Free The Wealth Of Nations Chronicled By Adam Smith Offered As Text

Wealth of Nations" is the book that changed greed to a virtue instead of a sin,

In fact, greed is one of the Seven Deadly Sins in Christian theology, Greed is a sin in ALL the great religions, including Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Zen Buddhism, Buddhism, American Indian Spiritualism, Wiccan nature love, Bahá'í Faith, Gnosticism Rastafari,Samaritanism, Indian Ayyavazhi, Jainism, Sikhism Iranian Ahle Haqq, Manichaeism, Mazdak, Yazidi,Zoroastrianism, East Asian Confucianism, Taoism,Recent Cao Dai,Chondogyo, Neopaganism, New Age, SeichoNoIe, Tenrikyo, Unitarian Universalism Ethnic/Folk African, Ancient religions, Prehistoric Near East Egyptian, Semitic, Mesopotamian
IndoEuropean Celtic, Germanic Illyrothracian, Greek Gnosticism Neoplatonism, Mithraism, Vedic Hinduism.


All these religions say greed is wrong, All these religions say you should not gather wealth at the expense of your neighbors, But this man Adam Smith says it is OK to do whatever is necessary to obtain wealth, Adam Smith says it is a good thing to allow your instinct toward selfishness to rule your life, He calls it Capitalism. And it works for a century or so before the robbed and disenfranchised revolt and kill off the greedy ones who rule society to their benefit.


Greed is the basis and essence of Capitalism, especially US Capitalism, in which every individual is guaranteed the "right to pursue happiness".
Has anyone EVER questioned that Why is more important to be happy than to know where you fit into the Grand Scheme Why is more important to make money than to find and free your spirit Look at any wealthy person who gained his or her wealth through competiton do they have a healthy or unhealthy spirit

In turning greed to virtue, Adam Smith has created an economic system that more accurately has been called "Social Darwinism".
In other words, according to Smith, it is perfectly natural for the meanest, strongest, most clever individuals to gobble up so much capital that the great majority of people are left with crumbs.


The weakest of us "deserve" to be poor, according to Smith, The Bible and every civilized religion in the world disagree, saying greed is a sin because the individual chooses to be greedy even though he/she knows it will cause great shortages of money among the meek and powerless.


Capitalism therefore is a sin, not an acceptable economic system, So long as there exists a middle class nothing catastrophic should happen to the society embracing this sin, But right now the middleclass is disappearing in the USA as it has in all empires, leaving only the few monsters at the top and everyone else in poverty.


Forgive me for reading and for using my mind to agree or disagree with the author, I know most of you are capitalist because you are citizens of the USA, I am frankly a disciple of Diogenes and believe we should all be free and enjoy life there is plenty to go around without getting into a harness and working yourself to death.
Let's face it, communism would have worked if they'd killed off the hogs as they rose to power, There are always hogs in society it is the duty of society to keep them chained or jailed,

Adam Smith, to a real Christian, is Satan personified, How devious and clever to claim a sin is a virtue, I recommend reading this admittedly fascinating book because it is an explanation of why Rome, Great Britian, the Ottoman Empire, et al, in the end collapsed because of greed made a virtue.


Adam Smith eloquently and wittily pretends to be a friend to the common person, So does "Das Kapital" and "Mein Kampf",

I personally am not a communist, socialist nor capitalist, I'm absolutely a nobody and you can take that to your corrupt bank, I revel in the freedom of my mind! I am an old graybeard and have read a thousand books I was cast out of theth Century for chastising lesser minds, indifferent minds.
I have been driven mad but in that madness there has come a clarity, It is so bright and wonderful that I can see clearly what I could not see before,

I hope this will attract bitter diatribes Webster: bitter and abusive writings against me and my blanket condemnation of Adam Smith's dangerous book.
That will mean that my words here have been read and considered, Is that too much to ask in this dispassionate world I think everyone who claims to be a free market capitalist should read this book so as not to overdo it Oh this book was such a tiresome read that I finishedother books before completing this one.


