Status
Available
Call number
Genres
Collection
Publication
East India Publishing Company (2022), 378 pages
Description
Business. Nonfiction. The foundation for all modern economic thought and political economy, The Wealth of Nations is the magnum opus of Scottish economist Adam Smith, who introduces the world to the very idea of economics and capitalism in the modern sense of the words. Smith details his argument in five books: Book I. Of the Causes of Improvement in the Productive Power of Labour Book II. Of the Nature, Accumulation, and Employment of Stock Introduction Book III. Of the Different Progress of Opulence in Different Nations Book IV. Of Systems of Political Economy Book V. Of the Revenue of the Sovereign or Commonwealth Taken together, these books form a giant leap forward in the field of economics. A product of the "Age of Enlightenment," The Wealth of Nations is a must for all who wish to gain a better understanding of the principles upon which all modern capitalistic economies have been founded and the process of wealth creation that is engendered by those principles.… (more)
User reviews
LibraryThing member RandyStafford
What more is there to say about a book that's been around 233 years? That's considered to be the founding text of modern economics? Written by a man who has organizations and lectures named after him, whose name is synonymous with free markets?
Well, the following is a list of things not generally
Smith, not surprisingly for a man of the Enlightenment, was a blank slate guy. The philosopher, we're told, differs from the porter "not so much from nature, as from habit, custom, and education". Smith's professional progeny, with less justification and an autistic-like inability to model human nature, has largely kept the notion of people as malleable economic units whose value can simply be altered by some inputs of education.
This is a book on the wealth of nations, not an argument for how trade is going to pacify the world and render borders obsolete as is the gospel sometimes preached - for at least a hundred years - by advocates of globalization. While Smith acknowledges that wealthy countries make great trading partners, he also notes their wealth makes them "dangerous in war and politics". (He also makes a not entirely unconvincing argument for standing armies being necessary. Part of it rests on the general efficacy of the specialization of labor.)
He also makes some, on the face of it, surprising digressions into what sort of established church should be supported and if public education is worthwhile - all under the section on how the government should be spending its money. He's not big on established churches but thinks they are inevitable unless a country has no tradition of them - like the American colonies who were just rebelling in the "recent disturbances" at the time of the book's publication. (Though, of course, individual colonies did have established churches.) He's a supporter of everyone being educated to a certain minimum degree. Indeed, he seems to argue for a sort of licensure system in which people, before entering economic life, have to prove a minimum standard of education. But he is skeptical of public financing and administration being able to do this. And, given the state of American public education in all its aspects, his skepticism sometimes seems still relevant and appropriate.
While Smith is rightly considered a strong advocate of free trade - a large section of the book is a demolition of the then fashionable mercantile system with its attendant emphasis on gold and silver as something more than just merely convenient mediums of exchange, he does note some objections. In an age where the US Pentagon admits some of its supply chains disappear somewhere overseas, Smith's admonition that free trade should not hamper national defense seems forgotten. "Defence" notes Smith, "... is of much more importance than opulence." Smith also is not in favor of free trade for items that are taxed by the importing country. Tariffs, he argues, should equal the tax load on the native manufacturer. He also supports retaliatory tariffs, a gradual elimination of tariffs, and notes that free trade should not proceed if those it unemploys can not easily find other employment. Historically, using the argument of the re-employment of thousands of soldiers and seamen after demobilization, he doesn't see this as usually being a problem though.
Smith states four maxims of good tax policy: each citizen paying in proportion to the property the state protects and enables the accumulation of , convenience of payments, certainty of amount and time of payment, convenience of payment, and economy of collection. He seems, at one point, to argue for hidden taxes on luxury consumer goods - the goods that social custom does not dictate are essential to the lives of even the lowest class.
What isn't in the book is any sort of mention of monetary policy - governments attempting to manipulate economies by manipulating money supplies. And one also wonders what Smith would have thought of the notion of a service economy. To Smith, productive labor was only that which increased the tangible, material property of a society. No significant mention is made of the idea of intellectual property yet he notes that "philosophers or men of speculation" have invented machines that have increased production of goods.
