I’m being fussy, but I’m advocating for using terms precisely. We generally have enough confusion and misunderstanding in discussing these difficult issues. When we have concepts like Partial Equilibrium and General Equilibrium that are rigorously defined in mathematical economics I think we should try to use them as precisely as possible.
Yes economists also sometimes use these terms loosely and I yell at them too :).
I think there are also concepts in game theory that your ideas seem to engage, involving comparative statics of equilibrium concepts other than Nash Equilibrium (single deviation)… , or possibly a sequential game
The indirect effects on labor markets that you mention actually sound to me more like what one would traditionally call general equilibrium effects. Maybe a better term for what you want would be something like “indirect strategic responses” … or “effects taking into account sequential responses of others”?
I’m being fussy, but I’m advocating for using terms precisely. We generally have enough confusion and misunderstanding in discussing these difficult issues. When we have concepts like Partial Equilibrium and General Equilibrium that are rigorously defined in mathematical economics I think we should try to use them as precisely as possible.
Yes economists also sometimes use these terms loosely and I yell at them too :).
I think there are also concepts in game theory that your ideas seem to engage, involving comparative statics of equilibrium concepts other than Nash Equilibrium (single deviation)… , or possibly a sequential game
The indirect effects on labor markets that you mention actually sound to me more like what one would traditionally call general equilibrium effects. Maybe a better term for what you want would be something like “indirect strategic responses” … or “effects taking into account sequential responses of others”?