Adam Rich |

March 1, 2010 by Post Team 

Adam RichAdam Rich | have a page excerpts, after stumbling across a nice New York Times article from 2001.

‘When the regulation, therefore, is to support the inside, it is always just and equitable, but sometimes only when they are in favor of the masters’.
- Adam Smith.

This is a review article by Emma Rothschild, Economic sentiments Book: Adam Smith, Condorcet and the Enlightenment, which indicates, as we did not so long ago:

Ms. Rothschild argues that Smith was invented as a narrow, unyielding defender of unfettered free enterprise. Yes, he emphasized the motivating force of self-interest and gains from free trade, but also look at freedom in a broader sense of economic freedom, and defended the disadvantaged. The real Adam Smith was a complex thinker, capable of holding and exploring ideas even when they were in the conflict. In order to understand Smith, Ms.Rothschild says his contributions must be viewed in the light of the institutions 18th century.
. . .
Smith is concerned from the encroachment of government on economic activity, but his concerns were addressed at least as much toward parish councils, and guards the Church, and large companies, unions, religious institutions and the nationalgovernment. . . Smith was sometimes tolerant of government intervention, «especially when the goal is to reduce poverty.”

And excerpts were also selected, such as:

“The Smith and John Rawls by the philosopher John Rawls, proclaiming:”No society can surely be flourishing and happy, including a much larger portion of the members are poor and miserable, but it is equity, besides, that they who feed, clothe and the whole body of the people, should have such a share of the production of their employment to be themselves tolerably well fed, clothing, and feet. ”

We already noticed this, to progressive taxation:

“Smith did not benefit of low taxes and has argued that topics» should contribute towards the support of the Government, to the maximum extent possible, commensurate with their respective abilities.”But, he says, «It is inconceivable that the very rich to contribute to the public expence, not only in the proportion of their income, but nothing more than that percentage in ».

In short, despite the claims of the Institute of Adam Smith and many others to claim Smith as an advocate for liberal, with low taxes and small government world view:

Ms. Rothschild says she does not want to”claim Adam Smith from right to left.”The key point is that Smith was a thinker with an accuracy not afraid, not ideology. «The only real sense of who I am calling,’’she said,”is to encourage people to read Adam Smith for the same«.

“The beauty of Adam Smith – why is still worth reading and then discusses 225 years – is that he saw the economy and is deeply intertwined with human nature, with people’s feelings, emotions and ideas, and eloquently reported what he observed directly or learned from history without prejudice or fear” .

Report to Team

Please feel free to send if you have any questions regarding this post , you can contact on

Disclaimer: The views expressed on this site are that of the authors and not necessarily that of U.S.S.POST.


Comments are closed.