Started to take toll on me with so much unnecessary explanations which made no sense, Sometimes cringe worthy!

Adam Smith was one of the few individuals who wanted the economic cycle to run itself, Hence he was in full support of market setting the momentum, But can we give such liberty to markets With inflation, resources cramped within few hands and power politics his notion have failed to a large extend in todays world.
As the richer are getting rich with each day whereas the poor are left on their mercy which never comes,

Nonetheless this book gave certain valuable parameters which can be used and revised to make things better, According to him abundance or scantiness depend upon two circumstances:

, By skill, dexterity and judgement with which its labour is applied
, By the proportion between the employer and unemployed

Wages, rent and profit are the three original sources of all revenues and exchangeable value.
Altogether there areclasses who contribute towards the annual produce of the land and labour:

, The proprietors of land
, Cultivators, farmers and country labourers who are honoured with the peculiar appellation of the productive class
, Class of artificers, manufactures and merchants who endeavour to degrade by the humiliating appellation of the barren or unproductive class

The sovereign as in the state has only three duties to attend to:
.
The duty of protecting the society from violence and invasion of other independent societies
, The duty of protecting every member of the society from injustice or oppression by every other member of it
, The duty of erecting and maintaining certain public works and institutions

Though Smith kept condemning the Mercantile System but his free markets have led to the very anarchy which even mercantilist couldnt bring in the world.


sitelinkBlog sitelinkYouTube sitelinkInstagram sitelinkFacebook sitelinkLinkedIn I would say that this is the most overrated book in economics.
That does not mean that this book is without its merits, but I was definitely frustrated, Let me tell you why:

, Smith, in various places in the book, criticizes merchantilists and others, However, since the average reader even the average economist has no knowledge of merchantilists and physiocrats, all his comments SEEM correct, whereas in fact they are just simplistic and unfair merchantilists never confused wealth and money, and physiocrats invented many important concepts in economics and public finance.
So, lots of great economics books think of John Steuart or Sir William Petty were simply ignored,

. Smith never quoted another writer, It is because he invented economics by himself No, . . it is because he never bothered to give references, "forgot" to mention what he took from other great writers, especially the physiocracts.
Thus, the book gives a false impression that he is MUCH more original than he actually is,

. He did not invent free markets, market economy, or economics, Period. He is not a liberal, or even a liberal economist, Yet, he is claimed to be the founder of economics labelled "classical" economics, Considering that there were economists before him, what makes him the father of anything Simple answer: because economists do not read historically important works in economics, they just quote Smith.


I could just go on and on, but there is no need to,

Let me simply say that if you want to get informed about the history of economics, start with the merchantilists.
If you want to learn about modern economics , the true founding father of modern economics is Jeremy Bentham, He is the true inventor of homo economicus,

If you think that this book is pointless and boring, you are mostly right, ENGLISH:

It is clear why this classic work is considered the milestone of Economics, Adam Smith seeks to comprise in a single work all the relevant economic phenomena of his time, describing them in detail and extracting fundamental insights, laws and general conclusions of Economics, many of them used until today.
The result is an enormous work both in importance and in extension, The vast quantity of information gathered attest to Smiths genius and his incredible research,

It is therefore a comprehensive work, though surprisingly easy to read not necessarily pleasant most of the time, and conducted with sobriety and pondered narrative.
Smith has a longwinded style, as can be expected of any author of that era, and he digs deep into many explanations of issues relevant solely to that time, also deviating from the strict economic theme on and off.
However, it is worth reading the entire work to follow his rationale, and because general insights and brilliant passages appear here and there abundantly and not very systematically.


The author starts out with magisterial conjectures about productivity and division of labor the famous example of the pin factory, going through many examples of commercial practices of the time governed by the law of supply and demand, digressions on the value of goods and gold and silver, land use, manufacture, the role of banks, productivity, subsidies, the mercantilism, the commerce of the European nations with colonies all over the world, taxation, public debt, among others.


