[CONTENT REDACTED BY REQUEST OF THE AUTHOR]
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
It was Barnard Mandeville who said, “Private vice makes public virtue.”
David Ricardo’s claim to fame was arguing that unregulated international trade benefits all.
First came Bernard Mandeville, then Adam Smith, then David Ricardo.
You overlooked the progenitor of the above crackpots, Thomas Malthus.
The man that argued , people should be kept at subsistence levels to keep the population in check. Another of his brilliant ideas , outlaw contraception to limit population growth.
Bunch of academic idiots who caused millions to suffer over more than a century by promulgating nitwitted ideas to justify starvation wages.
This rebuttal by Oscar Levy is a good illustration of jewish baffle gab.
A deluge of words and not a drop of sense.
No Fred, Malthus argued that the laws of nature would keep people at subsistence level unless they were constrained by restrictions on fertility, such as marriage and property.
Malthus was contemporary with David Ricardo. Here are the dates:
Smith …. 1723-1790
Malthus .. 1766-1834
Ricardo .. 1772-1823
Ricardo is the only one of them — so far as I know — that was a Jew. As usual, the Jew stretches the limits of some line of thinking invented by non-Jews.
Malthus’ observation about population outstripping the possibility of supporting it seems commonsensical on its face, but at the time when Malthus made the observation poverty in Britain was due not to overpopulation but to lopsided distribution of wealth, which the free market promoted by Mandeville, Smith, Ricardo, and Malthus himself, tends to exacerbate.
Etienne, you’re technically correct.
He stood by, in nodding agreement, while Parliament used his concept to block pro-worker legislation, like removing the Anti-combination laws (preventing unions and co-ops) and the Corn Laws (preventing the importation of cheap American grain).
His concept was used in a circular fashion. “The workers will just overpopulate to starvation levels, so we should just keep them at that level and not do anything to mitigate their poverty. If they have more money they will just populate more “(Which is the opposite of reality. Ppl with more money tend to populate less). He didn’t raise his voice to oppose this.
How marriage or property will prevent overpopulation is beyond me.
Billions seem to do just fine without either one.
“poverty in Britain was due not to overpopulation but to lopsided distribution of wealth, which the free market promoted by Mandeville, Smith, Ricardo, and Malthus himself, tends to exacerbate.”
Exactly! Nothing like a doctrine that keeps wages low and profits high.
“the free market promoted by Mandeville, Smith, Ricardo, and Malthus himself, tends to exacerbate.”
There wasn’t a ‘free market’, as there was a plethora of laws and constraints. Like the death penalty for forming unions or workers associations. Corn Laws to protect domestic grain producers, keeping food prices high (another concept supported by Malthus’ doctrine).
A totally ‘free market’ can’t exist. We’d have code clerks selling out a nations secrets to the highest bidder, total anarchy. Restrictions have to exist at some level.
The content presented at this web site thewhitenetwork-archive.com is the sole property of the program host and/or writer and The White Network. All rights reserved.
Before copying or re-posting anything from this site, please refer to our Copyright and Re-posting Policy.
Before commenting, please refer to our Comment Policy.