It’s Not Easy, but We Can All Learn to Think like Adam Smith
To truly understand what a dynamic economy requires, we would do well to recover the 18th-century sensibility that understood dynamism as a social and cultural phenomenon as much as an economic one.
When the disciplines of economics and sociology were being invented in Britain 250 years ago, their progenitors such Adam Smith, David Hume, Adam Ferguson and others were preoccupied with how vibrant commercial activity and human behavior were related. Economic dynamism was not only about economic growth, money and the division of labour, though it was that, too. It was about how and why individuals make commerce succeed.
The father of modern economics, Adam Smith, memorably wrote in his 1776 ‘Wealth of Nations’ that merchants made much better land developers than the landed gentry. Their ‘habits… of order, economy, and attention,’ cultivated in urban markets, formed the bedrock on which their profit and successful projects were built.
The languid posture of the aristocrat, in Smith’s telling, is a good picture of stagnation. Satisfied with the status quo and unable to envision how their land could produce a profit, they live uncreatively and do not recognise innovation.
Stagnation is everywhere in the news now. And with good reason. Slowing productivity, aging infrastructure, fiscal imbalances, less innovation – these and related trends make dynamism in the UK seem more like a thing of the past than the future.
Economic Dynamism
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
Social Mobility Wins
When people live within an environment offering good jobs, good education, social networks, and a culture of self-improvement and hard work, they experience progress in a way that undercuts the philosophical rationale that socialists need to justify the policies they advocate.
Kevin Warsh and the Future of Fed Communication
Warsh is right that the Federal Reserve should not speak so loudly that it hears only its own echo.