It is undeniable that the work leans in the direction of freedom to exercise economic activities in the face of State laws, the importance of competition and the harm provoked by monopolies and collusion between entrepreneurs, the benefits of foreign trade, and the importance of simplifying taxation concepts which are still quite modern.
It is very important to emphasize Smiths sharp and minimalist view of the functions a State must focus on to contribute to the wealth of the nation: i defend its people from foreign offenders ii create and administer an exact system of Justice and iii create and maintain works and institutions which are important for the society but lack incentives for individuals to endeavor due to the lack of profits.
Good political institutions, by the way, were the cause of prosperity of the English colonies so it seems that modern institutionalists descend directly from Smith.


Smith, however, was a broad thinker and sought to capture the economic phenomena in a complete way something that most modern economists clearly abandoned when narrowing the object of study with excessively simple theoretical premises, on the one hand, and extremely complex execution via mathematical elaboration, on the other.


Smith analyzes the functioning of economic systems frompractical topics, distancing his focus from the individual and his subjectivities, since years earlier he had written the Theory of Moral Sentiments in

this regard see my review: sitelink goodreads. com/review/show . The distinctive features of economic reasoning are there: investigation of causes and effects of broad collective phenomena with economic content, opportunity costs, and economic side effects of actions or measures originally intended to meet specific objectives.
The famous “invisible hand” image he became so famous for plays an important role in this aspect, though it expressly appears only once at the middle of Book Four.
For Smith, economic agents acting in the markets pursuing solely their own interests are taken as if by an “invisible hand” and end up benefitting the public.
The image appears in fact with more strength though Smith does not mention the term at the beginning of the book, in the famous passage in which he posits that the products and services we need are produced and provided not due to the producers and providers benevolence and sympathy for our needs, but because they pursue their own interests in profiting with their economic activities.


Although Smith does not focus his study on individual subjectivities which ultimately is the original unit of the economic phenomena, but rather occupies himself in explaining economics as a system, it is interesting to read some rare passages in which he takes such subjectivities into account, such as the one on excessive work as a cause of occupational diseases.
An unsuspecting reader might think this is a modern author discussing the excesses of workload in modern liberal society and the corresponding need to preserve the workers health against burnout!

It is no surprise that someone from Great Britain in thes brought together the most advanced economic thought of the time.
The country was excelling in the leadership of the worlds economic scenario, It was the beginning of the industrial revolution, the economy was heating up and gaining complexity, Smith, however, still ranks agriculture as the most economically productive activity, putting manufacturing in second place, Agriculture had developed nations and allowed manufacturing to exist, It is even notable the defense he makes of the US to focus on agriculture to continue developing, For him, it would be a mistake if the US intended to seize the trade in manufactured goods hitherto imported from Great Britain, as it would divert resources from agriculture, which was developing the US, and channel them into an activity that would delay its development.
Although one could accuse the existence of a perhaps more geopolitical rather than technicaleconomic base in this argument, the fact is that it is consistent with his defense of the superiority of agriculture in terms of economic productivity.


Interesting to note, though, that Smith, in an apparent contradiction, acknowledges in the book Introduction that rich nations generally outperform others in both agriculture and manufacturing, but are distinguished more by their superiority in manufacturing, once it implies greater division of labor.
If having more manufacture promotes greater wealth, how would the US option to develop its manufacture delay its development

Another point which calls attention is that Smiths main criticism against mercantilism the fact that it was coopted by so many private interests which successfully created market protections and privileges is exactly one of modern capitalisms main problems too.
Also, his critique that mercantilism was wrong in preaching surplus in foreign trade as a sacred rule is also criticized by those who sustain that Great Britain thrived and won international trade by doing exactly that.


Finally, it is interesting to note the works lack of a conclusion, Smith covered so many issues that putting a general conclusion together would certainly be impracticable, He finishes it with a sharp defense of Great Britain to get rid of its colonies insofar as they did not contribute with revenues to the British Empire and required defense expenses in wars.


