What is wrong with equilibrium analysis?
The dominant form of economic analysis since the 1880s has been equilibrium analysis. While equilibrium had been used by classical economics to explain what regulated market prices, it did not consider it as reflecting any real economy. This was because classical economics analysed capitalism as a mode of production rather than as a mode of exchange, as a mode of circulation, as neo-classical economics does. It looked at the process of creating products while neo-classical economics looked at the price ratios between already existing goods (this explains why neo-classical economists have such a hard time understanding classical or Marxist economics, the schools are talking about different things and why they tend to call any market system “capitalism” regardless of whether wage labour predominates of not). The classical school is based on an analysis of markets based on production of commodities through time. The neo-classical school is based on an analysis of markets based on the exch
Related Questions
- Bridgefield is collecting the wrong amount for my property taxes and/or insurance. Can an analysis be completed so that I do not have a large shortage/surplus in the future?
- Why do Info-Gap proponents persist in using the wrong Maximin formulation in their analysis of the relationship between Maximin and Info-Gap?
- Why bother with a detailed analysis why not just fix what is wrong?
