Members with This Book
Most Helpful Reviews
see all reviews
Liked It2 of 2 members found this review helpful ““The desire of food is limited in every man by the narrow capacity of the human stomach; but the desire of the conveniences and ornaments of building, dress, equipage, and household furniture, seems to have no limit or certain boundary.” |
Didn’t Like It “Obviously a classic and with much intrinsic value, just not really my cup of tea.” see full review » see other reviews » |
Newest Reviews
see all reviews-
“Obviously a classic and with much intrinsic value, just not really my cup of tea.”
imagisme wrote this review 3 weeks ago. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
“Intriguing discourse on economics; outdated and dull, but informative.”
Madelaine Whalen wrote this review Friday, December 9, 2011. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
“Very long and not riveting, but very readable. ”
Gary t wrote this review Tuesday, November 29, 2011. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
“What we study today has its foundation in a simple, logical, philosopher from Scotland. It gets into a significant amount of detail which I don't mind but the substance of the book is beyond priceless.”
Aaron Hatch wrote this review Thursday, July 7, 2011. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
“Good as a part of ecnonomics history, but not applicable to the current economy.”
Eldars Loginovs wrote this review Monday, July 4, 2011. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
“It is a different view of economics than America is using today. It has a fantastic foundation. He goes to great lengths to prove everything he says. It basically shows what a free market economy looks like.”
Alex wrote this review Monday, June 20, 2011. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
“Phenomenal. While few will exercise the discipline to actually read this entire volume, Smith's work is more than merely a defense of laissez faire economics, but a treatise on economics and its entire breadth of impact - religion, racism, wealth and poverty, war, government debt, governmental systems, and more. You might be surprised at what he says.”
Joey O wrote this review Saturday, May 28, 2011. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
“Difficult reading for me but only because I hade little interest after starting. It was written for a different time but it seems from my perspective that many of the practices are still in practice. I have a better understanding of corporate roots now.”
David D. wrote this review Tuesday, February 15, 2011. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No2 of 2 members found this review helpful““The desire of food is limited in every man by the narrow capacity of the human stomach; but the desire of the conveniences and ornaments of building, dress, equipage, and household furniture, seems to have no limit or certain boundary.”
BluecrowX wrote this review Wednesday, January 19, 2011. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
So goes the most powerful and influential approbation for a liberal economy governed by the laws of human greed. Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nation is not just a justification of an open market model, a concept not unfamiliar to those of us living in a capital driven world. But a break from the traditional humanist view of progress. That the best method of improvement in the human condition is not the august philosophy of Plato and Aristotle, not the fervent preaching of abbots, but the simple, slight and shameless inducement of wanton desire. By freeing those instincts ingrained in each of us, Smith persuasively shows us the steps in which such liberty can lead to the benefit of all.
It is difficult to read the Wealth of Nation without peering over into the passing storm of the recent economic crisis. The Anglo-Saxon model, much of its founding principles are synonymous with those presented in this book, has been the pillar of yesterday’s crumbling economic framework. If in the information driven age of the 21st century, such insatiable hunger of wealth has meant the pretension to richness and the unemployment of so very many people; what would have it meant in the opaque and secluded Georgian and Victorian era? Would Smith have argued for more liberalisation today for his home country in the face of growing competitions from the East, and falling productivity in the West?
I believe the answer is yes. By liberalising the market as Smith has argued, it is only the consumers who shall benefit. For Smith, the failure of today’s crisis would not be with the free-market principle, but with the oversight of the government. It is suggested in the Wealth of Nations that it is the government who should safeguard and intervene in cases of unjust and irregular financial dealings. If in the Wealth of Nations corrupt officials of the East India Company should be sacked, I have no doubt those fraudsters, who beggared the nation with intemperate investments would face equal scorn had Smith returned with another volume.
Finally, Wealth of Nations offer a few consolation for today’s government in Britain and others. The last book describes the means in which the national debt may be relieved, and the direction such government should take to further the potential of its economic development. A very apt passage in which Smith states that a country should quite literally, not punch above its own weight, almost moonlights the current direction taken by the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition. And it is through education and public infrastructure this continuance of wealth creation may be ensured, for me and for my home country, there may be a lesson to be learned.”