Is Smith readable? Largely, yes. The marginal annotations of the Cannan edition are very good and help easily follow Smith's arguments and find relevant sections. There is a reason there are many famous quotes from this book. Smith is usually a lucid - and occasionally wry - author. Even though he digresses into some less - at least to me - interesting topics like the history of the Bank of Amsterdam or the specifics of Britain's deficit financing in the early 18th century, his economic history is often interesting. I don't know how kind modern scholarship has been to his economic theories on European social development post-Roman Empire and the reasons for the Reformation, but they were interesting and not implausible. He also has an section on the pragmatic reasons why slavery was not conducive to the economic development of societies.
Smith's work is largely known for being an extended apologia for the benefits of enlightened self-interest. George Stigler, in a preface that ably sums up Smith's main points, convincingly argues - though the debt is not explicit in the text - that it isn't exactly self-interest, and not socialism's and communism's essential and necessary altruism, that motivates economic efficiency. It's the private vices that become public benefits. It's a notion developed in Smith's The Theory Of Moral Sentiments and may stem from Mandeville's The Fable of the Bees: Or Private Vices, Publick Benefits.
Well, the following is a list of things not generally
Show More
talked about - in my casual exposure to economics - in regards to this work.Smith, not surprisingly for a man of the Enlightenment, was a blank slate guy. The philosopher, we're told, differs from the porter "not so much from nature, as from habit, custom, and education". Smith's professional progeny, with less justification and an autistic-like inability to model human nature, has largely kept the notion of people as malleable economic units whose value can simply be altered by some inputs of education.
This is a book on the wealth of nations, not an argument for how trade is going to pacify the world and render borders obsolete as is the gospel sometimes preached - for at least a hundred years - by advocates of globalization. While Smith acknowledges that wealthy countries make great trading partners, he also notes their wealth makes them "dangerous in war and politics". (He also makes a not entirely unconvincing argument for standing armies being necessary. Part of it rests on the general efficacy of the specialization of labor.)
He also makes some, on the face of it, surprising digressions into what sort of established church should be supported and if public education is worthwhile - all under the section on how the government should be spending its money. He's not big on established churches but thinks they are inevitable unless a country has no tradition of them - like the American colonies who were just rebelling in the "recent disturbances" at the time of the book's publication. (Though, of course, individual colonies did have established churches.) He's a supporter of everyone being educated to a certain minimum degree. Indeed, he seems to argue for a sort of licensure system in which people, before entering economic life, have to prove a minimum standard of education. But he is skeptical of public financing and administration being able to do this. And, given the state of American public education in all its aspects, his skepticism sometimes seems still relevant and appropriate.
While Smith is rightly considered a strong advocate of free trade - a large section of the book is a demolition of the then fashionable mercantile system with its attendant emphasis on gold and silver as something more than just merely convenient mediums of exchange, he does note some objections. In an age where the US Pentagon admits some of its supply chains disappear somewhere overseas, Smith's admonition that free trade should not hamper national defense seems forgotten. "Defence" notes Smith, "... is of much more importance than opulence." Smith also is not in favor of free trade for items that are taxed by the importing country. Tariffs, he argues, should equal the tax load on the native manufacturer. He also supports retaliatory tariffs, a gradual elimination of tariffs, and notes that free trade should not proceed if those it unemploys can not easily find other employment. Historically, using the argument of the re-employment of thousands of soldiers and seamen after demobilization, he doesn't see this as usually being a problem though.
Smith states four maxims of good tax policy: each citizen paying in proportion to the property the state protects and enables the accumulation of , convenience of payments, certainty of amount and time of payment, convenience of payment, and economy of collection. He seems, at one point, to argue for hidden taxes on luxury consumer goods - the goods that social custom does not dictate are essential to the lives of even the lowest class.
What isn't in the book is any sort of mention of monetary policy - governments attempting to manipulate economies by manipulating money supplies. And one also wonders what Smith would have thought of the notion of a service economy. To Smith, productive labor was only that which increased the tangible, material property of a society. No significant mention is made of the idea of intellectual property yet he notes that "philosophers or men of speculation" have invented machines that have increased production of goods.
