Originally posted by hawkiye
I think Marx is rightly seen as having understood economics
Well there you have it folks some people stil think Marxs philosphy (who got his ideas on the division of labor among other things from Adam Smith by
the way) is sound despite its repeated failure through out history...
Perhaps you could quote Hayek for us on those claims and then perhaps we can discuss it in context?
As for the Friedman quote did you look that up on the internet? LOL! No one has been 100% right about anything and I never said I agreed with
everything any of them said. But of course that is is typical tactic for those who wish to avoid facts evidence and meaningful discussion. You still
have not told us what you think was right about Adam Smith. I guess it would be too much trouble to pull something from his 5 volumes even though it
is full of contradictions ;like how in book 1 he celebrates the division of labor as the purvayor of societal wealth and in book 5 he condemns it...
He fails to acknowldge his mentors such as Turgot and Hutchinson and stole much from Cantillon.
Smith claimed to invent the concept of laissez-faire, ignoring earlier expressions of the concept by his own teachers and others such as Grotius,
Pufendorf, and Boisguilbert among other French laissez-faire purveyors of thought in the seventeenth century...
Also why did Smith contradict his earlier celebrations of individual freedoms and laissez-fair capitalism with advocation of a progressive income
tax/theft incidently which is one of the planks of the communist manifesto?
"The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expence of the rich; and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage
all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. A tax upon house-rents, therefore, would in general fall heaviest upon the rich; and in this
sort of inequality there would not, perhaps, be any thing very unreasonable. It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public
expence, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion." Adam Smith book 5 Wealth of Nations..
Since you refuse to give any specifics of why you exalt Adam Smith above all others I suspect it is this sort of communistic thinking that endears you
edit on 24-11-2012 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)
I see you are basically illiterate.
I never said his political philosophy was right, in fact I said his utopian solutions were wrong.
What I SAID was that he is seen to understand economic theory... and hey, I'm not the only one that says that:
I also am not a huge fan of Adam Smith, as he's portrayed by the right, unlike most Libertarians, who misquote his invisible hand line ad nauseum.
I assume you think Marx's belief in:
"A progressive tax system which places primary reliance on the personal income tax"
Is socialism as well...?
As for your desire for me to quote Hayek, so you can discuss him with me... are you familiar with him or not??
As he is one of the economists you claim is always on the right side of history, like Ron Paul - or - let me guess - you just pasted his name from the
Ron Paul forum, where other people like yourself simply parrot this BS and pretend your all super clever to one another...?
Tell me this, do Libertarians believe the government should feed, house and clothe the poor?
Oh and hey, Adam Smith, the guy you dislike...
His work lived on, and he became a guiding light whose love of liberty helped make the 19th century the most peaceful period in modern history.
Now some two hundred years after Smith’s death, economists have identified technical errors in his work, yet his reputation towers over seductive
challengers like Karl Marx and John Maynard Keynes. Nobel Laureate George Stigler dubbed Smith “the patron saint of free enterprise.” H.L.
Mencken declared: “There is no more engrossing book in the English language than Adam Smith’s ‘The Wealth of Nations.’” He’s a major
presence as liberty is being reborn at the dawn of the 21st century.
But sure, what would the biggest Libertarian website know about what Libertarians believe?
edit on 25-11-2012 by longlostbrother because: (no reason given)