#AdamSmith, #WealthOfNations, and #CornLaws!
What more could you possibly want on a Saturday morning? (IV.v.b) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets

Yes, it’s the Digression Concerning the Corn Trade and Corn Laws! We can barely contain ourselves long enough to remind you that “corn” doesn’t mean 🌽 It means the principal cereal crop of a nation. (We keep saying so because we keep forgetting.) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
#TLDR on #AdamSmith’s thoughts on the Corn Laws:

They’re bad. (IV.v.b.1) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
Corn merchants can be broken down into four groups. Smith loves to break things down into groups.
1) Inland traders
2) Importers
3) Exporters
4) Transporters (IV.v.b.2) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
If inland traders raise their prices higher than supply and demand will allow, they’ll discourage consumption beyond “thrift and good management.” People will go hungry and crops will rot.

That's bad. (IV.v.b.3) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
If inland traders don’t raise prices high enough, people will overbuy, traders will lose profits, and the food will run out before the end of the season and people will go hungry.

That's bad. (IV.v.b.3) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
Careful attention to supply and demand and sensible pricing means that inland traders get the best profit and the people don’t starve.

It's the #InvisibleHand at work. That's good! (IV.v.b.3) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
If it were possible to have a monopoly on corn, a merchant might destroy crops to raise prices. But it’s too hard to do this with corn—too many merchants, too much corn. (IV.v.b.4) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
You don’t get dearth and famine from inland merchants colluding over prices.

You get dearth from war and bad weather.

You get famine from government interference. (IV.v.b.5–6) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
When the government sets prices for corn, they either keep corn off the market ➡ early famine, OR encourage people to buy too much too soon ➡ end-of-season famine.

People don't like it, but free trade is the only solution. (IV.v.b.7) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
When the govt interferes and famine results, everyone blames the corn merchants, not the government.

They seem, to Smith, to be the most hated of all merchants in history. (IV.v.b.8–10) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
"Our ancestors seem to have imagined" they could save money by cutting out the middleman.

We, the SmithTweeters, regret to fill you in about the prejudices of your descendants, Dr. Smith. (IV.v.b.11) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
Middlemen have always seemed to consumers like they make money by doing nothing but increasing the cost of goods they buy before reselling them. (Just ask @mungowitz!) But what middlemen do is bring resources to where they are more valued. (IV.v.b.11) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
Where resources are most valued might be another time or another place. Middlemen know they can make a profit by carrying corn to where it's needed or holding corn until it's needed, and then charging more because it's needed more. (IV.v.b.11–21) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
The prejudice against middlemen resulted in regulating agriculture very differently than manufacturing:
Manufactures were forbidden to sell their wares directly. Farmers were required to. (IV.v.b.12–14) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
These regulations prevented not only the division of labor but the development of land.

That makes corn more expensive, which was the opposite of what the laws intended! Oooooops. (IV.v.b.17) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
Treating corn merchants like any other wholesale dealers would help ensure we use our land, our corn, our money, and our time better. We'd all be better off! (IV.v.b.18–21) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
Adam Smith thinks George III gets some things wrong in the corn laws.

American SmithTweeters agree! (IV.v.b.23–26) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
The corn laws are like laws against witchcraft. They’re irrational and they blame people for bad things that they are not causing. The rational thing is free trade. (IV.v.b.26) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
#AdamSmith discusses the mathematics of politics for three paragraphs.
Then he says, “I have no great faith in political arithmetic.”
Moving on. (IV.v.b.27–30) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
Importers of foreign corn increase supply and lower prices.

That’s good!

Corn farmers and merchants disagree for reasons Smith has been explaining for some time now, but high import duties lead to want and scarcity. (IV.v.b.32–35) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
Counterintuitively, exporters help keep supplies up at home.