Is Smith readable? Largely, yes. The marginal annotations of the Cannan edition are very good and help easily follow Smith's arguments and find relevant sections. There is a reason there are many famous quotes from this book. Smith is usually a lucid - and occasionally wry - author. Even though he digresses into some less - at least to me - interesting topics like the history of the Bank of Amsterdam or the specifics of Britain's deficit financing in the early 18th century, his economic history is often interesting. I don't know how kind modern scholarship has been to his economic theories on European social development post-Roman Empire and the reasons for the Reformation, but they were interesting and not implausible. He also has an section on the pragmatic reasons why slavery was not conducive to the economic development of societies.
Smith's work is largely known for being an extended apologia for the benefits of enlightened self-interest. George Stigler, in a preface that ably sums up Smith's main points, convincingly argues - though the debt is not explicit in the text - that it isn't exactly self-interest, and not socialism's and communism's essential and necessary altruism, that motivates economic efficiency. It's the private vices that become public benefits. It's a notion developed in Smith's The Theory Of Moral Sentiments and may stem from Mandeville's The Fable of the Bees: Or Private Vices, Publick Benefits.
Show Less
LibraryThing member LisaMaria_C
According to the introduction Adam Smith was the “first modern economist” and “widely credited with laying the theoretical and philosophical foundation for the modern free market system” and “commercial society." He famously wrote that "It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the
The proposal of any new law or regulation of commerce which comes from this [business] order, ought always to be listened to with great precaution, and ought never be adopted till after having been long and carefully examined, not only with the most scrupulous, but with the most suspicious attention.
What struck me from the first about the book was how flowing and lucid it was to read. I’m not saying there aren’t difficult, dry passages--there are. But if you take the time, it is understandable without reading some Adam Smith for Dummies, and believe me, having read several books of philosophy and economics I appreciated that. And actually I found a lot of the reading quite lively. Like Darwin (and unlike Marx), Smith isn’t just erudite and well-read, but speaks of his personal observations, and in that regard his portrait of a pin-making factory and how it illustrates the efficiencies of the division of labor was very memorable. For Smith such specialization and the gains in productivity are key to the wealth of nations. And I found it interesting Smith stresses geography, not race, as the ultimate reason for differences of wealth between nations--particularly its role in access to markets as there ports and navigable rivers are crucial. An explanation not just enlightened for his time, but anticipating much-lauded recent arguments by Landes in The Wealth and Poverty of Nations and Diamond in Guns, Germs and Steel. Smith’s explanation of the formation and role of money still is among the most lucid and still rings true.
All this is to say that Smith is quite readable and enormously influential, and thus well-worth the read. If anything might put a reader off, it’s the sheer length, since complete unabridged editions run to around 600 pages. And as I admit above, I’m not saying some of it isn’t a slog--just that it’s worth it if you want to educate yourself about the basis of modern economics; this is definitely where to start. At the very least, see if you can read an excerpt containing his description of a Pin Factory. It's clear, interesting, short, and influenced both free market and socialist thinkers.
Show More
brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest." And that by pursuing their own interest in competition with others, entrepreneurs are “led by an invisible hand” by economic forces to create a variety of goods and services that benefit the public. But even Karl Marx used ideas of Smith in arguing for communism--particularly his key idea of the labor theory of value can be traced to Smith--as was Marx's idea of the “alienation” of the worker. As the introduction put it, Smith was concerned about the “deformation of humans due to tedious and repetitive work.” He was also concerned about how business interests would use their potential monopoly power--particularly in how they might use politics against the consumer: The proposal of any new law or regulation of commerce which comes from this [business] order, ought always to be listened to with great precaution, and ought never be adopted till after having been long and carefully examined, not only with the most scrupulous, but with the most suspicious attention.
What struck me from the first about the book was how flowing and lucid it was to read. I’m not saying there aren’t difficult, dry passages--there are. But if you take the time, it is understandable without reading some Adam Smith for Dummies, and believe me, having read several books of philosophy and economics I appreciated that. And actually I found a lot of the reading quite lively. Like Darwin (and unlike Marx), Smith isn’t just erudite and well-read, but speaks of his personal observations, and in that regard his portrait of a pin-making factory and how it illustrates the efficiencies of the division of labor was very memorable. For Smith such specialization and the gains in productivity are key to the wealth of nations. And I found it interesting Smith stresses geography, not race, as the ultimate reason for differences of wealth between nations--particularly its role in access to markets as there ports and navigable rivers are crucial. An explanation not just enlightened for his time, but anticipating much-lauded recent arguments by Landes in The Wealth and Poverty of Nations and Diamond in Guns, Germs and Steel. Smith’s explanation of the formation and role of money still is among the most lucid and still rings true.
All this is to say that Smith is quite readable and enormously influential, and thus well-worth the read. If anything might put a reader off, it’s the sheer length, since complete unabridged editions run to around 600 pages. And as I admit above, I’m not saying some of it isn’t a slog--just that it’s worth it if you want to educate yourself about the basis of modern economics; this is definitely where to start. At the very least, see if you can read an excerpt containing his description of a Pin Factory. It's clear, interesting, short, and influenced both free market and socialist thinkers.
Show Less
LibraryThing member automatthias
I just wanted to know what neoliberalism was, and ended up picking up this audiobook. In 1776, the economy was already quite complex, it turns out. I also enjoyed the description of the first types of money in the times of the Roman Empire. For example, copper rods. They had certain properties:
The book is long, but most of its bulk is filled with examples that Adam Smith gave to illustrate his examples. I suppose it's because the book was revolutionary for his times, and he needed all the supporting evidence he could get.
Show More
were standard, durable, and could be cut in smaller pieces.The book is long, but most of its bulk is filled with examples that Adam Smith gave to illustrate his examples. I suppose it's because the book was revolutionary for his times, and he needed all the supporting evidence he could get.
Show Less
LibraryThing member ThomasJefferson
"... in political oeconomy I think Smith's wealth of nations the best book extant ..."—Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Mann Randolph, May 30, 1790
"... if your views of political enquiry go further to the subjects of money & commerce, Smith's wealth of nations is the best book to be read, unless Say's
"Adam Smith, first in England, published a rational and systematic work on Political economy, adopting generally the ground of the Economists, but differing on the subjects before specified. the system being novel, much argument and detail seemed then necessary to establish principles which now are assented to as soon as proposed. hence his book, admitted to be able, and of the first degree of merit, has yet been considered as prolix & tedious."—From TJ's Prospectus for Destutt de Tracy’s Treatise on Political Economy , sent to Milligan for printing on April 6, 1816.
TJ frequently quoted from Smith's work in relation to banks and paper money; for example, Thomas Jefferson to John Wayles Eppes, Nov. 6, 1813.
"... if your views of political enquiry go further to the subjects of money & commerce, Smith's wealth of nations is the best book to be read, unless Say's
Show More
Political economy can be had, which treats the same subjects on the same principles, but in a shorter compass & more lucid manner ..."—Thomas Jefferson to John Norvell, June 11, 1807."Adam Smith, first in England, published a rational and systematic work on Political economy, adopting generally the ground of the Economists, but differing on the subjects before specified. the system being novel, much argument and detail seemed then necessary to establish principles which now are assented to as soon as proposed. hence his book, admitted to be able, and of the first degree of merit, has yet been considered as prolix & tedious."—From TJ's Prospectus for Destutt de Tracy’s Treatise on Political Economy , sent to Milligan for printing on April 6, 1816.
TJ frequently quoted from Smith's work in relation to banks and paper money; for example, Thomas Jefferson to John Wayles Eppes, Nov. 6, 1813.
