The word value, it is to be observed, has two different meanings, and sometimes expresses the utility of some particular object, and sometimes the power of purchasing other goods which the possession of that object conveys. The one may be called 'value in use ;' the other, 'value in exchange.' The things which have the greatest value in use have frequently little or no value in exchange; and on the contrary, those which have the greatest value in exchange have frequently little or no value in use. Nothing is more useful than water: but it will purchase scarce any thing; scarce any thing can be had in exchange for it. A diamond, on the contrary, has scarce any value in use; but a very great quantity of other goods may frequently be had in exchange for it.
New Statue unveiled today...
The BBC report falls for all the right wing shite and claims of ownership of Smith and his legacy. Ignore it - it's balls and shit -- Smith was a figure of the Enlightenment - proto-capitalism - what we today would call capitalism he thoroughly despised - "a vile maxim of the masters of mankind: all for ourselves and nothing for other people". The BBC snippet doesn't mention the part in 'The Weath of Nations' where after praising the 'division of labour' for the benefits in productivity it brings, he then, hundreds of pages later, goes on to say that the very same process of labour divided will destroy human beings and turn them into creatures as stupid and ignorant as it is possible to be. And that, therefore, in any civilised society the government is going to have to take measures to prevent division of labour from proceeding to its limits.
I could say more - maybe another time.
Comments (5)
And there you touch the heart of the matter, or at least, the heart of political discourse - exactly how far should a government go in alleviating/interfering (choose your own word) in states of affairs which it, the government, supposing (doubtfully) that it represents the will of the people, wishes to change.
Those who claim on behalf of any government that such and such an action represents the will of the people need to answer a simple question: so what? Most people, me included, are wrong more often than not. On grounds of space and time, we must set aside for the moment exactly how any government supports the notion that they actually do represent that mysterious entity - the will of the people.
Given that full-time politics attracts, with some rare exceptions, the very worst dregs of society, I think a prudent man would insist that *any* governme, made up as it is, of rascals, do as little as possible beyond defending the country, maintaining a system of justice to uphold safety for the individual and a means of settling disputes, and finally, running the finances of the country in a manner that keeps the currency at a stable level.
Note my expression "as little as possible" which, of course, recognises that a government does have duties beyond the three fundamental ones I listed, for example, a civil society would do its best to alleviate the plight of 'the sick, the lame and the halt'. However, that does not necessarilly entail governmental interference where encouragement of existing private activities is all that is required.
Finally, I think one of the main differences between Smith and Marx (and I confess my paltry knowledge of both) is that the former merely described what he saw about him, where-as the latter went a step further and proscribed a system to change the state of affairs that he saw. There-in lies the difference between a wise man and a fool!
Posted by David Duff | July 5, 2008 9:42 AM
If ignorance is bliss then you make Buddha look like Ian Curtis, David.
Posted by dirigible | July 7, 2008 12:45 PM
Who is Ian Curtis?
Posted by David Duff | July 7, 2008 8:45 PM
David,
I hear there is a thing called Google
http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=Ian+Curtis&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a
I think you know that tho'.
Posted by Will | July 7, 2008 11:27 PM
Well, I don't see why I should have to waste my very valuable time doing research in order to understand a cryptic comment which would defy the best of Bletchley Park.
After all, I've got my Dahlias to tend to!
Posted by David Duff | July 9, 2008 5:46 PM