Talk:Stock and flow

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Merger from Stock vs. flow in economics, and from Stock and flow (economics)

Merger was proposed in July 2007 by User:Iron wolf. There were no comments until Feb. 2008.

Yes, merge them, the pages are almost identical. --Rinconsoleao (tal ) 17:52, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I think I've merged all the relevant information into Stock and flow. Does someone know how to delete the related pages? --Rincons oleao (talk) 15:09, 7 February 2008 (U.T.C)

Since there are no dissenting opinions, closing discussion. --Rinconsoleao (talk) 18:15, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Wrong in Calculus interpretation?

the flow should be dQ & dK, rather than the derivative. Jackzhp (talk) 00:17, 24 January 2009 (U.T.C)

For maximum simplicity and transparency, the equations are stated in continuous time, rather than discrete time. $I^{n}(t)$ refers to the rate of capital formation per unit time, not the total amount of capital formation within some time interval (such as a quarter). Therefore there is nothing incorrect about this way of stating the equations. --Rinconsoleao (talk) 17:23, 25 January 2009 (U.T.C)

Economics project grading

I've graded this article 'c' - though it is probably higher - but there isn't many citations for a citipedia article. Jonpatterns (talk) 19:50, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Stocks and flows in accounting needs clean-up

Para 1 in the Stocks and flows in accounting section states "Some accounting entries … may be represented both as a stock or as a flow (e.g. capital)." Para 2: "A person or country might have stocks of … capital, … human capital …. Capital is a stock concept which yields a periodic income which is a flow concept." Those sentences conflict. Someone care to identify a term used alternately as stock and flow? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Humanengr (talk • contribs) 00:13, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Dr. Turon's comment on this article

Dr. Turon has reviewed this Wikipedia page, and provided us with the following comments to improve its quality:

The last sentence in the first paragraph is a little confusing ("Flow is roughly analogous to rate or speed in this sense.")

Another example of field where the distinction of stock and flows is useful is the study of unemployment. The stock of unemployment is the number of individuals claiming unemployment benefit at a certain point in time. The inflow to unemployment over a given period, say a quarter, is the number of individuals who have become unemployed within the last quarter, e.g. through loosing their job or joining the workforce without directly entering employment. The outflow from unemployment over a quarter is the number of individuals who have left unemployment, either when finding a job and entering employment or when giving up job search and entering inactivity. The change in the unemployment stock from one quarter to the next is the difference between the inflow and the outflow over that quarter.

Flow rates tend to be calculated as the ratio of the flow to the stock of provenance, e.g. the unemployment outflow rate is the ratio of the unemployment outflow to the unemployment stock.

Related reference: Davis, Steven J., R. Jason Faberman and John Haltiwanger. 2006. "The Flow Approach to Labor Markets: New Data Sources and Micro-Macro Links." Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20(3): 3-26.

Related topic: Duration analysis.

We hope Wikipedians on this talk page can take advantage of these comments and improve the quality of the article accordingly.

We believe Dr. Turon has expertise on the topic of this article, since he has published relevant scholarly research:

• Reference : Fabien Postel-Vinay & Helene Turon, 2005. "The Public Pay Gap in Britain: Small Differences That (Don't?) Matter," The Centre for Market and Public Organisation 05/121, Department of Economics, University of Bristol, UK.

ExpertIdeasBot (talk) 02:36, 6 September 2016 (UTC)