It is true that Smith spends so many lines detailing bureaucratic and certainly dated, episodic issues, providing figures on interest rates, tax collection and historical and contemporary prices even from other countries.
This is understandable, however, as it seems that he set out to cover all economic topics and perhaps put together the greatest economics guide of the time.
Also, he did not have a crystal ball to know what would stand the test of time, Of course, this is a critique from someone reading the work in his comfortable armchair nearlyyears later, in an entirely different world.
The work, however, has stood the test of time very well, as it brings general economic insights that are fundamental and still applicable today.


PORTUGUÊS:

Fica claro por que essa obra clássica é considerada o marco da Economia, Adam Smith procura reunir em uma única obra todos os fenômenos econômicos relevantes de seu tempo, descrevendoos em detalhes e extraindo insights fundamentais, leis e conclusões gerais da Economia, muitos deles utilizados até hoje.
O resultado é um trabalho enorme tanto em importância quanto em extensão, A grande quantidade de informações coletadas atesta a genialidade de Smith e sua incrível pesquisa,

É, portanto, uma obra abrangente, embora surpreendentemente fácil de ler não necessariamente agradável na maior parte do tempo, e conduzida com sobriedade e narrativa ponderada.
Smith tem um estilo prolixo, como se pode esperar de qualquer autor daquela época, e ele se aprofunda em muitas explicações de questões relevantes apenas para aquele tempo histórico, desviandose também do estrito tema econômico de vez em quando.
No entanto, vale a pena ler a obra inteira para seguir seu raciocínio, e porque insights gerais e passagens brilhantes aparecem aqui e ali de forma abundante e não muito sistemática.


O autor parte de magistrais conjecturas sobre produtividade e divisão do trabalho o famoso exemplo da fábrica de alfinetes, passando por muitos exemplos de práticas comerciais da época regidas pela lei da oferta e da procura, digressões sobre o valor das mercadorias e do ouro e prata, uso da terra, manufatura, o papel dos bancos, produtividade, subsídios, o mercantilismo, o comércio dos países europeus com colônias em todo o mundo, tributação, dívida pública, entre outros.


É inegável que o trabalho se inclina na direção da liberdade de exercício das atividades econômicas em face das leis estatais, a importância da concorrência e os malefícios provocados pelos monopólios e conluios entre empresários, os benefícios do comércio exterior e a importância da simplificação da tributação conceitos ainda bastante modernos.
Muito importante ressaltar a visão aguçada e minimalista de Smith sobre as funções que um Estado deve focar para contribuir com a riqueza da nação: i defender seu povo de ataques estrangeiros ii criar e administrar um sistema exato de Justiça e iii criar e manter obras e instituições importantes para a sociedade, mas que não apresentam incentivo para empreendedores individuais se aventurarem dada a falta de lucro.
As boas instituições políticas, aliás, foram a causa da prosperidade das colônias inglesas pelo visto, os institucionalistas modernos descendem diretamente do Smith.


Smith, no entanto, era um pensador amplo e buscava captar os fenômenos econômicos de forma completa algo que a maioria dos economistas modernos claramente abandonou ao estreitar o objeto de estudo com premissas teóricas excessivamente simples, por um lado, e execução extremamente complexa via elaboração matemática, por outro.


Smith analisa o funcionamento dos sistemas econômicos a partir de tópicospráticos, distanciando seu foco do indivíduo e de suas subjetividades, pois anos antes havia escrito a Teoria dos Sentimentos Morais a esse respeito v.
minha revisão: sitelink goodreads. com/review/show . As características distintivas do raciocínio econômico estão aí: investigação de causas e efeitos de fenômenos coletivos amplos com conteúdo econômico, custos de oportunidade e efeitos colaterais econômicos de ações ou medidas originalmente destinadas a atingir objetivos específicos.
A famosa imagem da “mão invisível”, pela qual ele se tornou tão famoso, desempenha um papel importante nesse aspecto, embora apareça expressamente apenas uma vez no meio do Livro Quatro.
Para Smith, os agentes econômicos que atuam nos mercados buscando unicamente seus próprios interesses são tomados como que por uma “mão invisível” e acabam beneficiando o público.
A imagem aparece na verdade com maior força embora Smith não mencione o termo no começo do livro, na famosa passagem na qual ele menciona que os produtos e serviços de que nós precisamos são produzidos e fornecidos não pela benevolência e simpatia dos produtores e fornecedores com nossas necessidades, mas porque eles buscam seus interesses próprios em lucrar com suas atividades econômicas.