Show Less
LibraryThing member ThomasJefferson
"... in political oeconomy I think Smith's wealth of nations the best book extant ..."—Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Mann Randolph, May 30, 1790
"... if your views of political enquiry go further to the subjects of money & commerce, Smith's wealth of nations is the best book to be read, unless Say's
"Adam Smith, first in England, published a rational and systematic work on Political economy, adopting generally the ground of the Economists, but differing on the subjects before specified. the system being novel, much argument and detail seemed then necessary to establish principles which now are assented to as soon as proposed. hence his book, admitted to be able, and of the first degree of merit, has yet been considered as prolix & tedious."—From TJ's Prospectus for Destutt de Tracy’s Treatise on Political Economy , sent to Milligan for printing on April 6, 1816.
TJ frequently quoted from Smith's work in relation to banks and paper money; for example, Thomas Jefferson to John Wayles Eppes, Nov. 6, 1813.
"... if your views of political enquiry go further to the subjects of money & commerce, Smith's wealth of nations is the best book to be read, unless Say's
Show More
Political economy can be had, which treats the same subjects on the same principles, but in a shorter compass & more lucid manner ..."—Thomas Jefferson to John Norvell, June 11, 1807."Adam Smith, first in England, published a rational and systematic work on Political economy, adopting generally the ground of the Economists, but differing on the subjects before specified. the system being novel, much argument and detail seemed then necessary to establish principles which now are assented to as soon as proposed. hence his book, admitted to be able, and of the first degree of merit, has yet been considered as prolix & tedious."—From TJ's Prospectus for Destutt de Tracy’s Treatise on Political Economy , sent to Milligan for printing on April 6, 1816.
TJ frequently quoted from Smith's work in relation to banks and paper money; for example, Thomas Jefferson to John Wayles Eppes, Nov. 6, 1813.
Show Less
LibraryThing member MattKneece
"Adam Smith has produced one of the greatest discussions on economics ever written, and if you are interested in formulating your own thoughts regarding economic policy, it is essential that you always examine the original sources in order to fully understand the concepts. Too many politicians
Show More
claim to support free market concepts yet fail to grasp true free markets as outlined by Smith. One of the best books regarding economic thought available." Show Less
LibraryThing member antiquary
As I think I noted elsewhere, i was struck by the fact that Smith seemed more physiocratic rather than free-enterprise; his real opponent was what we would now call "crony capitalism" --businessmen manipulating government for their own profit.
LibraryThing member tjwilliams
Adam Smith revolutionized the study of economics with the publication in 1776 of his epic tome, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. His analysis of how capital and labor move in an economy completely changed how people thought about money and how governments regulated
The first book of The Wealth of Nations reads much like any basic economics textbook would today. Smith opens with a discussion of specialization its importance to economic growth. He does not extend his argument, as modern economists would, beyond the subject of individual specialization to a broader discussion of comparative advantage and national specialization, but he does anticipate where future economists would take his argument when he discusses tariffs. Smith argues that is unwise to tax cheaper goods being imported to Britain and that the British should instead concentrate on exporting goods it can make more cheaply than its trade partners. This initial introduction to the concept of comparative advantage flew in the face of centuries of mercantilist thinking, in which trade was a matter of winners and losers and it was impossible for a country to enrich itself through trade without impoverishing other nations.
Beyond essentially inventing modern economic thought, Adam Smith’s greatest contribution was the concept of the Invisible Hand, a force that moves people, through their own self-interest, to engage in commerce that will benefit society as a whole. In fact, it is often possible for people to contribute more to society through greed and an attempt to profit, than through pure altruism. Profit opportunities are created by market inefficiencies and, by seeking to maximize their profits, entrepreneurs will attempt to capitalize on these profit opportunities and will fix these inefficiencies, often without understanding what they are doing.
While Smith is certainly a fan of letting markets and entrepreneurs work freely he is not a proponent of laissez-faire economics. He is very distrustful of corporations and argues that the biggest potential downfall of any economic system is collusion between businesses to drive prices up. He believes that a watchful eye needs to be kept on all businesses and that the government needs to be careful in making policies that might favor one firm over another.
There is so much more that could be said about The Wealth of Nations, but it should be sufficient to say that any person interested in economics owes it to themselves to read at least the first book of Smith’s work. They may have been revolutionary at the time, but his ideas laid the foundation for the entire field of economics and it remains relevant today.
