What you need to do is revisit Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations....and understand what he stood for and what he believed in. What he didn't believe in was his country {Scotland) having all of their wealth flow overseas.
Wrong. That wasn't the primary reason for him authoring his book....but it was in fact a major personal motivation in doing so.
You may want to do a little research on his term "comparative advantage".
What you need to do is to refer to any other text related to economics. That this is the only one you bring up (ad naseum) is a pretty clear indicator that your claim of being well-read in Economics is yet another mischaracterization. More on-topic, Smith did not (and would not) call for attempting to preserve wealth by erecting any sort of barriers, he would (and did) call for doing so by creating an environment where there would be no reason to even consider alternatives.
I could quote Malthuse, David Ricardo, and many others. I choose Smith in that you can never denounce the source.
What is abundantly clear, you have only read certain snippets from the Wealth of Nations, maybe from certain right winged business professors, who have done a fine job of bastardizing the greatest economics piece ever written......the political Bible for laissez-faire economics (although the term laissez-faire was not introduced into the English Language until a century after the book was published).
It just pisses you off that Smith admitted that his system had many, many caveats....mainly innately inborn incumbant with the concept of greed.
He was 100% anti corporation...but pro small business (less than 100 people to be exact.) Imagine that.... a free market without the legal contracts of corporations. Isn't it interesting that the Boston Tea Party event was a direct revolution towards the East India Tea CORPORATION? Forboding? No?
Isn't it also interesting that under Smith's "invisible hand" he acknowledged that any labor contract between the employer and the employee would always result in a "collusive advantage" for the employer. Only back then...in his book...he called the employers "masters" and the employees "slaves". You, of course, wouldn't know this...because you never actually read his book.
And isn't it also interesting to note....Smith's biggest fear regarding his sytstem on growing wealth would be undermined and chafed by the "masters" collusion and manifestation of oligopolies and monopolies....a scene that has enveloped our system so badly today, that the government now has to financially bailout the very colluders, manipulators, and monopolists.
Ha. What a sorbid take late term capitalism has morphed itself to be. Indeed Smith warned of it....and Smith was dead nuts on the money. But those that question the present day model of the American Corporate state are somehow labeled protectionists, or far worse...even communists. I see it written all the time. Was Adam Smith actually an under cover liberal? Haaa!!.
Maybe my sharing with you the cold blooded truth on Adam Smith's system equates to "ad nauseum" as you like to say...but it is time for you enfettered free marketers to be shown the truth as to what has happened to our great and proud country.
To those that continue to buy the free market model encompassing globalization...... not to worry. After you and I have lived our gluttonous lives on the national credit card, it will be our grand kids that will have to deal with living in a 3rd world country shithole.
