Re: [OPE] Specially for Patrick Bond: David Harvey on equilibrium

From: Dave Zachariah <>
Date: Wed Sep 16 2009 - 16:33:45 EDT

Gerald Levy wrote:
> You might as well add all of those Marxists to the
> chorus who have a concept of disequilibrium dynamics
> since you can't have a theory of disequilibrium without a
> theory of equilibrium. How else would you know that there was
> disequilibrium unless you had an equilibrium reference point?

I agree with this point. I think the discussion about equilibrium vs.
disequilibrium is ill-posed since it does not adequately deal with
different types of equilibriums. Perhaps an example from demographics
could help:

   1. If a population is taken as a constant over time we can say it is
      in 'static equilibrium'.
   2. If it is growing at a constant rate it is in a 'dynamic
      equilibrium', even if rates of fertility/mortality and
      immigration/emigration may be changing over time.
   3. A different concept all together is if its age distribution is
      constant over time. Then the population is in a 'statistical
      equilibrium', which may or may not violate static or dynamic

//Dave Z
ope mailing list
Received on Wed Sep 16 16:35:52 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Sep 30 2009 - 00:00:02 EDT