• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Wealth of Nations

 
 
 
ksen

ksen

Contributor
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
6,540
Location
Florida
Basic Beliefs
Calvinist
I've read excerpts here and there mostly back in college. But dismal has convinced me to read the whole thing and I just happen to have a copy at home.

Anyone want to read it with me?
 
ksen said:
I've read excerpts here and there mostly back in college. But dismal has convinced me to read the whole thing and I just happen to have a copy at home.

Anyone want to read it with me?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't waste your time. Economists have learned some things of over the last few centuries.

And unlike Marx, no one really clings to Adam Smith's outdated work as if it's inviolable scripture.
 
dismal said:
no one really clings to Adam Smith's outdated work as if it's inviolable scripture.
Click to expand...

lol

- - - Updated - - -

*ahem* anyways, well we can start with a foundation of Smith and move on to whomever you'd like me to read next.

Or you can suggest someone else's work.

I'm opening my reading schedule just for you my friend.
 
ksen said:
dismal said:
no one really clings to Adam Smith's outdated work as if it's inviolable scripture.
Click to expand...

lol

- - - Updated - - -

*ahem* anyways, well we can start with a foundation of Smith and move on to whomever you'd like me to read next.

Or you can suggest someone else's work.

I'm opening my reading schedule just for you my friend.
Click to expand...

Basic micro. Start there.

Haven't viewed it but my guess is this would be OK:

http://www.khanacademy.org/economics-finance-domain/microeconomics
 
No, no textbooks.

Let's go right to the source material.

Khan Academy :rolleyes:
 
ksen said:
No, no textbooks.

Let's go right to the source material.

Khan Academy :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

There is really no point in reading what Adam Smith wrote that has not stood the test of time. Unless you are trying to understand the state of economic thinking in 1776, not 2015.

As I mentioned before, there is not much controversy in basic micro and there's no point in looking at anything else in economics if you don't understand basic micro.
 
dismal said:
ksen said:
No, no textbooks.

Let's go right to the source material.

Khan Academy :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

There is really no point in reading what Adam Smith wrote that has not stood the test of time. Unless you are trying to understand the state of economic thinking in 1776, not 2015.

As I mentioned before, there is not much controversy in basic micro and there's no point in looking at anything else in economics if you don't understand basic micro.
Click to expand...

I know you don't think some liberal source could have anything of value but I'm recommending a tract that has sources.  Supply and Demand?

Just posted some stuff that dismal, as far as I know, has not yet responded.
 
The point of reading Smith, or any original source, is that you get to experience it for yourself and not have to rely on others that might only excerpt pieces that support their point of view.

I've taken plenty of economics classes in college. I know the textbook stuff already. I want to engage with the source documents.

I'll be posting my thoughts as I read. Comment or not as you see fit.
 
An Inquiry in the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations is worth the read if one has the time. Smith was an excellent observer of life during his time, and there are many fascinating asides liberally sprinkled throughout the text. I really cannot imagine any educated economist trying to dissuade anyone from reading this seminal work in the history of human thought.
 
ksen said:
The point of reading Smith, or any original source, is that you get to experience it for yourself and not have to rely on others that might only excerpt pieces that support their point of view.

I've taken plenty of economics classes in college. I know the textbook stuff already. I want to engage with the source documents.

I'll be posting my thoughts as I read. Comment or not as you see fit.
Click to expand...

I have seen economics professors blog about reading it and what holds up and doesn't, so if that's interesting to you that's great. I just don't think it's a great way to learn economics.
 
Think of it as me maximizing my education by reading the elite Smith instead of the diploma mill Khan.
 
ksen said:
dismal said:
no one really clings to Adam Smith's outdated work as if it's inviolable scripture.
Click to expand...

lol

- - - Updated - - -

*ahem* anyways, well we can start with a foundation of Smith and move on to whomever you'd like me to read next.

Or you can suggest someone else's work.

I'm opening my reading schedule just for you my friend.
Click to expand...

You should add Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy by Schumpeter to your reading list if you want to read a more modern economics classic.
 
funny aside: while looking for my wealth of nations copy I found my copy of Keynes right next to my Conan the Usurper
 
Not to post any spoilers... but you do realise why dismal and Axulus desperately don't want you to read Smith, right?
 
Yeah, I'm pretty sure he's going to say some things that wouldn't exactly jibe with current conservative economic principals, i.e. unions are fine.
 
Togo said:
Not to post any spoilers... but you do realise why dismal and Axulus desperately don't want you to read Smith, right?
Click to expand...

I didn't say I don't want him to read Smith. I said if he wants to learn basic economics his time would be better spent reading something that reflects current economic thinking since economic thinking has advanced in the last 200+ years.

The idea that someone who can't quite handle the concepts of week one of Econ 101 supply and demand curves is going to learn economics from reading Adam Smith is ludicrous.

If the goal is to come back with some killer propaganda along the lines of "ZMFOGO!!!11 don't you realize Adam Smith said X about unions" I have a prebuttal all set for that if it's something archaic economists no longer believe:

"Hey, dumbshit, Adam Smith wrote that 200+ years ago. Economics has advanced since then."
 
Economics was my minor in college so I feel ok with the week one Econ 101 arguments you keep busting out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom