Michael Short History Week 3

Michael Short History Week 3 - since that company has a...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Michael Short 10-15-09 History 1c From this weeks readings the article I found most interesting was “The Wealth Of Nations” by Adam Smith. This article was about economics and eventually got Adam Smith the title as “the father of economics”. One point of the article somewhat confused me, because I felt it contradicted itself on a certain level. In the article Adam Smith talks about how the government should not limit trade and let commerce go completely unrestricted and unchecked, because usually even if the government has the public’s best interests in mind, it works out bad for the public. Adam Smith discusses this point for a good portion of the article, but he also talks about how competition is good for the market and when a certain market is monopolized then there is no competition and lack of competition is a bad thing for the public. It’s a bad thing for the public, because
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: since that company has a monopoly they can inflate their prices and the public will be forced to pay that price because there is no one else selling that good. When he is talking about these monopolies he is referring to government made monopolies. What I am confused about is in a completely free and unrestricted market there will be times in different industries where one company becomes so powerful that they monopolize that industry. Without some sort of restriction these monopolies will mean no competition in that good and once again the company will be able to inflate prices with no interferences. Using this idea Adam Smith is against monopolies and restrictions on trade but I see no way of being able to have both of the wants of Adam Smith....
View Full Document

Ask a homework question - tutors are online