Hello,

Many thanks for your thoughts on my blog.

Adam smith wrote a book The Wealth of Nations in 1776, since then Economics is recognised as a different subject. As a bench mark of economics Adam Smith shouldn’t be a pure economist. There are many examples of established economists who have come from different discipline. It applies other fields as well.

The main focus of The Wealth of Nations is ‘economic growth’ which is possible by the specialization of labour force/human resource. According to Smith, the wealth of nations is labour force and education accelerates productivity of labour where division of labour increase individual productivity and personal work satisfaction. Smith believes on laissez fair. In his book The Growth Map, Jim O’Neill has said that by 2035 China will have the largest economy, the US second and India third’. The reason behind this is the size of population in china and India that is labour force. So, it is better to see an economic sustainability through its labour’s condition, fairness and specialization.

‘‘Supply creates its own demand” that is Say’s law from which economics especially law of supply was developing through. I am not fully convinced on it but we have to consider an example of Harry Potter of J K Rowling. The author never worked out for its market before publishing the book. She just wrote in coffee shops and published the book. Another example is Korean song Gangnam Style of Psy. I think when supply came to the market then demand was created day bay day even unknowingly. Now they have been an issue of market. So it is a way of consumer’s choice rather than prejudice. Am I not right?

I have to say that economics is also a matter of efficiency. Let’s see the examples from law of cost and production, cost benefit analysis, welfare, utility and satisfaction, alternative uses of goods, production possibility frontier, investment, and profit all can tell about efficiency more or less.

Now we are passing through the Washington Consensus which also known as Globalization suggested by John Williamson. But now due to intolerable inequality it has been sharply criticised by many economists including Professor Joseph Stiglitz, Professor Thomas Piketty and others. So, what I believe is no thought is without alternative, neither static it is. Time and need play an important role to bring change.

‘Supply creates its own demand, ‘that is Say’s law from which economics especially law of supply was developing through. I am not fully convinced on it but we have to consider an example of Harry Potter of J K Rowling. The author never worked out for its market before publishing the book. She just wrote in coffee shops and published. Another example is Korean song Gangnam Style of Psy. I think when supply came to the market then demand was created incredibly day by day even unknowingly.

If I have to say, economist and principles of economics are equally responsible to have not satisfactory result from the economic development. So there is still something need to be considered because the World, now, is in transition of humanity. For the sake of future, new setting of the state is needed because, for example, even education: academic institutions are selling their certificates at higher costs and the cases is judged in line with man-made law that is designed by the same group who want to protect their interest. That ends the hope of the poor. Justice is denied. Today’s intolerable inequality is state supported. Because super managers are allowed to create discriminatory pay rate policy and gender pay gap. A single decision of super-managers is enough to allocate resources. There is no any check and balance on self-awarded nature of human greed. I would like to remember ‘‘how much land (property) does a man need’’ by Leo Tolstoy. We need to protect the society.

Management guru Professor Henry Mintzberg says- this is not a failure of economics. It is sheer failure of management. So he further says ‘The triumph of capitalism was the triumph of balance over imbalance. In turn capitalism now seems to be getting out of balance’’. Unileaver’s CEO Paul Polman says- ‘‘Capitalists are big threat of capitalism…it is time to consider new models for…conscious, moral or inclusive capitalism’’. This is the reality of present capitalism.

If I have to say, economist and principles of economics are equally responsible to have not satisfactory result from the economic development. So there is still something need to be considered because the World, now, is in transition of humanity.

Finally I would like to add a quotation of Einstein ‘‘those world will not be destroyed by those who do evil, but by those who watch and do nothing.’’

This is the world of multi-ism. So it does not mean everybody should have same thought. So I don’t think there is any misconception around the World. Thought is dynamic. Vision may vary whatever the colour glasses have.

I value your thought. Thank you again.

Feature Image: FIRE

(This is my reply to a comment by williambean2014 on economic thoughts on my blog. William, I think, is a philosopher. I really admire his thoughts and love to read his posts. His blog is worth checking out)

Advertisements