Abstract
Adam Smith justified the contemporary usury laws and was severely criticised by Bentham and most modern writers with the important exception of J.M. Keynes. We argue that pace Bentham, Smith did not intend to preclude loan financing of all ‘risky’ ventures and give a ‘monopoly’ to safe investments and did not neglect the potential emergence of black credit markets. Yet Smith ought to have modified his position independently of Bentham's criticism, considering a marked rise in the rate at which governments borrowed in the late 1770s.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 523-551 |
Number of pages | 29 |
Journal | European Journal of the History of Economic Thought |
Volume | 6 |
Issue number | 4 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - 1 Jan 1999 |
Externally published | Yes |
Keywords
- Adam Smith
- Jeremy Bentham
- classical economics
- entrepreneurship
- risk
- usury laws
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- General Arts and Humanities
- Economics, Econometrics and Finance (miscellaneous)
- History and Philosophy of Science