Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Already signed up?
Log in now.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Remember your password?
Log in now.
2 Comments
gwiz665says...Chomsky was a good listen, but I sure didn't like the dude after.
RedSkysays...There is a demonstrated bias towards equity investment domestically which is probably what Adam Smith was talking about, which is rather different to tax havens and global supply chains which would not have been as feasible back in the 18th century.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_bias_puzzle
Chomsky is also not really correct as Adam Smith does use it in the more general sense that it is referred to today in The Theory of Moral Sentiments. That it took me a couple of minutes to contradict this video with wikipedia does not bode well for the fact checking of TYT.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invisible_hand#Other_uses_of_the_phrase_by_Smith
I think it's also worth pointing out that Smith's position wasn't that of unrestrained market activity. The general principle of the invisible hand is sound if you accept that point. As far as his actual position on the role of government, it's open to interpretation. It's also worth pointing out that you can't expect a concept to not need some adjustment after 250 years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Smith#As_a_symbol_of_free_market_economics
Discuss...
Enable JavaScript to submit a comment.