This study involves an empirical analysis of the effect of social security wealth on wealth accumulation. My analysis takes as its point of departure a study by Feldstein and Pellechio on this subject. Their study used the same data source as analysed in this paper. Feldstein and Pellechio found strong support for the notion that increases in social security wealth caused families to reduce their wealth accumulation. My resuts indicate the strong conclusions reached by Feldstein and Pellechio are not robust. In particular, first, when I excluded a group, of farmers from our sample increases in social security wealth did not result in families reducing their wealth accumulation. Second, Feldstein and Pellechio calculated social security wealth using income measures from a single year. When I applied their methodlogy to income measures from a different year results were markedly affected.

Previous authors who have considered partially nonexcludable goods have claimed that an increase in copyright protection will have the following two effects on social welfare. First, it will decrease the social welfare loss due to underproduction. Second, it will increase the social welfare loss due to underutilization. In this paper we investigate these claims in a formal setting by analyzing a model in which consumers vary only in terms of their costs of obtaining a reproduction. Our analysis provides partial support to the first claim of these previous authors while giving little or no support to the second claim.

Previous authors who have considered partially nonexcludable goods have claimed that an increase in copyright protection will have the following two effects on social welfare. First, it will decrease the social welfare loss due to underproduction. Second, it will increase the social welfare loss due to underutilization. In this paper we investigate these claims in a formal setting by analyzing a model in which consumers vary only in terms of their costs of obtaining a reproduction. Our analysis provides partial support to the first claim of these previous authors while giving little or no support to the second claim.