John Smith Critique

In, The Wealth of Nations, Smith explained why capitalism is the most known economic system. He gives credit to the defenders of the principle parrot his basic arguments. The theme of The Wealth of Nations is what Smith's supporters called the doctrine of laissez-faire capitalism. This doctrine had the world of economics functions under natural laws. It operated exclusively on politics. Government in the economic order of things did not like these natural laws, and said the laws disrupted the nation's economy. The hands-off policy permits citizens to complete economic freedom, and shows that governments could promise the growth of a nation's wealth. Smith realized that under a free enterprise system, individuals would pursue their own self-interests. He said that selfish individuals need competition, so

Adam Smith born 1723-1790 a Scottish philosopher and Economist. Defending the morals of acceptability of pursuing one's self- interest quoted in Document C “Every man is left perfectly free to pursue his own interest in his own way.” Smith gains into the general utility of society knowns as the the invisible hand argument. In the Wealth of Nations smith reveals the interests of merchants and manufacturers were opposed to those of society and had a tendency of pursuing their own interest. Smith wasn’t one to let religious attitude stop his thinking. He believed that more wealth to common people would benefit a nation's economy and society as a whole, stated in the The Wealth of Nation. Smith’s main

Over time, this powerful theoretical proposition has become a legitimating cornerstone for the robust defense of market capitalism, a particular ensemble of political institutions, and a specific line of justification for liberal ideas and values. Though manifestly plausible as an accurate reading of Smith when Wealth of Nations is read on its own, even on these terms, this interpretation, is limited and partial. Astonishingly, and disappointingly, most readers of Wealth of Nations fail to attend the very next sentence that follows Smith's seemingly transhistorical, objectivist theory of human dispositions, mindful of Mandeville's classical representation of human egoism. Smith immediately probed more deeply by asking "Whether this propensity be one of those original principles in human nature of which no further account can be given; or whether, as

Smith writes in his “Wealth of Nations” that the division of labour betters society. Things can be produced more quickly by a greater number of labourers specializing in a single skill than by a single worker attempting various tasks. This one worker may not be completely apt at all the components to complete the entire desired product. A larger number of workers that can each be well adapted for a certain part of the whole product would be much more

Through his essays, he attempted to enlighten the pro and the cons of the policies aiming “to state […] what appear to me to be the advantages and disadvantages of each system” (Malthus 1815, p.1). He thought that was needed a clarification about the issue as “some important considerations have been neglected on both sides of the question” (Malthus 1814, p.1). At the beginning of his Observations (1814) he concentrated his analysis in refusing the Adam Smith’s argument in favour of corn export, labelling the idea as "fundamentally erroneous" (p.1). Malthus (1814) wrote that Adam Smith considered the

It is said Smith’s mother led him to his scholarly efforts. By 1740, Smith had developed a passion for freedom in that personal freedom and liberty will lead to the best possible outcome. Because of this, Smith is often regarded as an essential proponent in laissez-faire. By 1748, Smith was teaching and giving lectures at Edinburgh. It was here that Smith first established his economic thoughts about freedom and liberty. By his late 20’s, Smith had already developed the passion for liberty, reason, and free speech.

Smith, however, was of the opinion that Mercantile System was deeply flawed. Firstly, as given in the Fourth Book (3) of the Wealth of Nations, he argued that the real wealth of a nation was “not in the unconsumable riches of money, but in the consumable goods annually reproduced by the labour of the society”. (4) Secondly, the balance of trade, as observed by him, often did little to enhance the wealth of a nation and instead served to create violent national animosity instead. He instead put forth the idea of a balance of annual production and consumption, which if it were unfavourable would have caused a decay of the wealth of a nation. Thirdly, Prof. Smith was a strong critic of the idea of colonialism; stating that, “To found a great empire for the sole purpose of raising up a people of customers, may at first sight, appear a project fit only for a nation of shopkeepers. It is, however, a project altogether unfit for a nation of shopkeepers, but extremely fit for a nation whose government is influenced by shopkeepers. Such statesmen, and such statesmen only, are capable of fancying that they will find some advantage in employing the blood and treasure of their fellow-citizens, to found and maintain such an empire.”(5) The implication being that the idea of colonialism was of an extremely oppressive nature, beneficial only to the colonial

Smith, Adam. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. Edwin Cannan, ed. 1904. Library of Economics and Liberty. Retrieved October 26, 2014 from the World Wide Web: http://www.econlib.org/library/Smith/smWN.html

3.Who does Smith think should run the economy? Businesses and consumers, people affected by the economy should be allowed to run it without interference from the government.

If a man had no hope of property, Smith thought, he would obviously work badly. He based his beliefs from experience of all ages and nations. "Work done by freemen comes cheaper in the end than that performed by slaves." That sentence was immensely influential in the slave labor plantation system. Smith's interpretation was taken exceptionally serious because unlike most who were opposes to slavery based on factors such as religion and moral belief, Smith never mention moral or religion regarding slavery as a factor in his book "Wealth of Nations".

An important aspect of Smith's views, were taxes. In one of Smith's many opinions regarding human nature, he explains that the rich, once placed in a position of power, maintain that power through their dealings within a civil government which employs men of inferior wealth, to protect the wealthy lands of the rich. In layman’s terms a community with the bare minimum has little violence since there is nothing to fight over, but one with plush property and wealth, has a plethora of people fighting over one another. This is where Smith's views of taxes comes into play. In his world, the government would impose taxation, with the intentions of discouraging improper or luxurious behavior which he believed did not benefit society as a whole. (Smith, pp.18-20) When discussing human nature in the sociological spectrum, Smith likens humans to animals, or dogs in particular. The typical reliance of animals, once they're matured,on no one but themselves (becoming independents), is a characteristic that humans do not follow. I believe Smith's

The reasons for writing a book such as Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations are many,

Adam Smith is widely regarded as the father of economics as a social science, and is perhaps best known for his work The Wealth of Nations. Throughout this work Smith states and informs towards his belief that society is not at its most productive when ruled over by rules and limitations with regards to trade, and that in order for markets to maximise prosperity, a free trade environment should be made accessible. In this essay I intend to asses the way in which many of Smiths theories taken directly form his works can be applied to past and current situations, first from an economic then social, and then a political point of view. I will also

Mercantilism aided the monarch and the merchant-capitalists to plan and govern the economic life to secure monopoly gains. Pecquet (2003) suggested that, “The king captured monopoly revenues in the form of customs duties imposed on the tobacco trade, and English merchants gained exclusive access to most of the world tobacco crop” (p. 467). As a consequence, domestic market was less competitive, legal monopolies drove up prices, consumers were hurt, the purchase power declined, and the further development of economy was affected. All of these reasons support the fact that mercantilism was a deficient theory because its policies benefited only one party and harm the other, and there was no possibility of economics being used to maximize the "commonwealth", or common good.

Adam Smith is considered as one of the most influential economists in the 18th century. Although his theories have been criticized by several socialist economists, however, his idea of capitalism still has great impact to the rest of the economists during classical, neo classical periods and the structure of today’s economy. Even the former Prime Minister of Britain, Margaret Thatcher had praised on Smith’s contribution on today’s capitalism market. She commented “Adam Smith, in fact, heralded the end of the strait-jacket of feudalism and released all the innate energy of private initiative and enterprise which enable wealth to be created on a scale never before contemplated” (Copley and Sutherland 1995, 2). Smith is also being recognized