alt Hacker News> and an equilibrium assumption to recover the parameters
That parts makes no sense though, there isn't an equilibrium and can never be, economies are a chaotic system. One of the key problems of economic modeling is that they used mathematical tool that aren't suited for that.
You can't consider an economy as a steam engine. Walras was a trained engineer in the 19th century so I can excuse him for making this approximation, but I can't excuse anyone still following his course more than a century later.
I don’t agree that it doesn’t make sense. It’s a good approximation a lot of the time.
Also: from your comment I’m pretty sure you don’t have the background (correct me if that’s wrong) and so don’t know what it really means in practice to make an equilibrium assumption in a macro model: Markets clear, on average people have reasonable beliefs about the evolution of aggregate variables, firms maximize expected profits. That’s all pretty harmless.
I definitely don’t agree that we are “using mathematical tools which aren’t suited for that.” We aren’t treating the economy “like a steam engine.” The entire revolution in macro from the 1970’s on involves optimizing agents. There is no useful analogy to a steam engine.
I suspect you have been reading criticism by people who are misinformed about what macro actually is and how it is practiced.