Embora Smith não concentre seu estudo nas subjetividades individuais que, em última análise, é a unidade original dos fenômenos econômicos, mas se ocupe em explicar a economia como um sistema, é interessante ler algumas passagens raras em que ele leva em conta tais subjetividades, como a do excesso de trabalho como causa de doenças ocupacionais.
Um leitor desavisado pode pensar que ele é um autor moderno discutindo os excessos de carga de trabalho na sociedade liberal moderna e a necessidade correspondente de preservar a saúde dos trabalhadores contra o burnout!

Não é surpresa que alguém da GrãBretanha nos anostenha reunido o pensamento econômico mais avançado da época.
O país se destacava na liderança do cenário econômico mundial, Era o início da revolução industrial, a economia estava aquecendo e ganhando complexidade, Smith, no entanto, ainda classifica a agricultura como a atividade economicamente mais produtiva, colocando a manufatura em segundo lugar, A agricultura desenvolveu as nações e permitiu que a manufatura existisse, É até notável a defesa que ele faz dos EUA em focar na agricultura para continuar se desenvolvendo, Para ele, seria um erro os EUA pretenderem apoderarse do comércio de manufaturados até então importados da GrãBretanha, pois desviaria recursos da agricultura, que estava desenvolvendo os EUA, e os canalizaria para uma atividade que atrasaria seu desenvolvimento.
Embora se possa acusar a existência de uma base talvez mais geopolítica do que técnicoeconômica nesse argumento, o fato é que ele é consistente com sua defesa da superioridade da agricultura em termos de produtividade econômica.


Interessante notar, porém, que Smith, em uma aparente contradição, reconhece na Introdução do livro que as nações ricas geralmente superam as outras tanto na agricultura quanto na manufatura, mas se distinguem mais por sua superioridade na manufatura, uma vez que esta implica maior divisão do trabalho.
Se ter mais manufatura promove maior riqueza, como a opção dos EUA por desenvolver sua manufatura atrasaria seu desenvolvimento

Outro ponto que chama a atenção é que a principal crítica de Smith ao mercantilismo o fato de ter sido cooptado por tantos interesses privados que criaram com sucesso proteções e privilégios de mercado é exatamente um dos principais problemas do capitalismo moderno também.
Além disso, sua crítica de que o mercantilismo estava errado ao pregar o superávit no comércio exterior como uma regra sagrada também é criticada por aqueles que sustentam que a GrãBretanha prosperou e se destacou no comércio internacional fazendo exatamente isso.


Por fim, é interessante notar a falta de conclusão do trabalho, Smith cobriu tantas questões, que reunir uma conclusão geral certamente seria impraticável, Ele termina com uma forte defesa da GrãBretanha em se livrar de suas colônias, na medida em que não contribuíam com receitas para o Império Britânico e exigiam despesas de defesa em guerras.


É verdade que Smith gasta muitas linhas detalhando questões burocráticas e certamente datadas, episódicas, fornecendo números sobre taxas de juros, arrecadação de impostos e preços históricos e contemporâneos, mesmo de outros países.
Isso é compreensível, no entanto, pois parece que ele se propôs a cobrir todos os tópicos econômicos e talvez estabelecer o maior guia econômico da época.
Além disso, ele não tinha uma bola de cristal para saber o que resistiria ao teste do tempo, Claro, esta é uma crítica de alguém lendo o trabalho em sua poltrona confortável quaseanos depois, em um mundo totalmente diferente.
O trabalho, no entanto, resistiu muito bem ao teste do tempo, pois traz insights econômicos gerais que são fundamentais e aplicáveis ainda hoje.
.