bigqueue_qlewisI see that I have answered my own question about the term market equilibrium…..I tend to think of it as the place all forces match…..which is sort of the definition set-up by Investopedia, except that it seems to define it as a particular point that is “reached” and I question how a systems with so many interrelated variable will ever just “get” to a point…..so to me this is a bit theoretical. To me, like with an electronic circuit, unless the systems is unstable, then the circuit is always in equilibrium…..perhaps just transferring charge (current/voltage) from node to node, but in a way totally related to the conditions in the circuit. In a “stable” circuit, the “future” state is known (and can be predicted) given the current state and the parameters in the circuit itself.
http://www.investopedia.com/video/play/what-economic-equilibrium/
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/economic-equilibrium.asp
Perhaps economics needs a bit more of an equivalent set of “components” similar to electronics with capacitors, inductors and resistors.
My mapping might be something like this:
ELECTRONICS ECONOMICS
———– ———
VOLTAGE ==> Savings / Deposits (potential energy)
CURRENT ==> Spending (money flow)
POWER (IxE) ==> WORK? (force through a distance….production?)
RESISTOR ==> ???
CAPACITOR ==> VALUE ACCUMULATION PROCESS
INDUCTOR ==> Spending Modulator (resists and demands….wants constant)
TRANSISTOR ==> (tough one) FORCE MILTIPLIER OF SOME SORT
You get the picture…..
Sorry for going way off the rails…..I will just “shut up” and keep listening to the lessons. They are fascinating and very helpful to my appreciating how things work in this complex thing we call the economy. (though like weather, the “full story” is not yet understood though we at least know a hurricane exists before it come at off from out to sea)