ABSTRACT
It was precisely the insufficient analysis of these changes in Lindahl's method, without mentioning Lindahl's name in the German and English editions, that was criticized by Myrdal, since by "dividing time into a number of short equilibrium periods during which no changes occur" (ibid., p.l22) the intervening changes can not even be comprehended (cp. sect. IV:2:4). Myrdal (and Lundberg) had thereby hit the weak point in Lindahl's method, even if Myrdal gives no details (i.e. that intervening changes like the savings paradox can not really exist if temporary equilibrium holds) • Hence, the development of the notions of ex ante and ex post, and the concomitant analysis of the intervening changes, made it possible to come out of the strait-jacket of the equilibrium approach implied by the not ion of temporary equilibrium.
