User Review - Flag as inappropriate
I think most of these reviews are Ron Paul supporters that dont really understand monetary theory AT ALL. No problem with that however, other than they project their own new version of what Adam Smith said. If they understood Adam Smith and John Maynard Keynes, they would realize that they espouse economic theories, not ideologies on the role of government.
Keynes doesnt disagree with at all Adam Smith; he expands on Adam Smiths theories (which were a good 100 years prior). Keynes and Smith are both capitalists and agree on basic tenants of capitalism, that a free market is an efficient means of allocating resources.
John Maynard Keynes, just as other economist such as Milton Friedman who espouse supply-side intervention, is prescribing solutions to anomalies in the free market in this landmark book. Keynes addresses how to repair or refocus a free market that veers off it's course (sound similar?).
Adam Smith, being a pioneer of economic philosophy, wasn't considering anomalies in free markets; he was defining free markets. Subsequent capitalist philosophers such as Keynes and Friedman expounded on the details and caveats of Smiths theories.
What Adam Smith actually advised was that the wrong interventions in a commercial market by government should be, first, reversed and secondly those wrong interventions should be avoided, and other interventions of governments should be encouraged. This is not the same thing as being against government intervention as a whole. He wasnt of the opinion ascribed to him by modern economists since the 18th century. In fact, Adam Smith advised that certain interventions, not in his time undertaken with much consistency by government, should be undertaken as soon as possible.
By understanding Adam Smith, people can understand Keynes and his theories. Keynes is just Adam Smith with 100 years of additional financial innovation to work from. Not to mention Adam Smith was around during feudalism, John Keynes during the industrial revolution.