise or fall in income (e.g., income received from lottery or race). Similarly, he distinguishes between permanent consumption (C p ) and transistory consumption (C t ). Transistory consumption may be regarded as the unanticipated spending (e.g., unexpected illness). Thus, measured consumption is the sum of permanent and transitory components of consumption. That is, C = C p + C t . Friedman’s basic argument is that permanent consumption depends on permanent income. The basic relationship of PIH is that permanent consumption is proportional to permanent income that exhibits a fairly constant APC. That is, C = kY p where k is constant and equal to APC and MPC. While reaching the above conclusion, Friedman assumes that there is no correlation between Y p and Y t , between Y t and C t and between C p and C t . That is RY t . Y p = RY t . C t = RC t . Cp = 0. Since Y t is uncorrected with Y p , it then follows that a high (or low) permanent income is not correlated with a high (or low) transitory income. For the entire group of households from all income groups transitory incomes (both positive and negative) would cancel each over out so that average transitory income would be equal to zero. This is also true for transitory components of consumption. Thus, for all the families taken together the average transitory income and average transitory consumption are zero, that is, Y t = C t = 0 where Y and C are the average values. Now it follows that Y = Y p and C = C p Let us consider some families, rather than the average of all families, with above-average measured incomes. This happens because these families had enjoyed unexpected incomes thereby making transitory incomes positive and Y p < Y. Similarly, for a sample of families with below-average measured in come, transitory incomes become negative and Y p > Y. Now, we are in a position to resolve the apparent conflict between the cross-section and the long run time-series data to show a stable permanent relationship between permanent consumption and permanent income. The line C p = kY p in Fig 3.40 shows the proportional relationship between permanent consumption and permanent income. This line cuts the C SR line at point L that corresponds to the average measured income of the population at which Y t = 0. This average measured income produces average measured and permanent consumption, C p . ![Friedman's Consumption Function Friedman's Consumption Function](https://www.economicsdiscussion.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/clip_image004_thumb15.jpg) Let us first consider a sample group of population having an average income above the population average. For this population group, transistory income is positive. The horizontal difference between the short run and long run consumption functions (points N and B and points M and A) describes the transitory income. Measured income equals permanent income at that point at which these two consumption functions intersect, i.e., point L in the figure where transitory income in zero. For a sample group with average income above the national average measured income (Y 1 ) exceeds permanent income (Y P1 ). At (C P1 ) level of consumption (i.e., point B) average measured income for this sample group exceeds permanent income, Y P1 . This group thus now has a positive average transitory income. Next, we consider another sample group of population whose average measured income is less than the national average. For this sample group, transitory income component is negative. At C p2 level of consumption (i.e., point A lying on the C SR ) average measured income falls short of permanent income, Y p2 . Now joining points A and B we obtain a cross- section consumption function, labelled as C SR . This consumption function gives an MPC that has a value less than long run proportional consumption function, C p = kY p . Thus, in the short run, Friedman’s hypothesis yields a consumption function similar to the Keynesian one, that is, MPC < APC. However, over time as the economy grows transitory components reduce to zero for the society as a whole. So the measured consumption and measured income values are permanent consumption and permanent income. By joining points M, L and N we obtain a long run proportional consumption function that relates permanent consumption with the permanent income. On this line, APC is fairly constant, that is, APC = MPC. Related Articles: - Relative Income Hypothesis (With Diagram) | Consumption Function
- Absolute Income Hypothesis (With Diagram) | Marco Economics
- Permanent Income Hypothesis: Subject-Matter, Reconciliation and Criticisms | Consumption Function
- Comparison of PIH with LCH of Hypothesis | Consumption Function
This website uses cookies.By clicking the "Accept" button or continuing to browse our site, you agree to first-party and session-only cookies being stored on your device to enhance site navigation and analyze site performance and traffic. For more information on our use of cookies, please see our Privacy Policy . Journal of Economic PerspectivesRetrospectives: margaret reid, chicago, and permanent income. ISSN 0895-3309 (Print) | ISSN 1944-7965 (Online) - Editorial Policy
- Annual Report of the Editor
- Research Highlights
- Reading Recommendations
- JEP in the Classroom
- Contact Information
- Current Issue
- Guidelines for Proposals
- Evelyn L. Forget
- Article Information
- Comments ( 0 )
Additional Materials- Author Disclosure Statement(s) (40.24 KB)
JEL Classification- E21 Macroeconomics: Consumption; Saving; Wealth
We serve the public by pursuing a growing economy and stable financial system that work for all of us. - Center for Indian Country Development
- Opportunity & Inclusive Growth Institute
Monetary Policy- Banking Supervision
- Financial Services
- Community Development & Outreach
- Board of Directors
- Advisory Councils
Work With Us- Internships
- Job Profiles
- Speakers Bureau
- Doing Business with the Minneapolis Fed
Overview & MissionThe ninth district, our history, diversity & inclusion, region & community. We examine economic issues that deeply affect our communities. - Request a Speaker
- Publications Archive
- Agriculture & Farming
- Community & Economic Development
- Early Childhood Development
- Employment & Labor Markets
- Indian Country
- K-12 Education
- Manufacturing
- Small Business
- Regional Economic Indicators
Community Development & EngagementThe bakken oil patch. We conduct world-class research to inform and inspire policymakers and the public. Research GroupsEconomic research. - Immigration
- Macroeconomics
- Minimum Wage
- Technology & Innovation
- Too Big To Fail
- Trade & Globalization
- Wages, Income, Wealth
Data & Reporting- Income Distributions and Dynamics in America
- Minnesota Public Education Dashboard
- Inflation Calculator
- Recessions in Perspective
- Market-based Probabilities
We provide the banking community with timely information and useful guidance. - Become a Member Bank
- Discount Window & Payments System Risk
- Appeals Procedures
- Mergers & Acquisitions (Regulatory Applications)
- Business Continuity
- Paycheck Protection Program Liquidity Facility
- Financial Studies & Community Banking
- Market-Based Probabilities
- Statistical & Structure Reports
Banking Topics- Credit & Financial Markets
- Borrowing & Lending
- Too Big to Fail
For ConsumersLarge bank stress test tool, banking in the ninth archive. We explore policy topics that are important for advancing prosperity across our region. Policy Topics- Labor Market Policies
- Public Policy
Racism & the EconomyThe permanent income hypothesis revisited. Working Paper 335 | Published November 1, 1987 ![development of permanent income hypothesis photo of Lawrence J. Christiano](https://www.minneapolisfed.org/-/media/assets/people/lawrence-j-christiano/christiano-photo.jpg) This paper investigates whether there are simple versions of the permanent income hypothesis which are consistent with the aggregate U.S. consumption and output data. Our analysis is conducted within the confines of a simple dynamic general equilibrium model of aggregate real output, investment, hours of work and consumption. We study the quantitative importance of two perturbations to the version of our model which predicts that observed consumption follows a random walk: (i) changing the production technology specification which rationalizes the random walk result, and (ii) replacing the assumption that agents' decision intervals coincide with the data sampling interval with the assumption that agents make decisions on a continuous time basis. We find substantially less evidence against the continuous time models than against their discrete time counterparts. In fact neither of the two continuous time models can be rejected at conventional significance levels. The continuous time models outperform their discrete time counterparts primarily because they explicitly account for the fact that the data used to test the models are time averaged measures of the underlying unobserved point-in-time variables. The net result is that they are better able to accommodate the degree of serial correlation present in the first difference of observed per capita U.S. consumption. Sign up for news and eventsThe Permanent Income Hypothesis and Consumption Durability: Analysis Based on Japanese Panel DataThe permanent income hypothesis is tested on a four-quarter panel of about two thousand Japanese households for ten commodity groups. Consumption is a distributed lag function of expenditures, and the utility function is additively separable in time. Durability is defined as the persistence of the distributed lag. The permanent income hypothesis implies that, for each commodity group, expected change in expenditures is correlated neither with past expenditure changes on other commodities nor with expected change indisposable income, if its own lags are controlled for. The main results are the following: (1) durability is substantial even for food and services, (2)the permanent income hypothesis applies to almost all (probably more than ninety percent) of the population, and (3) the habit persistence hypothesis is rejected in favor of the permanent income hypothesis. - Acknowledgements and Disclosures
MARC RIS BibTeΧ Download Citation Data Published VersionsMore from nber. In addition to working papers , the NBER disseminates affiliates’ latest findings through a range of free periodicals — the NBER Reporter , the NBER Digest , the Bulletin on Retirement and Disability , the Bulletin on Health , and the Bulletin on Entrepreneurship — as well as online conference reports , video lectures , and interviews . ![development of permanent income hypothesis 2024, 16th Annual Feldstein Lecture, Cecilia E. Rouse," Lessons for Economists from the Pandemic" cover slide](https://www.nber.org/sites/default/files/styles/promo/public/2024-07/SI%202024%20Martin%20Feldstein.png?itok=iMIwiSar) ![](//writinghelp.online/777/templates/cheerup/res/banner1.gif) |
IMAGES
COMMENTS
Permanent Income Hypothesis: A permanent income hypothesis is a theory of consumer spending which states that people will spend money at a level consistent with their expected long term average ...
The permanent income hypothesis (PIH) is a model in the field of economics to explain the formation of consumption patterns.It suggests consumption patterns are formed from future expectations and consumption smoothing. [α] The theory was developed by Milton Friedman and published in his A Theory of the Consumption Function, published in 1957 and subsequently formalized by Robert Hall in a ...
The Income Hypothesis THE magnitudes termed "permanent income" and "permanent con-sumption" that play such a critical role in the theoretical analysis cannot be observed directly for any individual consumer unit. The most that can be observed are actual receipts and expenditures during some finite period, supplemented, perhaps, by some verbal ...
The Permanent Income Hypothesis, as developed by Friedman (1957), contrasts with the simple Keynesian consumption theory, which postulates that consumption depends on current income only and is equal to a nonincreasing fraction of current income. To the present day, the Permanent Income Hypothesis is the major building block of modern ...
Permanent Income ThomasS.Coleman Draft-16December2013 PEOPLE: MiltonFriedman ... Friedman developed and tested the permanent income hypothesis during the 1950s to address a very specific set of problems, the apparent contradiction between evidence from time-series and
The permanent income hypothesis definition refers to the theory that states that consumers spend their earnings at a level in accord with their estimated future income over the long term. Individuals view this expected income level as their permanent income level, which they believe is safe to spend. Milton Friedman developed this theory in n 1957.
More specifically, the Permanent Income Hypothesis argues that people consume based off of their overall estimation of future income. Economic thought at the time assumed people consumed only based on their current after-tax income. For a simple example, consider a college student. A college student borrows a lot of money to go into a ...
The permanent income hypothesis (PIH) is a theory that links an individual's consumption at any point in time to that individual's total income earned over his or her lifetime. The hypothesis is based on two simple premises: (1) that individuals wish to equate their expected marginal utility of consumption across time and (2) that ...
Conference on Research in Income and Wealth; Early Indicators of Later Work Levels, Disease and Death; Economics of Digitization; Financial Frictions and Systemic Risk; Improving Health Outcomes for an Aging Population; Macroeconomics Annual; Measuring the Clinical and Economic Outcomes Associated with Delivery Systems; Oregon Health Insurance ...
evidence in favor of the permanent-income hypothesis. If the R2for changes in income is small, it is very pos- sible that consumption is close to a random walk as measured by R', but the permanent-income hypothesis is far from true as measured by the coefficient i. The choice of instruments is critically important in our approach.
The permanent income hypothesis was introduced by Milton Friedman. It is based on the assumption that individuals aim for utility maximization. According to Friedman, permanent consumption is a function of the permanent income of a consumer.
The permanent income hypothesis with rational expectation is restated, estimated, and tested by an instrumental variables technique on the postwar U.S. aggregate time-series data. The hypothesis is accepted on a consumption series which includes service flows from consumer durables. If the consumption series is the one in the National Income and Product Accounts, the hypothesis is decisively ...
The permanent income hypothesis (PIH), introduced by Milton Friedman in 1957, revolutionizes our understanding of consumer spending. Unlike Keynesian economics, which emphasizes current after-tax income as the driving force behind consumption, PIH asserts that people spend money in alignment with their anticipated long-term average income.
If the permanent income hypothesis (or a similar hypothesis, such as the life cycle hypothesis) is valid, the changes in consumption will be small and occur over a relatively long time span. Consequently, the success of temporary policies largely hinges on whether households react differently to temporary changes.
DOI 10.3386/w2209. Issue Date April 1987. This paper investigates whether there are simple versions of the permanent income hypothesis which are consistent with the aggregate U.S. consumption and output data. Our analysis is conducted within the confines of a simple dynamic general equilibrium model of aggregate real output, investment, hours ...
1. Absolute Income Hypothesis: Keynes' consumption function has come to be known as the 'absolute income hypothesis' or theory. His statement of the relationship between income and consumption was based on the 'fundamental psychological law'. He said that consumption is a stable function of current income (to be more specific, current disposable income—income after tax payment ...
Permanent-Income Hypothesis1'2 ROGER J. BOWDEN University of Auckland Probably the most important gap in our thinking on the Permanent-Income Hypothesis is the lacuna that exists between on the one hand the concept of permanent income as derived from a wealth construct related to anticipated income receipts, and on the other
Margaret Gilpin Reid (1896-1990) began her career as a home economist and, with Dorothy Brady, Milton and Rose Friedman, played a central role in the development of the permanent income hypothesis at Chicago. Reid was the first woman to be elected Fellow of the American Economic Association, and was a key figure in the empirical tradition at ...
After a concise but critical survey of several tests of the permanent income hypothesis (PIH), the authors advance their own test for India using annual data from 1919-1960. It employs Friedman's technique for calculating the permanent value of a variable. Two different specifications of the model are tested, using different values of the ...
The permanent income hypothesis would be completely inappropriate if applied to a consumer living a hand-to-mouth existence or to a consumer subject to abrupt and radical change. A sudden change in expectations or a sudden large-scale loss of financial assets certainly could be expected to affect a consumer's willingness to spend. Also, the ...
Abstract. This paper investigates whether there are simple versions of the permanent income hypothesis which are consistent with the aggregate U.S. consumption and output data. Our analysis is conducted within the confines of a simple dynamic general equilibrium model of aggregate real output, investment, hours of work and consumption.
The permanent income hypothesis is tested on a four-quarter panel of about two thousand Japanese households for ten commodity groups. Consumption is a distributed lag function of expenditures, and the utility function is additively separable in time. Durability is defined as the persistence of the distributed lag.
This paper offers insights into the balanced development of wages and private deposits in China, highlighting the implications of high-speed rail for economic dynamics in the country. ... Other researchers refined growth models or tried to find alternatives to the permanent income hypothesis, leading them to explore more structural ...