Michael

Just read through your comments on Smith, and the SHOE replies you got,
including

<<I do not find much usefulness for Michael's quotes on Smith from his new
book.  The quotes don't tell us who he believes better qualifies for the
title, "Founding Father of Modern Economics."  Perhaps, now he can go ahead
and tell us his nominee with the requisite explanation.>>

In reply to this latter I offer three quotes, taken from memory, but I can
source on request

1)  From the I-Ching (c. 500 BC)  

"The markets must be kept open, in order to encourage production"

2)  From Ibn Khaldun, (c. 1350 quoting Anushirwan, c. 550)

"The great princes should not engage in trade"

3)  From Sher Shah Suri (c. 1530, in an address to his peasantry)

"Today I give you your freedom, do whatever you can to better yourselves".

(As I recall he goes on the explain to his soldiery that their prosperity
and that of the state as a whole depended upon the productivity of the
peasantry.  He then rode off to kill a few of the most exploitative local
landlords)

My problem with the criticism cited at the head of this mail is that, as far
as basic matters to do with the invisible hand and such like go, I do not
see anything modern about "Modern Economics".  

The invisible hand idea was already nearly as old as the hills when Smith
wrote, and history had judged its successes and failures on many previous
occasions.

The tactic of presenting Smith as a ‘founding father’ of something called
‘modern economics’ seems to me to place a block in the way of anyone seeking
to learn some of the lessons that all that previous history might teach us

Rob Tye