I mean, from the Keynesian point of view there are a number of possible employment levels which can be thought of as equilibrium positions that follow from the factors which influence aggregate demand and investment. Logically this would mean that total output would be continuously adjusting to the various fluxes in investment and consumption.
But even if we get to marshall, his partial equilibrium position leaves a lot of flux depending on the time period under consideration. In other words, it seems that the Hayekians are trying to "pin" static concepts on something which in fact is not entirely static, even as originally presented. I'm not sure I want to venture off into the Hayekian universe, though. I've got my hands full learning about the Keynesian. -gn
-- Gregory P. Nowell Associate Professor Department of Political Science, Milne 100 State University of New York 135 Western Ave. Albany, New York 12222