On 4/11/2011 11:06 PM, James C.W. Ahiakpor wrote:
> Posner attributes to Keynes the insight that "that
> consumption is the 'sole end and object of all economic
> activity,' because all productive activity is designed to
> satisfy consumer demand either in the present or in the
> future" (p. 2).  He does not realize that Adam Smith's
> /Wealth of Nation/ said that earlier: "consumption is the
> sole end and purpose of all production ... The maxim is so
> perfectly self-evident, that it would be absurd to attempt
> to prove it."

It is not clear to me that these statements are identical
(or in either case, true).  Smith seems to have more of
a normative intent, and Keynes seems to be making more of
a positive claim.  For Smith his (nomative?) claim is
"self-evident", which I find a bit short of an argument, as
I blithely exert my labor to send this message to the list.
(Either this not production, or I have an inadequately
tautological notion of consumption, or I am morally bent.)
For Keynes his (positive?) claim is "obvious", which also
falls short of a discussion.  Their attempts to delimit
their claims by speaking of "production" or "economic activity"
only serves to highlight the difficulties.

fwiw,
Alan Isaac