Saturday, April 04, 2015


jundalisay has authored an interesting new Blog HERE:
“This is the public site of the new proposed science of socio-economics or ‘Smithonomics’ or ‘Political Economy version 2.0′ which is meant as an alternative to  economics.”
“Economic science was created in the 19th century by intellectuals who championed the cause of businesses, which is to maximize profits based on the paradigm of personal utility or pleasure for the benefit of the self. This is in stark contrast to the old science of the Political Economy which advocated to maximize the benefit of the whole society through proper government policies and regulation and was based on moral philosophy.
I pass the above on to readers in the interrests of reporting new developments among economists that may have some value. I am not endorsing the author’s approach or opinions.
Earlier last year I received messsages from jundalisay about th writing of a “simplified version of Wealth Of Nations and was asked to comment on some extracts, which I did. I generally welcome the simplified text of WN as a fair representation of Smith’s overall meaning and analysis. 
This year the author’s work has been taken further and I believe it is developing into a worthwhile project, though I am not sure where the interest in Venezuela is taking Adam Smith’s political economy and moral philosophy.

Like Adam Smith, I am fairly pragmatic and not ideological.  If you follow the link and read it for yourself, I would be interested in your views, first on its presentation of Smith’s ideas, secondly on the applications provided, and thirdly on its quo vadis orientations.


Blogger Paul Walker said...


I have a couple of quick thoughts on this here:

11:27 pm  
Blogger Unknown said...

Thanks for mentioning my blog, Gavin. Regarding direction, I shifted from 'theoretical' Smith to 'practical' Smith after encountering his phrase in the Theory of Moral Sentiments: "Even if a person’s intentions are.. proper.. his merit will seem imperfect.. if they fail to produce their effects." In my case, I interpret it as: well-meaning economic theories are useless unless they can create predictions that can be proven. So, I just put my Smith-derived theories in a paper predicting what year the "Daedalian wings of quantitative easing" will crash and exactly how this crash will manifest, since QE is the biggest and most obvious violation of Smith's maxims. In fact, it violates all of Chapter 2 of Book 2. Most of my work now is in building Smith's free-trade system which uses his Labour Theory of Value, taxation maxims, etc. that can palliate disasters such as famines and economic crises. jundalisay

8:52 am  

Post a Comment

<< Home