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