IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/85.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Paradoxes of Perfect Foresight in General Equilibrium Theory

Author

Listed:
  • Johnson, Joseph

Abstract

Intertemporal General Equilibrium Theory cannot be used to settle the Capital Controversy. The device of using dated commodities to avoid dynamic analysis excludes, artificially, strategic behaviour. The auctioneer plays an unsuspectedly stronger role in the dynamic economy than in the static economy, if capital goods are present.

Suggested Citation

  • Johnson, Joseph, 2006. "Paradoxes of Perfect Foresight in General Equilibrium Theory," MPRA Paper 85, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:85
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/85/1/MPRA_paper_85.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hurwicz, Leonid, 1979. "On allocations attainable through Nash equilibria," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 140-165, August.
    2. Morishima,Michio, 1996. "Dynamic Economic Theory," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521563246.
    3. Shapley, Lloyd S. & Shubik, Martin, 1969. "On market games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 9-25, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Benjamin Patrick Evans & Mikhail Prokopenko, 2021. "Bounded rationality for relaxing best response and mutual consistency: The Quantal Hierarchy model of decision-making," Papers 2106.15844, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2023.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rebelo, S., 1997. "On the Determinant of Economic Growth," RCER Working Papers 443, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER).
    2. Martin Shubik, 1984. "The Cooperative Form, the Value and the Allocation of Joint Costs and Benefits," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 706, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    3. Avishay Aiche, 2019. "On the equal treatment imputations subset in the bargaining set for smooth vector-measure games with a mixed measure space of players," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 48(2), pages 411-421, June.
    4. Tian, Guoqiang, 2004. "On the Informational Requirements of Decentralized Pareto-Satisfactory Mechanisms in Economies with Increasing Returns," MPRA Paper 41226, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Oct 2006.
    5. Judith Timmer & Werner Scheinhardt, 2018. "Customer and Cost Sharing in a Jackson Network," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(03), pages 1-10, September.
    6. Kovalenkov, A. & Holtz Wooders, M., 1997. "Epsilon Cores of Games and Economies With Limited Side Payments," UFAE and IAE Working Papers 392.97, Unitat de Fonaments de l'Anàlisi Econòmica (UAB) and Institut d'Anàlisi Econòmica (CSIC).
    7. Sun, Ning & Trockel, Walter & Yang, Zaifu, 2008. "Competitive outcomes and endogenous coalition formation in an n-person game," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(7-8), pages 853-860, July.
    8. Imre Fertő & László Á Kóczy & Attila Kovács & Balázs R Sziklai, 0. "The power ranking of the members of the Agricultural Committee of the European Parliament," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 47(5), pages 1897-1919.
    9. Csóka Péter & Pintér Miklós, 2016. "On the Impossibility of Fair Risk Allocation," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 16(1), pages 143-158, January.
    10. Kalai, Ehud & Postlewaite, Andrew & Roberts, John, 1979. "A group incentive compatible mechanism yielding core allocations," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 13-22, February.
    11. Pálvölgyi, Dénes & Peters, Hans & Vermeulen, Dries, 2014. "A strategic approach to multiple estate division problems," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 135-152.
    12. Lahiri, Somdeb, 2008. "Manipulation of market equilibrium via endowments," MPRA Paper 10002, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Tian, Guoqiang, 1991. "Implementation of the Walrasian Correspondence without Continuous, Convex, and Ordered Preferences," MPRA Paper 41298, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Streekstra, Leanne & Trudeau, Christian, 2020. "Stable source connection and assignment problems as multi-period shortest path problems," Discussion Papers on Economics 7/2020, University of Southern Denmark, Department of Economics.
    15. Bhaskar Dutta & Arunava Sen & Rajiv Vohra, 1994. "Nash implementation through elementary mechanisms in economic environments," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 1(1), pages 173-203, December.
    16. Qin, Cheng-Zhong & Shapley, Lloyd S. & Shimomura, Ken-Ichi, 2006. "The Walras core of an economy and its limit theorem," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 180-197, April.
    17. Kóczy, LászlóÁ., 2015. "Stationary consistent equilibrium coalition structures constitute the recursive core," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 104-110.
    18. Sjur Flåm, 2009. "Pooling, pricing and trading of risks," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 165(1), pages 145-160, January.
    19. Maskin, Eric & Sjostrom, Tomas, 2002. "Implementation theory," Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare,in: K. J. Arrow & A. K. Sen & K. Suzumura (ed.), Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 5, pages 237-288 Elsevier.
    20. Algaba, Encarnación & Béal, Sylvain & Fragnelli, Vito & Llorca, Natividad & Sánchez-Soriano, Joaquin, 2019. "Relationship between labeled network games and other cooperative games arising from attributes situations," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    General Equilibrium; perfect foresight; foresight; Capital Controversy; Cambridge Controversy;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D5 - Microeconomics - - General Equilibrium and Disequilibrium

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:85. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.