Product Description

Smith's THE WEALTH OF NATIONS was the first comprehensive treatment of political economy. Originally delivered in the form of lectures at Glasgow, the book's publication in 1776 co-incided with America's Declaration of Independence. These volumes include Smith's assessment of the mercantile system, his advocacy of the freedom of commerce and industry, and his famous prophecy that "America will be one of the foremost nations of the world".

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #18675 in Books
• Published on: 2003-09-25
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 544 pages

About the Author
Adam Smith (1723-90) taught both logic and moral philosophy at Glasgow University. His Wealth of Nations revolutionised the economic theories of the time. Andrew Skinner teaches at the Adam Smith Institute and is an expert on the author's work.

Customer Reviews

Prosperity or poverty. Smith vs Marx
Adam Smith like Marx sees changes in the economic system as a logical, inevitable sequence of events. For example the power of the landed aristocracy declined as a consequence of the increasing importance of the towns. Good government was a result of this decline as people that had worked on the estates in conditions close to slavery moved to cities where they had considerable freedom. The difference between Marx and Smith is that Smith considered all of these changes leading to steady improvements whereas Marx considered the results of capitalism and industrialisation and urbanisation disastrous. Marx lived about one hundred years later than Smith. The system had not produced wealth for all as Smith foresaw. Smith believed that if governments would refrain from interfering in the economy prosperity would increase for all. Marx considered that a revolution whereby the capitalist class would be eliminated and private property is abolished a necessary consequence of the exploitation of the workers. Smith believed the opposite in that private property was the main driving force for progress. Their analysis of the historical development looking at it now shows many serious mistakes. However many more of the ideas of Adam Smith are still valid in hindsight than those of Marx. Somewhat surprising both being persons with interest in morality do not ascribe any importance to that subject. Both are imprisoned by the concept that "mechanical" or systemic changes in society can explain changes in the economic system. Many economists to day still fall in the same trap. They do not believe that moral standards can play an important role in the development of economic system. They therefore typically reject new developments such as "socially responsible investing ". Like "Capital" of Marx, the "Wealth of Nations" presents many interesting facts about for example the near slavery conditions in the large agricultural estates throughout Europe. This information is a good antidote to the romantics that believe conditions in the countryside in the past were very pleasant. The Wealth of Nations is lucidly written and shows quite clearly the dependence of wealthy creation on essential but minimal government regulation

some gems hidden in amongst the wheat husks
Smith is much under-estimated both amongst philosophers of money (economists) and philosophers of social life (moralists).

And it is true, as the reader from Melbourne says, that the book requires a great deal of dedication in places. At times Smith repeats the same point three, four even five times in short succession, always in the same carefuyl but ponderous prose. yet elsewhere, surprisingly, there are flashes of wit and humanity, alongside the great methodical reasoning and argument that make a philosophical work powerful.

Invisible hand concept missing
I missed clear implications of today's relevance of the "invisible hand" concept. Otherwise the book is still a classical macroeconomic must.