I prove that as long as we allow the marginal utility for money (lambda) to
vary between purchases (similarly to the budget) then the quasi-linear and
the ordinal budget-constrained models rationalize the same data. However, we know that lambda is approximately constant. I provide a simple constructive proof for the necessary and sufficient condition for the constant lambda rationalization, which I argue should replace the Generalized Axiom of
Revealed Preference in empirical studies of consumer behavior.
'Go Cardinals!'
It is the minimal requirement of any scientifi c theory that it is consistent with
the data it is trying to explain. In the case of (Hicksian) consumer theory it was
revealed preference -introduced by Samuelson (1938,1948) - that provided an
empirical test to satisfy this need. At that time most of economic reasoning was
done in terms of a competitive general equilibrium, a concept abstract enough
so that it can be built on the ordinal preferences over baskets of goods - even if
the extremely specialized ones of Arrow and Debreu. However, starting in the
sixties, economics has moved beyond the 'invisible hand' explanation of how
-even competitive- markets operate. A seemingly unavoidable step of this
'revolution' was that ever since, most economic research has been carried out
in a partial equilibrium context. Now, the partial equilibrium approach does
not mean that the rest of the markets are ignored, rather that they are held
constant. In other words, there is a special commodity -call it money - that
reflects the trade-offs of moving purchasing power across markets. As a result,
the basic building block of consumer behavior in partial equilibrium is no longer
the consumer's preferences over goods, rather her valuation of them, in terms
of money. This new paradigm necessitates a new theory of revealed preference
