arraya wrote: “The invisible hand is a silly superstition on par with santa clause.”
Can you explain? I have read some explanations of Adam Smith’s invisible hand concept. It sounded like a significant advance in our understanding of our economic relationships. You’re saying that it is meaningless. Can you lay out what you think the economic “invisible hand” theory says, and then lay out your argument that shows it’s bunk?
(Oh, I know people who like less income redistribution argue one way, and those who advocate more income redistribution argue another way. I don’t count political opinions as knowledge, never mind as an economic rationale.)
