Cover: Should Government Transfers Be Adjusted for Geographical Cost Differences?

Should Government Transfers Be Adjusted for Geographical Cost Differences?

Published 1969

by Edgar O. Olsen

Purchase Print Copy

 Format Price
Add to Cart Paperback13 pages $20.00

An investigation of answers to the question of whether families of the same size and income should receive higher transfer payments from the federal government if they live in higher cost areas. Basic assumptions of a specific Paretian welfare economics model and some statements concerning individual preference functions are presented as conditions that must be satisfied if an allocation of resources is to be considered optimal. In the attempt to define an optimal subsidy, the food subsidy to an eligible family is expressed algebraically as the face value of a government issued certificate minus the charge. Unique demand curves are obtained for the transfer activity on the part of the recipient and taxpayers. The normative theory might be applied to the case of housing subsidy as well. 13 pp. Ref.

This report is part of the RAND paper series. The paper was a product of RAND from 1948 to 2003 that captured speeches, memorials, and derivative research, usually prepared on authors' own time and meant to be the scholarly or scientific contribution of individual authors to their professional fields. Papers were less formal than reports and did not require rigorous peer review.

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit

RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.