Galbraith Sr mentions that the state at the time was run by George III. That 
would be enough for me to think that total chaos might be better than a system 
run by him.

>"Some see the Invisible
>Hand quote as applying to only international trade issues (the
>specific topic) while others generalize it."
>
>Yes, Jim, I remember Rothschild making exactly that point, but I am
>not quite following it. Thank you for making this point.
>
>Smith makes reference to the invisible hand in the course of a
>critique of mercantilism?
>
>But then why would not that argument for freer trade apply more
>generally? Or why would it have special force in the critique
>
>of mercantilism in particular?
>
>I do remember her suggesting that some of Smith's skepticism of state
>intervention resulted from his suspicion that the state would most
>likely intervene on the
>
>behalf of business monopolies!
>
>So is the point that freer trade can bolster the wealth of nations to
>the extent that it undermines state control of the economy in the
>service of established monopolies?
>
>OK I'll have to reread Rothschild.
>
>
>LR
>
>


_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to