Unless farmers are allowed to export, they’ll be too cautious about planting more than they can sell. Failed crops, etc. will lead to an undersupply. (IV.v.b.36) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
We’ve always been nicer to exporters than importers or inland merchants. Maybe because it’s fun to charge high prices to foreigners?
(You should see our international SmithTweeting rates!) (IV.v.b.38) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
In case you're not sure, Smith still thinks free trade is the answer. Forbidding farmers from selling goods to the best market (home or overseas) is unjust as well as unproductive. (IV.v.b.39) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
Why keep regulating? As with religion, we think our own interest is so great the government should push people around to protect it. We build bad laws and worse systems and do dumb things like persecuting "witches". (IV.v.b.40) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
https://t.co/dc9Y96eoj0
[That’s some epic #SmithSnark. We bet #DavidHume drew little hearts in the margin by that paragraph.] (IV.v.b.40) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
Merchants who import grain in order to export it somewhere else are basically banned in England.

That's bad.

A country that serves as a storehouse will never starve! (IV.v.b.41–42) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
Another #TLDR: Stop praising the corn laws and start treating agriculture more like manufacturing. (IV.v.b.43–53) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
One more time. Corn Laws Bad. Free Trade Good!

Good Digression. Good job, everyone. See you tomorrow! #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets

More from @AdamSmithWorks

More from Law

This is what he wants to do.

No matter how this trial plays out, the US will remain divided between those who choose truth, Democracy, and rule of law and the millions who reject these things.

1/


The question is how to move forward.

My mantra is that there are no magic bullets and these people will always be with us.

Except for state legislatures, they have less power now than they have for a while.

2/

The only real and lasting solutions are political ones. Get Democrats into local offices. Get people who want democracy to survive to the polls at every election, at every level.

It’s a constant battle.

3/

Maybe I should tell you all about Thurgood Marshall’s life to illustrate how hard the task is and how there will be backlash after each step of progress.

4/

Precisely. That's why Thurgood Marshall's life came to mind.

We are still riding the backlash that started after the Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education.

That's why I keep saying there are no easy
A Call for Help!
1. we have a petition/open letter for the WHO
https://t.co/Bie8pUy7WJ
2. 372 people signed it but we want to boost it
3. I post link ascomment on related YT videos
Tks @KevinMcH3 for the tip
4. You can help by liking the comments
5. That will increase visibility!


6. Links for YT videos with comments are here
1. China curtails hunt for virus origins
https://t.co/NhcYdtsd2Y
2. China: nearly 500,000 may have been infected in Wuhan
https://t.co/KRUQ5hFrii
3. WHO becomes US-China battleground | DW Documentary
https://t.co/8ah8M8bpiB


4. Gravitas: The 'hidden hunt' for COVID-19 origins
https://t.co/hHhhUqgPYt
5. Seeking the invisible: hunt for origins of deadly Covid-19 coronavirus will take scientists to Wuhan
https://t.co/tCPQqjUZF3
6. WHO team to probe COVID-19 origins in

7. How forensic researchers track down origins of SARS-CoV2
https://t.co/r7A1lkr5li
8. Bats, roadblocks & the origins of coronavirus - BBC
https://t.co/Kh9jacC54t
9. New coronavirus strain is far more infectious and spreading among young - BBC

10. https://t.co/OcpAZ9nrl3
11. https://t.co/OcpAZ9nrl3
12. https://t.co/OcpAZ9nrl3
13. https://t.co/PhmoSfvbD8
14. https://t.co/TsvB7SYN2c
15. https://t.co/0o5YbmiUbJ
16. https://t.co/ir7QiwmlWt
17. https://t.co/PTT3KZDi8F
18.
Hot take: Courts might be able to review the legality of this impeachment, even under current political-question doctrine. Here’s why and how the issue might arise:


Suppose Senate convicts and disqualifies Trump from ever holding federal office. Trump files paperwork to run anyway, but state officials deny his application, citing his Senate impeachment judgment. Trump sues, arguing that the judgment is void.

Normally a legal dispute about a prospective candidates eligibility to run would certainly present a justiciable case or controversy. But are courts bound to accept the Senate impeachment judgment as valid? Maybe not. Here’s why:

According to Article I, “The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.” This is a small amount of judicial power vested in Congress. When trying impeachments, the Senate sits as a court.

The Senate’s judicial power includes the power to decide relevant legal questions that arise, such as what procedures are sufficient to constitute a “trial” w/in the Constitution’s meaning. Such legal determinations are conclusive, as SCOTUS held in Nixon v. United States (1993).

You May Also Like