Abstract
The article contests an argument that the creation of a capital market in educational ""human capital"" and subsequent voluntary transactions on this market are sufficient to create equal opportunities in education, consequently reducing the income premium enjoyed by households with higher initial wealth endowment end eliminating deadweight detriments to efficiency caused by unequal household budget constraints. The counterargument is based on game-theoretical model developed in Bowles 2004.
The inevitable incompleteness of contracts results in allocation inefficiency: agents with above average wealth endowment are able to finance larger projects, and/ or projects of worse than average quality, while agents with insufficient initial wealth endowment are excluded from the financial market. This inefficiency can be attenuated only by redistribution enforced by the government.
The article concludes with a discussion of the general relationship between equality (redistribution) and efficiency.