Summary Of The Wealth Of Nations By Adam Smith

In the novel, The Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith attempts to construct a new, fresh

Analyst: The document explains how the mass production of goods led to more people become becoming part of the revolution because more mass production led to a better business. Because the better businesses were able to buy bigger factory, more people would be more employed, the businesses and give out better wages. Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations tells us the inside the businesses marketing/ business records. He says that that if it was separate and independent people were working, they would only produce 20 pins per day, but because of the mass production they were able to produce 48,000 pins per day, proving how The industrial revolution was intended to increase mass

“Adam Smith argued that Individuals who were allowed to pursue rationally their own economic self-interest would benefit society as well as themselves” (Sherman & Salisbury, 2008, p.187). This argument helped industrial capitalism grow in the 19th and 20th centuries. Industrial capitalism affected the bourgeoisie and the working class. Although the bourgeoisie gained money and power, the working class suffered through poor working conditions.

Members of society in the 19th century were enlightened by an industrial system of private capital. Compared to a feudal, agricultural society, an industrial economy based on private capital became a far more efficient means to produce and accumulate wealth (Bellamy, 1996). It allowed the production of cheap, mass-produced goods, so it raised the standard of living. However, the wealth that was produced as a result was placed into the hands of the privileged few. Bellamy expresses his point of view by arguing that an economy based on publicly owned capital would strengthen the characteristics that 19th century society members admired most about their industrial system (Bellamy, 1996). He believed that his ideal society would be more efficient. For example, labor would never be inactive, and supply would far more closely match demand. He argued that the frequent gluts, shortages, strikes, and business failures under an economic system run on competition are immense wastes that would be eliminated under a system based on communal cooperation (Bellamy, 1996).

Two men, two novels separated by nearly a century both examine the importance and the demands of the labor and its eventual effects on the economy. Adam Smith published his magnum opus Wealth of Nations in 1776. In this novel, he sought to detail his concept of the division of labor, a novel theory that could further the productivity of the labor market. In Capital, Volume 1 published in 1867, Karl Marx takes a much different stance on division of labor. Writing nearly a century after the publication of Wealth of Nations, Marx is in the position of the critiquing Smith’s revolutionary concept of division of labor. Instead of praising Smith, Marx sees the current state of labor and the capitalist model of society as degrading to the laborer. For each man, production is composed of three main components: the laborer, the employer—or to Marx, the Capitalist, and the machinery.

Adam Smith was born in Kirkcaldy, Scotland in the year 1923, and died in the year 1790 at the age of 67 (Stewart, 1861). His exact date of birth is unknown but was baptized on 5th June 1723. His father was a prosecutor, advocate, and solicitor but passed on two months after his birth, leaving his mother to bring him up. His mother, Margaret Douglas, played a great role in his upbringing, especially in education. He joined the Burgh school where he learned history, writing, Latin and mathematics. He went to the University of Glasgow at the age of 14 where he studied moral philosophy; he also established his passion for reason, free speech and liberty (Stewart, 1861). In 1740, he entered Balliol College, Oxford where he undertook his postgraduate studies and became the first student to gain from the scholarship of John Snell. Conversely, his studies at Balliol College, Oxford did not contribute a lot towards his lifework as compared to his studies at Glasgow University (Stewart, 1861).

In The Wealth of Nations (WN), Adam Smith assumes that human behavior is fundamentally based on self-interest and that, when controlled, allows individuals and society to prosper. Though not superficially evident, in The Theory of Moral Sentiments (TMS)—an earlier work—he maintains his assumption, and, in this case, holds that at least some self-interest is present in humans, specifically through prudence, a human virtue grounded in self-interest. Concerning the consequences of excessive self-interest, however, Smith becomes inconsistent, as he implies that they are permanent in WN but self-correcting in TMS. While in TMS Smith claims that the innate desire for approval and praise causes people to restrain their self-interest, in WN, he believes that the same inherent restraining mechanisms are no longer effective, as monopoly power, fueled by excessive self-interest, is insurmountable. Hence, Smith, though consistent in his agreement on the presence of self-interest, is inconsistent in discussing the remediation of its consequences, as he prescribes self-interest in TMS but only describes (and criticizes) it in WN.

Part A of this essay I will be defending Adam Smith and his view on the economy and how the government should not be involved in the market place. I will be using evidence John Stossel gives us through the video we watched. Before then I will give you a brief biography on Adam Smith.

In Adam Smiths book he talks about the division of labor being important to restrict it for the sake of the children forced to work in the factories doing the jobs. He wants the kids to get an education instead of doing a repetitive task that will make them stupid. In this essay I will provide reasons as to why we should accept this argument.

This developing liberal trend within the middle class produced conditions that allowed for the exploring of social thinkers such as John Locke, a philosopher of the 17th century, who theorised on politics and liberty and the individual. Then there was the Magna-Carta adding further to the liberal maelstrom of the political debate at this time. There was Adam Smith, who promoted a laissez-fare approach to economics, which was a further expression of liberal thinking. Smith’s book, ‘The wealth of a Nation’ heralded new thoughts about trade and the market. He suggested that the market should be left to regulate itself, reducing governmental control. This gave the enterprise class further opportunity to break with the old restricted practices of

To promote that value, we should improve the division of labor, which is the greatest improvement in the productive power of labor. Division of labor is always has the important role in increasing productivity exponentially of a company. For Smith, division of labor is very important even in producing a very simple product because it creates specialized knowledge of a particular trade or task that makes the employees get

In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, the industrial revolution was a period when English society experienced a radical shift in terms of industrial expertise. T. S. Ashton, former University of London Economic History Professor, supports this statement saying, “The industrial revolution was in part cause, and in part effect, of a heightening and extension of the principle of specialization” (The Industrial Revolution 15). England experienced an extreme period of product specialization within the manufacturing system which included production of products, the structure of labor techniques, and the acceptance of improvements throughout the industrial society.

The Industrial Revolution increased the livelihood of the working class and the means by which they could flourish. A common assumption many people hold is that the Industrial Revolution greatly benefited the wealthy and ground the poor into dirt. Actually, according to historian Thomas S. Ashton, “it would have been strange, indeed, if the industrial revolution had simply made the rich richer and the poor poorer. For the commodities to which it gave rise were not, in general, luxuries, but necessities and capital goods”. Ashton attests that the goods that the Industrial Revolution created were consumed just as much by the working class as by the wealthy. To add to this

And with overcrowding comes crime. Thus, Jack the Ripper’s crimes seem to be directly related to the conditions that the citizenry were subject to during the industrial revolution’s urbanization movement. That considered it did have some positive effects. For example, the high concentration of working individuals near factories did numbers for the already booming British economy. While capitalism’s overall effect on society is debatable, the economic philosophy detailed in Adam Smith’s The Wealth of Nations was expanded due to the equally expanded workforce that was brought about by urbanization. And as previously mentioned, Britain's expanded economy allowed it a head start in the world economy.

40 years after the publication of Adam Smith’s “An Inquiry into the Wealth of Nations” during the early 19th century, the rivalry between the Capitalists and the Landlords was at its peak. Thomas Robert Malthus had lived through two conflicts one the Industrial Revolution, and the Control of landowners over Parliament. Malthus wrote an essay on the theory of population where he challenged England’s poor laws. On the other hand David Ricardo believed that the Malthusian position regarding the Corn Laws was wrong as Ricardo believed that countries don’t benefit from protectionist policies like the Corn Laws; however, they benefit from trade and globalization. In a protectionist society, profits fall while rents rise; to Ricardo this was a