|
|
Back to UserFriendly Strip Comments Index
|
(Quasi)Philosophical Question of the Day | by nimdokk | 2002-07-09 11:12:40 |
| Adam Smith wrote of the |
by dire_lobo |
2002-07-09 16:00:58 |
"Invisible Hand" that would prevent abuses in a capitalist society (An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations - 1776)
"...every individual necessarily labours to render the annual revenue of the society as great as he can. He generally, indeed, neither intends to promote the public interest, nor knows how much he is promoting it. By preferring the support of domestic to that of foreign industry, he intends only his own security; and by directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be of the greatest value, he intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention. Nor is it always the worse for the society that it was no part of it. By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it. I have never known much good done by those who affected to trade for the public good. It is an affectation, indeed, not very common among merchants, and very few words need be employed in dissuading them from it." IMHO, the rise of multinational corporations combined with Reagan era greed effectively amputated the "invisible hand" and effectively justified immoral/unethical behavior. While we can't legislate the risk out of life, we as a people can and should regulate when abuses by the few have the ability to destroy the lives of the many.
However, when the "chosen son" of the heir apparent to Regan is the one calling for action, I and more than a bit suspicious...there is no evidence of rationality...
|
|
[ Reply ] |
|
|
[Todays Cartoon Discussion]
[News Index]
|
|
