I'm hoping that VPs link include an idiots guide to it as those are beyond me somewhat. What i did get though is the DSGE is a theory of how the world works. It can be used to predict how the world will respond to certain inputs within limitations. This is because the world is massively complicated and to model it properly you'd need a 2nd world essentially to experiment on. This then relies on the operator making assumptions, and determining to an extent what they'd like the outcome to be. Many people far cleverer than me (or with more understanding as they all seem unable to decide whos right) then argue over which bits are more/less right than others. But from what I read it, it would appear that since the model is largely based on prior experience it points to the world roughly heading in the direction it is. The relevance to Scottish independence then seems to be a change in the institutional frame work. However while this may appear to be big, in the scheme of the whole world i imagine its not really: the effect in the model would be roughly the same as changing the party in control in westminster, which is ummm not much really?

Davepoth/Vp am I about right?

Would you be surprised if I said, most likely, much the same as now?

In theory ANYTHING can be modelling with precise enough input data. But that that never exists. In highly non-linear systems, the slightest error in an input variable will spiral out to orders of magnitude variation after a relatively modest number of time steps/ iterations. That is why I argue AGAINST deterministic models in this case. Complex systems theory under such non-linear conditions tells us we can only make general predictions (e.g., little change in a new equilibrium state if there are relatively little changes to boundary conditions).

Alternatively your feeble brain cannot grasp relatively simple maths theory.

I genuinely think your posts arise from a frustration of realising you're not clever enough to understand this.

Yup, got them cheers, it looks like i can get one possibly two of them, though the other one is out of budget and unavailable. I think we got there from my failed attempts to sum up stochastic equilibrium which you seemed to be suggesting would occur in Scotland post independence, to Scotlands benefit.

If that is indeed the case I'd suggest its highly likely that the political class in Scotland post independence will also fail (spectacularly) to understand any of that and will therefore carry on doing what they do regardless. I.e. they will try the same failing tax and spend solutions that they advocate now until they run out of other people's money, disappear up their own backsides and go "how the fk did that happen then?"

...and this , at the most simplistic level is why things will not change significantly any time soon (and the very simplest thing that you overlook). The same political goons will , for the most part, have their hands on the levers. Only they'll be pulling those levers within much more highly constrained circumstances (cost of borrowing, etc etc etc yada yada).

Meanwhile the Wall Street vultures will indeed be circling.

You don't need any big words or complex (but dubious) theories to see that little lot. These simple external factors will have far, far more influence on what would actually happen than some nut-job theorising from the top of his hill till he's blue in the face

What are the economic factors over which the government can affect my quality of life (apart from just f***ing off and leaving me in peace)? So long as I can move around, don't get burgled/mugged etc and have a hospital if i need it the less they do the better. Is this what you hope to be the outcome of the Scottish government?
Ok maybe the politicians can empty my bins and take away my sewage as a bonus.

Mine simply imploded, is this the new discussion about maths and misuse of statistical analysis thread then?

Any answer VP?

So what if the whole world realises how right Salmond is and converts to renewable energy?