Customer Reviews

The Principles of Political Economy and Taxation

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Some authors you read, and perhaps think, "I wish I'd written that!" Ricardo, like Adam Smith and John Locke, are in another league altogether. The originality of mind is stunning. Smith, Mill, Malthus and J.B. Say are all more readable, which I fear sounds like a very poor recommendation for Ricardo! Still, I was so bowled over by the originality of his theoretical line, that I forgave much slow slogging through a difficult text. His theory of rent is I think quite misguided, but is so powerfully presented that I was hard put to think how I might argue against it were Ricardo to appear before me in person. I took this book about ten pages at a time, and found it well worth the trouble.

The ideas put forward by Ricardo in this book challenges some of the ideas presented by Adam Smith in the Wealth of Nations, particularly in the principles of economic rent. Ricardo also revealed interesting insights on the subject of value in chapter 1.

To understand the text fully,it would be advisable to have read Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations, another book in the Great Minds Series, which I had also painfully digested.

Like other books in the Great Mind's series, have a good cup of coffee ready. It is a very challenging and difficult read. Nevertheless, it is a worthwhile read for those serious in understanding the foundations of the present economic systems.

Along with Adam Smith, the Englishman David Ricardo is one of the fathers of the so-called Classics school of economic thought, and the Principles is his major opus, one he was very much reluctant to write, but only did so at the urgings of James Mill and his son John. Written in the first half of the 19th victorian century, he was nonetheless, a very freed mind, who did not accept or indulge in the extravagancies of the beginning of the industrialization proccess in England. To David Ricardo, Karl Marx owes a good share of his theory of labour, something essential in the labour movements of then. The concepts adapted and created by David Ricardo is transported to the text in a dry and concise style, not too much worried in polemics, but only interested in address the topics he raises in a very precise way. IF you are a student of Social Sciences, this book is a must.

This work is a masterpiece of economic theory only second to
the Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith. Ricardo states that value
is a function of effort and not the price paid for labor. He
reminded us that labor plus the tools to assist labor affected
the creation of value. Therefore; increases in value were in
direct proportion to increments in labor. Value was also a
function of the time it took to bring the goods to market.
Surprisingly, the cultivation of inferior land resulted in a

higher exchangeable value of raw produce because more labor
was required in its production. If we become more efficient in
land cultivation, rents will go down because more can be
cultivated with less land. In addition, the exchangeable value
of commodities is undisturbed by natural or accidental causes.
Laborers derive their greatest pleasure when the market price
of labor exceeds the natural price. Therefore; wages will
increase in response to increases in the demand for labor.
Rises in rent are accompanied by increments in the share of
produce because landlords want more rent when harvests are
greater. Accordingly, the price of corn is a function of the labor to produce it. If wages go down, then prices must fall.
As the price of labor goes down, profits increase but the
price of the commodity may not go down. Taxes on profits
tend to increase the price of a commodity . If money is not
taxed, then all commodities will be subject to price increases.
Ultimately, a tax on land begets a tax on produce. In addition,
a tax on labor will raise its price. In addition, the price of
provisions determine the price paid to the worker. If money
decreases in value, all commodities will be subject to steep
price increases. This was seen in modern times with the
fluctuation of the Russian currency. Ultimately, bounty
lowers the price to foreigners because the government subsidizes
the bounty paid to the local merchants to stimulate trade.
The theory of rent transfers value but does not create it.
Ultimately, wages are determined by the price of food and
cost of production.

This theory of wages differs from Adam Smith who said that
wages were a function of the ease or hardship to do work, the
difficulty or expense of learning a trade, the constancy
of employment, the trust reposed in the workmen, the probability
of success or failure of the venture or the fear of misfortune.
David Ricardo's work is an important milestone in the theory
of economics and comparison to the work of Adam Smith.

I got this book, well frankly because I wanted to read John Maynard Keynes' General Theory. I got 2 pages into it and realized that I needed to do a little more background work. Keynes referred to Ricardo a bunch in those first few pages, so I skipped to this book.

I am VERY glad that I read Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations" before I read this book. Ricardo constantly refers back to it. He also refers to Malthus, Buchannan and Say alot. I did learn a great deal in this book-and he proved very effectively some points that seemed counter-intuitive to me. There are a few things that I still don't agree with, but I recognize this as a the next step down the road to modern economics.

The language in this book was more "modern english" than "The Wealth of Nations" but still not what I would consider entirely modern. Another thing that made this book a little more readable was the lack of long digressions on various things. Ricardo's examples were short and very illustrative. "The Wealth of Nations" was laced with Enlightenment philosophy which really made my little libertarian heart flood with joy. There was none of that, here. Very much more like a text book.

The reason I knocked off a star was Ricardo's habit of taking great pains to explain in great detail how this or that would happen under this or that circumstance...and then in 1 paragraph at the end explain why this would never actually happen, or explain why he didn't really mean what it sounded like he was saying. Frustrating.

Overall, a good and very worthwhile read. Don't expect to be entertained-but expect to learn something.

David Ricardo played a crucial role in developing Classical Economics. Ricardo was prompted to write on economics by reading The Wealth of Nations. As luck would have it, Ricardo knew James Mill (father of JS Mill) and was soon in contact with TR Malthus. The debates between Ricardo and Malthus produced a paradigm that lasted only a half a century. PPE+T is a central part of the Classical paradigm, it is Ricardo's definitive statement on economics.

PPE+T is perhaps the most tightly reasoned book written by a Classical economists (JS Mill is a close rival here). This is not fun reading but it is important as a piece of history, and elements of Ricardo's analysis remain relevant today. Given Ricardo's razor sharp intellect, one must wonder why he did not develop modern value theory himself. The tight reasoning of this book is, ironically, the source of much criticism against it. Joseph Schumpeter (among others) has lamented `the Ricardian vice', by which Ricardo arrived at policy conclusions through flawless but restrictive logical reasoning. Ricardo is hard to argue against, given his assumptions, but what if we alter these assumptions?

While Classical Economics is dead, some of its Ricardian elements live on. The Principles of Political Economy and Taxation remains relevant today largely because of Ricardo's concept of Comparative Advantage. Comparative Advantage is one of the most enduring ideas in economics. The development of the Comparative Advantage concept set Ricardo ahead of all but a few of his contemporaries. Economists still speak of Ricardian Equivalence and The Ricardo Effect. While some might object Ricardo's logical-deductive approach to political economy, few economists have stood the test of time so well. PPE+T is a timeless classic. This is not fun reading, but it is important none the less.

I don't want to insult Ricardo. He was unequivocally brilliant. But this book was painful to read. Granted, I am not an economist, so maybe this just wasn't for me. I found it dry and devoid of all emotion. I understand that it is intended to educate and to promote an economic theory, not to entertain, but God man, show your readers some mercy! I am a firm believer that if a book is too boring to read, the author's message will never get out, regardless of its merits.

David Ricardo was never one to mince words.
"The opinion entertained by the labouring class, that the employment of machinery in frequently detrimental to their interests, is not founded on prejudice and error, but is comfortable to the correct principles of political economy." Unlike today, the ruling class and their intellectuals of the 19th Century were not affraid to say what they were up to.

The publisher should be convinced that the automatic spell checker should not be so heavily relied upon. The cover art is an expression of how an armchair graphic artist can be innovative with Photoshop. If a book of such high esteem be put out for public enrichment its presentation should not be so insincere.