----------------- HES POSTING ----------------- 
Robin Neill wrote: 
 
> Smith pulled together a number of ideas from preceding writers, systematizing them into
a national economic policy stance that was about to become fashionable. His work was more
eclectic and agglomerative than this would suggest, but that added to his success, because
he provided his readers with nuanced debating points on both sides of some basic
questions.<
 
I don't think this view holds up under close scrutiny. I would state just two examples
that counter the claim of Smith as purely a literary synthesizer. Firstly, his development
of the division of labor and its overall effect on the development of world economies and,
secondly, his contributions on money. Concerning just this latter point, where in the
prior literature can one find so eloquent an explanation of how the development of money
substitutes by conserving on social capital add to the overall welfare of society?
 
Chas Anderson 
 
------------ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ------------ 
For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask]