Adam Smith: The Grandfather Of Economics

Far too simplistic. Most of the things discussed, especially that wealth comes from production and the role of capital in it, were known by economists though in a pre-capitalist society before Adam Smith, by William Petty, Richard Cantillon, Quesnay and Turgot. Does not really explain why Smith is often regarded the father of economics.

Yes starting from Adam Smiths olden to Neo we the globe has been trying a great capitalist move of philosophical short or long term zeroing,great inequality removal to remove the olden theory to production,hence we reached the edge while there will be no jobs so could this be told that we will be lowering the branding and all the hotchptoch to reach the high level quality achievement and more to Agri than that of global centraluzed industrialization?
Reply.

Yes Adam Smith was the biblical Adam ,Karl Marx was Caine Smith(that want to kill his brother, no matter of the consequences), and Keines was Abel Smith (the guy that want to do the right thing even if don't understand why is right), this is a biblical story, not because the good guys wins, but because the winning part become the good guys, no matter how morally questionable are their claims.

Great summary. Thanks for the content

Adam Smith's groundbreaking ideas paved the way for modern economics – a must-watch for anyone interested in economic history!

Economics has been studied in India since long before Adam smith's ancestors were living in caves. Read about arthashastra. A book eastimated to be written in the 2nd century bce😂

I actually read WON, and this quote floored me (something for the hardcore to think about): "Whenever the legislature attempts to regulate the differences between masters and their workmen, its
counsellors are always the masters. When the regulation, therefore, is in favour of the workmen, it is
always just and equitable; but it is sometimes otherwise when in favour of the masters."

Economics is so interesting. Its human behavour quantified in numbers

Thanks sir..very interesting and highly informative video.

adam smith plagiarised imam ghazali...?

Is it Mercantilism

just finished reading parts of book I: division of labour and principles that gave rise to division of labour. What i found surprising or rather intriguing was the idea of delegating certain duties to certain someone or a group of people. Pretty much where we are now, I'd like to think that that has been considered somewhat as a natural flow of process when you're involved with large and heavy projects. You create plan, divide it among people and have each do their own task. Such a thought did not occur or perhaps wasn't considered a norm at all back in the days. People just like to do their own thing. It tells me just how much we have taken things for granted, so much to the point we considered it as normal, when it took one man's book written in 1700s to create things. Adam smith is indeed a great man. I haven't even finished reading book I and here i am just marvelling at the brains of adam smith 😂😅😂

The father of economics is Xenophon, who defined the word

Better Video Than 800 i have already watched on the same topic

Be careful

Important persons inventors the educated are lost along with their abilities

How long for recovery after loss of human capital?

Supply chains are predictable

Understood?

Play predictable markets gdp

Explain the corilation of. World wars and economic volitility

Was there ever a continuation hinted at by the end of the video? Looked around in the Economics Explained archives and couldn't see it.

Always interesting, thank you.

So those with more money have more votes? That's a weird kind of democracy........

randomizing used gender in speech is a must

Very good explaination, though not great!

Where are all the Rightists who ought to criticize him for trusting in the Labor Theory of Value—some such seem quite willing to dismiss Marx completely therefor....

So Adam Smith was basically saying its ok to build tall, got it :)

The Illuminati was also formed in 1776 in Bavaria.

He would roll over his grave if he found out what capitalism has evolved to...

One part of Adam Smith's writing that, while extremely important, is largely ignored. This is his analysis of how the private ownership of nature (which political economists referred to as "land") effects the production and distribution of tangible wealth (as distinct from the financial claim on tangible wealth). Smith's analysis followed that of the French school of political economists, the physiocrats. The physiocrats offered an entry level analysis of land markets, an entry level analysis because they were writing during a period when commercial agriculture dominated the French economy. Thus, they spent no real time analyzing the same land market dynamics that existed in town and cities.

Here is what they all understood to be the case. Every parcel or tract of land has some potential annual rental value as determined by demand (i.e., market forces) directed by whatever restriction on use are imposed by government. With regard to agricultural land, they described the process by which rental value is based on fertility and other factors that make it possible for the same input of labor and capital goods to produce greater output of agricultural commodities. The difference between output on the best land versus the next base land is defined by the political economists as "rent." Less and less rent arises as land quality falls. At some point, land cannot be worked to produce enough output to justify the required labor and capital goods. The land market has then reached its "margin of production".

Later political economists began to apply the Smith-Physiocrat analysis to other land markets, to land that holds timber or subsurface mineral deposits. All sorts of locational advantages or disadvantages determine how much, if any, rent comes from locational advantage. Some, most prominently Henry George in the late 19th century, argued that as rent arises based on natural advantage or advantage created by privilege under law, rent rightfully belongs to society. George argued that rent should be publicly collected. And, once one turned over whatever rent was due, the individual (or business entity) had met any financial obligation to society. The taxation of earned income flows, of tangible assets and of commerce is by definition an unjust confiscation of private property.

Wenn er klüger gewesen wäre, hätte er seine Kinder verkauft.

Hi

Great content! What is the title of the next video about behavioural economics? Can't find it....

The depreciation of durable consumer goods does not exist in post-1900 economic theory. Of course Adam Smith never owned an automobile since he died in 1790. Educated people in the 21st century are not supposed to know how to apply algebra to economics.

Sharknado 5 is a cinematic masterpiece!

The Theory of Moral Sentiments by Adam Smith is probs in my top ten favorite books. I only read the Wealth of Nations because I had to for school so I didn't really end up with an emotional connection to it or anything.

His accent give me anxiety.

John Bezpiaty writing--Have you considered a video on economist Wilfredo Pareto? I believe his ideas were among the hampers to the economies of such places as Cleveland, Akron, Pittsburgh and Detroit.

BIG UP KIRKCALDY

All too often Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations is distorted in any reading without a solid working understanding of the impartial spectator in his Theory of Moral Sentitments (1759)

Easy is Boring man...The Gentle Men

Still watching Frank G Melbourne Australia 🇦🇺 ❤️

What was his stance on market intervention?

i have discovered the nature of money that would provoke the gold and cryptocurrencies market crash. If you buy put options on gold and with your influence make my theory on money known provoking the gold market crash you would become rich. Being everything else the same a country with no gold is wealthier than a country with gold that protects the mineral inside a vault. Being everything else the same imagine a country with a baker, a fishmonger and a singer with no gold and another with a baker, a fishmonger and a guard to protect gold inside a vault. Which one lives better? Which one is wealthier? The country with no gold is wealthier because the baker and fishmonger get entertained by the singer for their money but the country with gold have to work to pay the guard to protect a mineral that offers no wellbeing or wealth because is useless inside a vault. An analogy would be an innocent kid after saving his pocket money buys a bicycle and his father tells him that he can store the bicycle in a garage unused to sell it in the future, but the rent of the garage would cost him some of his pocket money or he can use and enjoy the bicycle. Which option would the kid choose? There is not benefit in buying to sell because no value is added. Do you understand? The gold becomes wealth when is used, sparing the cost of protection. Because gold is increasingly more expensive to dig out as there is less underground and is increasingly cheaper as there is more on offer overground there would be a point when nobody would be mining the mineral. How much cost the taxpayers to protect gold? Cryptocurrencies are a number but money is transferable debt, a number and a name. Who would sell last? capitalist or communist? Humanity is throwing the money to the rubbish bin protecting a mineral valuable for its intrinsic usefulness in jewellery and manufacturing.

What is the difference between
ZeroSumGame vs
WinWin Game ?

What is the difference between
ZeroSumGame vs
WinWin Game ?