Adam Smith on Who Benefits?
American Enterprise Institute Dr. Mark J. Perry is a
full professor of economics at the Flint campus of The University of Michigan,
where he has taught undergraduate and graduate courses in economics and finance
since 1996. Starting in the fall of 2009, Perry has also held a joint
appointment as a scholar at The American Enterprise Institute HERE
Quotation of the day: Adam Smith
From Adam Smith’s “An Inquiry into the Nature
and Causes of the Wealth of Nations":
”Consumption is
the sole end and purpose of all production; and the interest of the producer
ought to be attended to only so far as it may be necessary for promoting that
of the consumer. The maxim is so perfectly self-evident that it would be absurd
to attempt to prove it. But in the mercantile system the interest of the
consumer is almost constantly sacrificed to that of the producer; and it seems
to consider production, and not consumption, as the ultimate end and object of
all industry and commerce.”
Comment
It is also quite common to find
commentators quoting the number of jobs “created” by this or that public investment
that the state has attracted by it agencies lobbying multi-national corporation
or being lobbied by professional lobbyists or professional pressure groups. The
number of jobs potentially “created” becomes a controversial agenda when local
interests or the professional interest activists get wind of a “development”.
These arguments forget that employment is
a cost in an investment; it is not automatically a benefit. It is about production not consumption,
which is the more important criteria in making decisions. Does the investment benefit
consumers? That is the prime
interest.
Though in benefitting the producers
involved it may also benefit them as consumers in regard to their incomes and the
expenditures they necessarily make from them. It is therefore a matter
of judgement, which is down to specific cases.
For example the modern road suspension bridge
over the River Humber in England is still used well below capacity, even 20
years later. It is a bridge to ‘nowhere’.
It was built with taxpayers’ money,
largely by what US voters call “pork barrel politics” (I think!), to support
local Labour Party interests. Clearly
it benefited bridge-building producer interests at the expense of alternative
projects that may have benefitted consumers’ more.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home