Show More
the markets.The first book of The Wealth of Nations reads much like any basic economics textbook would today. Smith opens with a discussion of specialization its importance to economic growth. He does not extend his argument, as modern economists would, beyond the subject of individual specialization to a broader discussion of comparative advantage and national specialization, but he does anticipate where future economists would take his argument when he discusses tariffs. Smith argues that is unwise to tax cheaper goods being imported to Britain and that the British should instead concentrate on exporting goods it can make more cheaply than its trade partners. This initial introduction to the concept of comparative advantage flew in the face of centuries of mercantilist thinking, in which trade was a matter of winners and losers and it was impossible for a country to enrich itself through trade without impoverishing other nations.
Beyond essentially inventing modern economic thought, Adam Smith’s greatest contribution was the concept of the Invisible Hand, a force that moves people, through their own self-interest, to engage in commerce that will benefit society as a whole. In fact, it is often possible for people to contribute more to society through greed and an attempt to profit, than through pure altruism. Profit opportunities are created by market inefficiencies and, by seeking to maximize their profits, entrepreneurs will attempt to capitalize on these profit opportunities and will fix these inefficiencies, often without understanding what they are doing.
While Smith is certainly a fan of letting markets and entrepreneurs work freely he is not a proponent of laissez-faire economics. He is very distrustful of corporations and argues that the biggest potential downfall of any economic system is collusion between businesses to drive prices up. He believes that a watchful eye needs to be kept on all businesses and that the government needs to be careful in making policies that might favor one firm over another.
There is so much more that could be said about The Wealth of Nations, but it should be sufficient to say that any person interested in economics owes it to themselves to read at least the first book of Smith’s work. They may have been revolutionary at the time, but his ideas laid the foundation for the entire field of economics and it remains relevant today.
Show Less
LibraryThing member RonManners
" Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations was recognized as a
landmark of human thought upon its publication in
1776. As the first scientific argument for the principles
of political economy, it is the point of departure for
all subsequent economic thought. Smith's theories of
capital accumulation, growth,
among others, continue to be influential in
modern economics.
This reprint of Edwin Cannan's definitive 1904
edition of The Wealth of Nations includes Cannan's
famous introduction, notes, and a full index, as well as
a new preface written especially for this edition
by the distinguished economist George J. Stigler. Mr.
Stigler's preface will be of value for anyone
wishing to see the contemporary relevance of
Adam Smith's thought."
Taken from the Back Cover.
landmark of human thought upon its publication in
1776. As the first scientific argument for the principles
of political economy, it is the point of departure for
all subsequent economic thought. Smith's theories of
capital accumulation, growth,
Show More
and secular change,among others, continue to be influential in
modern economics.
This reprint of Edwin Cannan's definitive 1904
edition of The Wealth of Nations includes Cannan's
famous introduction, notes, and a full index, as well as
a new preface written especially for this edition
by the distinguished economist George J. Stigler. Mr.
Stigler's preface will be of value for anyone
wishing to see the contemporary relevance of
Adam Smith's thought."
Taken from the Back Cover.
Show Less
LibraryThing member gbsallery
Vast, rambling, dated, and yet compelling. As a founding tome of the study of economics, many of the ideas in this book have become familiar through diffusion into the discourse of everyday life. However, to see them set out in their historical context (admittedly, occasionally too much historical
It is illuminating to reflect on both how much of this work is still relevant, and how much has been overturned by modern societies. The admonitions against government indebtedness have a certain resonance with current events, even as the detailed analysis of the price of corn in the various cities of Europe has become antiquated due to the passage of time - and, vitally, the increased ease of movement in the modern world. This upsets some of the assumptions of the work, and it will also be interesting to see to what extent mass customisation overturns certain other assumptions about the efficacy of capital-intensive mass production. That these questions can be asked within the framework of a book dating back so far is testament to the soundness of its basic ideas.
Worth reading if you've ever partaken in a capitalist society, or are thinking of doing so.
