Adam Smith's Soft Side (nationalist w/ "populist streak")

The Globalist ^ | December 14, 2005 | Sherrod Brown

[RightWhale]

I try to avoid implying content. The real deal will be in my book if I live long enough to finish it and by then I will be gone and won’t be available for defense.

[Mind-numbed Robot]

Much of economics is a chicken or egg argument. Supply and demand, which drives which? Arguments are made for each but it remains a debate, not an absolute either way. Each is true under certain circumstances. The same is true for other economic principles.

Economics is a combination of statistical observations and sociology/psychology. It is "if, then, else" in operation. As for the "invisible hand", R. Buckminster Fuller said that Free Enterprise has the unique ability to transform the selfish desires of the individual into a good for the whole.

Monopolies are neutral, neither good or bad. John D. Rockefeller had a vertical monopoly in the oil industry but kept prices low to discourage competition, benefitting the consumer. AT&T went the other way.

When you suggest there are times it is appropriate to restrict trade to accomplish moral and political goals, of course that is correct, it should not be confused as economics instead of politics. (I don't think you did confuse the two but were instead saying the principle of free trade is not above all else.)

[unspun]

I think the lesson to he and us is that “Corporatism” is not the same as Conservatism. Those corporations allowed to do business in the USA must pick if they would be American or based in another nation, then tax policy can be set accordingly, as well as all CORPORATE WELFARE must be ended as well as unfair regulations that stifle competition! That would be a truely free-market (arena) in which many can prosper and the invisable hand can exist!

Well put, JSD1. I was kinda' waiting for someone to argue with you -- or at least show his concurrence.

[JSDude1]

huh?

[unspun]

Generally agree with your assessment. It's "The Wealth of Nations," not "The Wealth lf Global Corporations Operating Above the Law and the Interests of the People."