The Wealth of Nations

>Considered to be first ever serious book on economics
>First published in 1776, the book offers one of the world's first collected descriptions of what builds nations' wealth, and is today a fundamental work in classical economics. By reflecting upon the economics at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, the book touches upon such broad topics as the division of labor, productivity, and free markets.

Anyone here read this book? Is it worth the read?
I figure the book doesn't say anything that hasn't been shortened down and restated somewhere else, so I was thinking maybe someone on Veeky Forums could give me a quick rundown.

I posted this on Veeky Forums earlier but just got replies about buying crypto.

Other urls found in this thread:

econlib.org/library/Smith/smWN1.html#B.I,
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Probably not worth your time OP. Whilst there is no doubt he is the heavyweight of free market economics, a lot of what he wrote had since been said a lot better by others. You'll probably find yourself thinking that you already know most of what hes written in the book simply because todays modern thought is completely based on him.

It focuses a lot on the society at the time to, which is which is what Smith is commenting on - a lot more descriptive and historical than purely theoretical.

eh, every economist after smith read him, so probably

Not OP but what should I read instead?

The Communist Manifesto

Yes but read an abridged version.

Capital in the 21st century

Any introductory economics textbook

>Capital in the 21st century

Is that book free market or keynesian or marxist?

After a quick google
>The Economist hailed Professor Piketty (the author) as "the modern Marx"

isn't it crazy how english alone was good enough to summarize all of basic economics in a paragraph or few.

>Whilst there is no doubt he is the heavyweight of free market economics
He neither supported Free market capitalism nor wrote about it. He just analysed the economic trends of his era.

econlib.org/library/Smith/smWN1.html#B.I, Introduction and Plan of the Work

opening paragraph, masterful writing

He's Keynesian (sort of) and admitted to having never read Marx's Capital

Some of the ideas are important to understand but that's no excuse to force yourself to read this piece of shit. Just focus on some secondary texts.

Funny how the "muh market" extremists who hate academics consider this eccentric fop their god.

post-keynesian
removal of force from capital and basic income is a friedman/libertarian concept too

>marx

dropped

>start with capital in the 21st century
This is equivalent to "start with infinite jest"

eh most high school grads are qualified enough to read infinite jest, most high school grads have also encountered basic economics and government

Chydenius wrote about the same shit as Smith a decade earlier but I guess it doesn't count as a "serious book on economics" because it was in Swedish.

Being qualified to read vs. comprehending the intellectual weight behind a work are different. Knowledge of "basic economics and government" isn't enough unless you want to skim it and be able to impress your less informed peers.

Rather read The National Gain by Anders Chydenius, published 11 years before the Wealth of Nations but includes literally everything from comprehensive classic liberalism to the invisible hand

This, it's incredible how neoliberals rewrite Smith to bring him to their side.