Consider a consumption model with bivariate data points $(Y_i,X_i)$, $i=1,...,n$, with $Y_i$ consumption and $X_i$ income. The univariate model is $$Y_i=\beta X_i+u_i,$$ where $E(u_i|X_i)=0, \textrm{var}(u_i|X_i)=\sigma^2$ and $\textrm{cov}(u_i,u_j|X_i)=0$.
The estimates of $\beta$ are given as follows: $$\hat{\beta_1}=\frac{\sum_{i=1}^{n}Y_i}{\sum_{i=1}^{n}X_i}$$ and $$\hat{\beta_2}=\frac{\sum_{i=1}^{n}X_iY_i}{\sum_{i=1}^{n}X_i^2}.$$ a.) Show that $\hat{\beta_1}$ and $\hat{\beta_2}$ are unbiased. Also, which estimator is 'better'.
I am not sure how to prove that both are unbiased. I think we begin by taking the expected values and then reduce it to the form of $E(\hat{\beta_1})=\beta$ and $E(\hat{\beta_2})=\beta$, but I am not sure how to do this mathematically.
To consider which is better, since both are unbiased, I would look at which has the smallest variance, but to avoid calculating this, would it be sufficient to talk about the Gauss-Markov conditions and state which one satisfies these conditions? Because the one that satisfies these conditions will have the smallest variance possible. How would I show which $\hat{\beta}$ does not satisfy the Gauss-Markov conditions? I believe that it is $\hat{\beta_1}$ but I am unsure of how to show this.
b.) If the residuals of the model are linearly related to the income so that $\textrm{var}(u_i|X_i)=\sigma^2X_i$, how could one verify if this is the case? Ie.: suggest a test.
I think you would write the OLS, take residuals and square them, then run the regression. If we assume linearity then we could use the Breusch-Pagan test with the following model: $$\hat{u_i^2}=\sigma^2+\sum_{j=1}^{k}\delta_jX_{ij}+\epsilon_i,$$ where $\sum_{j=1}^{k}\delta_jX_{ij}+\epsilon_i=0$ by the homoskedasticity assumption.
So this would give us: $H_0: \delta_1=\delta_2=...=\delta_k=0$ and $H_1: \textrm{at least one } \delta \neq 0$.
Then I think you would run an F-test since this is a joint hypothesis. We would then reject the null hypothesis if we cannot accept that all $\delta$'s equal $0$. And we would conclude that there exists heteroskedasticity in at least one of the $X$'s.
Is this correct? And how would be compute the F-statistic?
c.) If heteroskedasticity does exist, then will the estimators still be unbiased? And which estimator is now considered 'better'?
I would say that the estimators are still unbiased as the presence of heteroskedasticity affects the standard errors, not the means. So the condition for unbiasedness still holds ($E(u_i|X_i)=0$). I think the better estimate is now $\hat{\beta_1}$ because it is an optimum WLS (weighted least squares) estimator as it minimises $\textrm{var}(u_i|X_i)=\sigma^2X_i$, however I am unsure of how to prove this formally.
d.) If consumption also depends on interest $R_i$ so that the consumer may need to borrow in order to fund certain forms of expenditure), this would give the following model: $$Y_i=\beta X_i+\gamma R_i+u_i,$$ where $E(u_i|X_i, R_i)=0, \textrm{var}(u_i|X_i, R_i)=\sigma^2X_i$ and $\textrm{cov}(u_i,u_j|X_i, R_i)=0$.
What happens to the unbiasedness of the the $\hat{\beta_1}$ and $\hat{\beta_2}$ estimators? What conditions will make them unbiased?
Here, I think that again $\hat{\beta_1}$ and $\hat{\beta_2}$ are still unbiased as the $E(u_i|X_i, R_i)=0$. However, I am not sure because of the introduction of the $R_i$ term. Also, to make them unbiased would it be correct to say that the only condition that would make them unbiased is when $E(u_i|X_i)\neq0$? Or are there other conditions which can cause unbiasedness?
Any help with any of these questions will be really appreciated. Thank you!