Re: Equilibrium, stasis and death <FAC_BROSSER@VAX1.ACS.JMU.EDU>

["Alan G. Isaac" <AISAAC@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hopefully such models are useful for socioeconomic criticism because
they provide insight into the functioning of actual economies. Yes?


I would appreciate a reference to a single interesting economic model
that makes no reference to equilibrium. For example, how about a model
of the level of output that makes reference to the supply and demand
for output neither directly by equating them nor indirectly by
conditioning some macroeconomic adjustment process upon their divergence.
Until I know of such, all this talk about abandoning the equilibrium
methodology is a bit abstract for me.

On Wed, 19 Jan 1994 21:19:41 -0700 <FAC_BROSSER@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> said:
>Response to Paul Cockshott:
>     However as Puls Davidson might point out, it is possible
>to construct static equilibrium models that contain unpleasant
>phenomena and might be useful for socioeconomic criticism,
>e.g. Paul's version of a long-run "Keynesian" (I am tempted to
>say "fundamentalist Keynesian") equilibrium that is stable but
>exhibits substantial "involuntary" unemployment.
>Barkley Rosser
>James Madison University
>(PS to Steve Keen:  No disagreement)