Composite good

In economics, a composite good is an abstraction that represents all but one of the goods in the relevant budget.[1]

Purpose

Consumer demand theory shows how the composite may be treated as if it were only a single good as to properties hypothesized about demand. The composite good represents what is given up along consumer's budget constraint to consume more of the first good.

Reason for use

Budget constraints are designed to show the maximum amount of a good, or combination of goods, that can be purchased by a consumer given a limited budget. In a single-good world, the cost of a good cannot be related to any other opportunities. Therefore, opportunity costs cannot be calculated.

The addition of one new good to a single-good market allows for opportunity costs to be determined only in relation to that other good. However, its weakness is that it ignores all other possible choices. Trying to solve this problem by adding even more goods to the market makes analysis unwieldy. Under these circumstances, economic modelers are forced to choose between goods in order to create a simple model.

The concept of the composite good addresses this problem. The addition of a composite good in a single-good model (bringing it up to two) allows for all other opportunities to be accounted for. Since the composite is considered a single good only for purposes of the model, analysis can be made on a two-dimensional graph. Optimal choices represent the bundle of two goods; the first good and the composite.

A final step can be taken in relating the composite good to a unit of account such as money by setting the price of the composite good to 1. Since the prices of all other goods are known, the composite good can be converted into any combination of bundles that represent the optimal choice other than the first good. This final step clarifies the relation of the model to the real world where many goods can be stated in terms of money value. In John R. Hicks's classic Value and Capital (1939), a composite good was used to generalize mathematically from consumer demand equilibrium for an individual in the 2-good case to market equilibrium via supply and demand in the n-good case.

gollark: - it funds the BBC, but you have to pay it if you watch *any* live TV, or watch BBC content online- it's per property, not per person, so if you have a license, and go somewhere without a license, and watch TV on some of your stuff, you are breaking the law (unless your thing is running entirely on battery power and not mains-connected?)- it costs about twice as much as online subscription service things- there are still black and white licenses which cost a third of the price
gollark: Very unrelated to anything, but I recently read about how TV licensing works in the UK and it's extremely weird.
gollark: "I support an increase in good things and a reduction in bad things"
gollark: Or maybe they just check it for keywords automatically, who knows.
gollark: I assume most people would agree with (most of) those things, but just saying, effectively, "more good things, fewer bad things" isn't very meaningful. Maybe that's what you're going for, but I assume they might want you to say/make up more personal-scale things.

See also

Notes

References
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.