Patrick Peterson's Reviews > An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations

An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith
Rate this book
Clear rating

by
2173066
's review

it was amazing
bookshelves: clssics, economics, history, libertarian, philosophy, political, reference
Read 2 times. Last read 2005.

2013 One of the best and most important books ever written. Period.

Smith made a few mistakes, but he was a pioneer and what he did for the world with this book and his other book, Theory of Moral Sentiments, are incomparable gifts to mankind.

His opening analysis of "division of labor" as being the crucial key to increases in productivity and wealth production was not only a monumental insight but also one of the most pleasurable and neato things I have ever read. You may have heard of his example of the pin factory. Well, it is right there in the beginning of the book, and just fascinating and as easy to read, these 242 years after he first published it, as it shook the world then.

His arguments for free trade vs. government controls/mercantilism are excellent, and just as applicable and important today as they were when written. Oh, if Donald Trump and more of his supporters would only take an hour or so to read the relevant passages, they might see the ultimate folly of their rhetoric and actions that penalize the American public with higher tariffs...

I had the opportunity to read this book in college during my Junior year January "Interterm" Tutorial with a wonderful Religion Professor, Dr. Young. He was not expert in the economics aspects of this book, but he was great at keeping me focused, honest and able to persevere in finishing it in the one month time allotment. That was significant since it is a 700+ page book and there are sections (for instance "Digression on Silver") which were not too easily or productively gone through.

Then again about 2005 I was very happy to have found a group in San Jose, CA near where I lived which went through and discussed the book over a several month time frame. These were graduate and undergraduate students in economics, so that aspect of the book was given much more careful analysis. Also very helpful in getting more meaning and detail out of the book.

Before and since then, I have noted many varying scholars who have praised or (usually foolishly) condemned Smith for his great insights and central importance to, though sometimes setting an unproductive or worse course (for instance his very misleading and not helpful Labor Theory of Value, promotion of Usury Laws and other ideas that contradicted his sound general adherence to laissez faire principles. Scholars who I especially admire on their comments on Smith's WoN are:
Ludwig Mises
Gene Epstein
Dierdre McCloskey
Jerry Muller
Dan Klein
Russ Roberts
Caroline Breashears
and others.
Others who really got Smith wrong, &/or ran with his most foolish ideas:
Karl Marx
Abba Lerner
and most all other socialists.

Updated: 2024-03-03
27 likes · flag

Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations.
Sign In »

Reading Progress

January 1, 1976 – Started Reading
January 30, 1976 – Finished Reading
2005 – Started Reading
2005 – Finished Reading
January 19, 2013 – Shelved
January 19, 2013 – Shelved as: clssics
January 19, 2013 – Shelved as: economics
January 19, 2013 – Shelved as: history
January 19, 2013 – Shelved as: libertarian
January 19, 2013 – Shelved as: political
January 19, 2013 – Shelved as: philosophy
January 19, 2013 – Shelved as: reference

Comments Showing 1-3 of 3 (3 new)

dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Lloyd (new)

Lloyd Russell Almost makes me want to read it...but not quite. No offense!


Patrick Peterson It is a very long book, and some parts are quite tedious - the "Digression on Silver" is widely acknowledged to be a virtual waste.

But if you just read the first 50 pages or so, I bet you would be so happy and enriched, you might actually thank me.... REALLY!!!! It is THAT good and pathbreaking... and easy.


message 3: by Lloyd (new)

Lloyd Russell You make a compelling argument. Unfortunately, you made it to the wrong guy. Good try, though.


back to top