Show More
context) gives them a freshness and a real insight into how great the advances made by Smith really were. As elaborated here, his ideas have a richness and humanity which is often missing from the concepts when reduced to their most compact form. It is illuminating to reflect on both how much of this work is still relevant, and how much has been overturned by modern societies. The admonitions against government indebtedness have a certain resonance with current events, even as the detailed analysis of the price of corn in the various cities of Europe has become antiquated due to the passage of time - and, vitally, the increased ease of movement in the modern world. This upsets some of the assumptions of the work, and it will also be interesting to see to what extent mass customisation overturns certain other assumptions about the efficacy of capital-intensive mass production. That these questions can be asked within the framework of a book dating back so far is testament to the soundness of its basic ideas.
Worth reading if you've ever partaken in a capitalist society, or are thinking of doing so.
Show Less
LibraryThing member charlie68
The book that launched a thousand theories. Mr.Smith over explains some of them like the price theory. Interesting view of the world of those times.
LibraryThing member jpsnow
Actually, the full title is An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations -- perhaps the longest reading everyone should finish. Every basic economic concept is directly addressed or at least touched upon by this work. However, most of the text involves an endless series of
Show More
examples using commodities, prices, and laws from the 18th century. Adam Smith covers division of labor early on (it's worth noting that his famous pin factory is brought up within the first 20 pages) and moves through international trade, taxation, public goods, and politics of that time. As this was published in 1776, it is most interesting to note his discussion of the recent "disturbances" in the colonies. Towards the end of the 900 pages he further encourages that the Irish and American people should be willing to pay more in taxes. In discussing wage prices, his discourse about the payment of soldiers and sailors was quite interesting. Both take the position for the non-pecuniary benefit of a slight chance for a large payback in glory, with the soldier getting a greater chance but not facing the competition a sailor's place has in light of the large merchant trade. Smith's discussion of laws and business special interest groups shows that not that much has changed. For example, the wool lobby had such laws prohibiting export of unprocessed wool, prohibiting transport within certain miles of certain coasts, prohibiting transport in darkness, and requiring containment only in leather or cloth bags with "WOOL" written on the outside in letters at least 3 inches wide. Other concepts covered: money, rent, profits, economic efficiency (the invisible hand), education, roads, efficient taxation, examples involving trade restrictions, special interest groups, and factors affecting price supply, and demand. Show Less
LibraryThing member Audacity88
I'm a libertarian, and I love economics. But I found Smith hard to get through. Aside from some of his more spirited arguments, such as the famous butcher/baker/whatever the third one is analogy, a lot of this book seemed like dead weight to me. As with many possibly great books, though, it may be
Show More
a case of failing to appreciate its greatness because it has come to dominate subsequent thought and hence is already familiar in its essence to me. Show Less
LibraryThing member JVioland
One of the most influential books ever. I wish more neo-cons and ultra capitalist would read it. Smith espouses some government involvement in regulating business enterprises. No! Really! Why, that sounds like Marxism! Bull. He surveyed the economies of the world, surveyed assembly of products,
Show More
reviewed the balance of trade, the influence gold has on national debt, the problem of inflation and other standard economic issues. He was very insightful and should be taught in every high school economic class. The foundation for studying any economic activity should begin with Smith. Show Less
LibraryThing member jimocracy
Overall, this was an informative read; not for its economic insightfulness but for how its supporters use Smith's theories. There are some basic economic truths and a lot of tedious detail but what is really telling are the outdated ideas and the sweeping generalizations which have carried over to
Show More
our contemporary economic discussions. Show Less
LibraryThing member MarcusBastos
History and Economy
This is a review of the audiobook. Adam Smith’s work is a reflection about the history and the economy of the europeans states in the XVIII century. The author laid his principles on economic analysis throughout an exposition of historical facts carefully chosen in order to
This is a review of the audiobook. Adam Smith’s work is a reflection about the history and the economy of the europeans states in the XVIII century. The author laid his principles on economic analysis throughout an exposition of historical facts carefully chosen in order to
Show More
demonstrate his main thesis: public and private wealth flourish in an environment of liberty. One must not be a specialist in economy to understand the book, though some knowledge of history helps to follow the author’s line of thought. The section of the book in which Adam Smith examines the role played by the americans colonies in the economic development of the europeans states is quite interesting and reminds me of Eduardo Galeano’s book, The Open Veins of Latin American. Despite the poor quality of the recording, the audiobook is worth listening. Show Less
LibraryThing member DanielSTJ
A complicated, multi-layered, cognitive, and deep piece of work surrounding economics. Adam Smith denotes many different facets of the overall broad scope that he sweeps across. Hard to understand, and dense, but worth the read for anyone interested in the subject. The last sections were especially
Show More
poignant to me. Show Less
LibraryThing member MaowangVater
Published originally in 1776, this is the first book length study of political economy. But in addition to laying the theoretical groundwork for the field, it contains a lively account of economic history, and Smith’s opinions on monopolies, government economic policy, taxes, trade associations,
“It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.” Adam Smith. The Wealth of Nations Bk 5 Ch 2 Pt 2.
Show More
and what he felt were the justices and injustices of the existing European polices and systems.“It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.” Adam Smith. The Wealth of Nations Bk 5 Ch 2 Pt 2.
Show Less
LibraryThing member keylawk
Although he was an entirely unpretentious "moral philosopher", Adam Smith is the genius who marshalled the granular details of human interaction into a great riparian beach of economics. In a sense, all Economic theory is a footnote to the 5 little books that comprise this 900 page Work. What
In a time of brutish poverty, few men were more angered by inequity who did more to displace it. Publishing in 1776, Smith urged the import of prosperity and noted that wealth was always a collective enterprise. Towns grew because of "commerce" between them. Smith's genius was to understand that the key to unlocking communal prosperity was individual self-interest.
Prosperity is built on three things:
(1) The pursuit of self-interest;
(2) Free Trade;
(3) Division of Labor.
Some of the details: Smith seems to agree with Polybius that Roman "character" was superior to the Greek, and for this reason: "...the better constitution of their courts of justice", and the distinction which Romans gave to their personal oaths [362].
Smith indulges a spirited "argument" throughout his Work, often disagreeing with himself, weighing apparent or "possible" contradictions. "Possible" is one of his leitmotifs.
Smith does attempt to make public policy recommendations. At that point he falls, like so many of us, upon the "political". As one of Smith's great disciples, PJ O'Rourke says: "Politics makes idiots of all of us".
I try to keep in mind what Smith was really doing. He was a moralist. He was trying to enable us to be better.
Show More
appear to be "competing" theories of Capitalism and Communism, both derive from these entries.In a time of brutish poverty, few men were more angered by inequity who did more to displace it. Publishing in 1776, Smith urged the import of prosperity and noted that wealth was always a collective enterprise. Towns grew because of "commerce" between them. Smith's genius was to understand that the key to unlocking communal prosperity was individual self-interest.
Prosperity is built on three things:
(1) The pursuit of self-interest;
(2) Free Trade;
(3) Division of Labor.
Some of the details: Smith seems to agree with Polybius that Roman "character" was superior to the Greek, and for this reason: "...the better constitution of their courts of justice", and the distinction which Romans gave to their personal oaths [362].
Smith indulges a spirited "argument" throughout his Work, often disagreeing with himself, weighing apparent or "possible" contradictions. "Possible" is one of his leitmotifs.
Smith does attempt to make public policy recommendations. At that point he falls, like so many of us, upon the "political". As one of Smith's great disciples, PJ O'Rourke says: "Politics makes idiots of all of us".
I try to keep in mind what Smith was really doing. He was a moralist. He was trying to enable us to be better.
Show Less
LibraryThing member mykl-s
This is Smith's second-most-important book. It is a follow-up to his Theory of Moral Sentiments, which underlies all the concepts in Wealth of Nations.
Subjects
Awards
Language
Original language
English
Original publication date
1776-03-09
Physical description
378 p.; 9 inches
ISBN
1989201822 / 9781989201824
DDC/MDS
| 330.153 |