Compare And Contrast Adam Smith And Adam Smith

With settlements turning into colonies in the majority of countries across the world, great scholars in the late 1700s wrote not only about topics like religion and evolution, but also now wrote more on topics like trade, taxes and currency. Most growing economies were faced either with the issue that trade flow was increasing faster than they could deal with, or the issue that there was little to no upsurge in productivity to accommodate the growing populations. Two of many economic philosophers at the time presented resonant ideas that helped to better infant industries. Adam Smith, who was a physiocrat and key figure in the Scottish Enlightenment, wrote his most famous work, “The Wealth of Nations.” A few years later, Alexander Hamilton was appointed the Secretary of …show more content…
While both social theorists worked towards strengthening America’s economy, Hamilton believed the government would influence more change while Smith believed that the manufacturers themselves would influence more change.
The success of Adam Smith’s ideal economy is rooted in the concept of man himself creating and expanding a system of trade with little intervention from the government. Smith emphasizes the autonomous method of division of labor because it creates efficiency while simultaneously powering the economy. He opens up his text by saying, “The greatest improvement in the productive power of labour, and the greater part of the skill, dexterity, and judgment with which it is anywhere directed, or applied, seem to have been the effects of the division of labour.”1 By dividing up tasks in a labor force, a worker can become really great at one task rather than be average at many tasks. When a worker improves on his task, this increases efficiency and leads to more innovativeness in his specific field. In terms of competing with other countries, Smith feels that this method will work because “[t]he separation of different trades and