but adam smith for the moral sentiments that he also wrote was far more important than that occurred on trade and the wealth of nations and he always said this was the most important thing he was trying to contribute to the entrepreneurship that is vital to the success of the economy but adam smith also said you've got to sell you fairness and responsibility and the value that we think are important in our everyday life, friends of yours who don't show integrity or you can't trust and are not responsible and don't do their duty and was off the backs of other people rather than help contribute to the common good and the same way he said the economy and we but now is a big multinational companies and finance companies if they don't exit fees values that it's a danger that we will have as we had two or three years ago markets that don't solve regulate, but markets that self-destruct. so i would say the values that he wrote about in the 18th-century par still the values that got to guide our economy and of the 20th century was a battle between markets and states, what power should market

and as i understand political economy, it started with adam smith who happened to be a citizen of the town in which i grew up. and i am now a member of parliament for serving in the house of commons. adam smith lived in this town and was born there and grew up there, and it has a two-mile road that -- can you hear me? this two miles, he would look out every morning and he would see ships coming in and out of the body that were trading with the rest of europe. this was the middle of the 18th century. and because he saw this trading taking place, he then thought, well, trade is the engine of growth. and then he realized that too tragic to specialize. and to specialize you had to have a proper division of labor between those who did certain talents and those who had others. it's all three of how the economy works. it was built from this idea that looking out on the sea, he could see that trade was transforming the whole economic landscape at the town in which he was born. but adam smith thought that the theory of moral sentiments which was the book he also wrote was far more important th

my name is adam smith. i am with whole foods market. i would first like to say i am very honored to be part of the work that was done on this project. whole foods looks forward to the opportunity to serve this community with a neighborhood grocery store that supports its needs. we support stores that become a vibrant members of the community by fitting in with the community. we do this in a number of ways. because many of our team members will be hired locally, there will have an innate connection with the neighborhood -- they will have and a neat -- they will have an innate connection with the neighborhood and can quit products and merchandising that better suits the community. team members can use alternative transportation. i expect most of our customers well as well. we believe the residential areas and public transit will make this they -- make this whole foods market and then deal place -- an ideal place for people in the area to share food or sharing a meal. the support fund-raising and food for special events, and donations such

and as i understand political economy, it started with adam smith who happened to be a citizen of the town in which i grew up in adam smith put in this interrupt their has a two-mile dash can you hear me? and this two-mile esplanade, he would look out every morning and see ships coming in and out the retreating and this is the mental of the 18th century. and because he saw the trading taking place he then thought trade is the engine of growth and then he realized to trade you have to specialize. especially if you have a proper division of labor between those who do certain tasks than those who did others. his whole theory about the economy worked was built from this idea was actually transforming the whole economic landscape which he was born. adam smith thought the world sentiments, which was the book he also wrote was far more important than not trade, the wealth of nations. and he always said this was the most important thing that he was trying to contribute to this study of society. and underpinning the economy and underpin a market that had in his youth to be volumes that people

>> >> i will start it off and handed over to adam smith. we know that the ordinance allows the delivery to start as early as 6:00. as part of the discussions that we had with the neighborhood groups, whole foods agreed to move up to 7:00. i believe that that is under the noise ordinance for organizations. if they are in a neighborhood where there are complaints about noise that the ordinance requires them to start after 7:00 in the morning. i will let adam comment about the deliveries. >> we do have a bit of latitude with our delivery schedule. this is more than a larger chain. i think it would be difficult for us to agree to a condition that would require us to deliver after 9:00 a.m.. these are not likely to start until several years in the future. we have made some good faith efforts to make some concessions and i consider that we will do so in the future as well. i think as far as a specific time of delivering past 9:00 a.m., i was in reservations about a green with that. >> thank you. >> i think that -- requested some notice around the

that the environment part of a huge unstable system now in economics and of course going back to adam smiththe jew a lot of it's inspiration from observing nature when you run wealth of nations and during the enlightenment which brought us neoclassical economics to begin with it seems to have been ignored but he looked at nature he said systems need to be mimicked in certain way so he they mimic the systems except the part about the fact that they're highly unpredictable because these are very fluid systems so folks are in denial about the ecology they're in denial about the economy my last question is if you were to do an arbitrage between denial in australia and denial in america now that you've been in denver a little bit where is the denial deepest about the ecological. economic disasters of or and the ecological economic disasters in australia which population is deeper in denial always try it without a doubt america is truly in a depression let's stop with the fist and stop calling it what it is might as you and i both know the real bout of unemployment america is closer to seventy pe

i neglected to confess my equal fealty to the insights in adam smith's wealthy nations. the question then of course and the question today is whether those values and institutions and in sites have any relevance to the extraordinarily different world in which we now live. our believe they do. a believe they do today. the effect is that our country was created by a remarkable group of men. people like james madison who had studied the history of experiments in freedom from the most ancient times, the times of shirley and athens and through the ages and in every instance, freedom eventually failed because of the one factor in a human affairs which is a constant, namely human nature and in this case talking about the impulse to concentrate power exercised either by an individual does the or a parliamentary majority. so in constructing the constitution, the ultimate responsibility for protecting our freedoms lies with the people, responsible people, self-reliant people, auxiliary precautions, in the case of the constitution the principle of balance of power between coequal b

i neglected to confess my equal fealty to the insights and adam smith's wealth of nations. the question then of course and the question today is whether the values and institutions and insights have any relevance to the extraordinarily different world in which we now live. i believe they do then and i believe they do today. the fact is that our country was created by a remarkable group of men, people like james madison who had studied the history of experiments and freedom for the most ancient times, the times of greece and athens and on through the ages. and in just about every instance, freedom eventually failed. why? because of the one factor in human affairs, which is a constant, namely human nature. in this case you are talking about the concentration of power so, in constructing the constitution, madison said, the ultimate responsibility for protecting our freedoms lives of the people, responsible people, self-reliant people. what he called auxiliary precautions are also required. and these were in the case of our constitution the principle of the balance of powers be

it is not the invisible hand of adam smith. it is not the organic way the economy works. that is all nonsense and the way you know it is nonsense is this you look at a couple of things. you look a perfect the bailout is continuing. it is continuing a through zero% interest rate that the federal reserve is accessible by the largest corporation. if any of us had an actress to billions of dollars at 0% you could probably make some money. i am going to test that by asking that the fed give me $5 billion for two weeks. double come back and testify that i am wealthy. and i'm brilliant in business. anyone can be brilliant in business if you are saturated in cash and that is why large earnings are not good earnings and that why the bailout continues. at some .0% interest has to end and then we will see the real complexion of the economy and the largest banks are earning those dollars not based on contributing to productivity or creating jobs. is not a result of lending. it is a result of proprietary trading. all one has to do is look up the book of business and you will see somet

i neglected to confess my equal fealty to the insights and adam smith's wealth of nations.the question then of course and the question today is whether the values and institutions and insights have any relevance to the extraordinarily different world in which we now live. i believe they do then and i believe they do today. the fact is that our country was created by a remarkable group of men, people like james madison who had studied the history of experiments and freedom for the most ancient times, the times of greece and athens and on through the ages. and in just about every instance, freedom eventually failed. why? because of the one factor in human affairs, which is a constant, namely human nature. in this case you are talking about the concentration of power so, in constructing the constitution, madison said, the ultimate responsibility for protecting our freedoms lives of the people, responsible people, self-reliant people. what he called auxiliary precautions are also required. and these were in the case of our constitution the principle of the balance of powers bet

adam smith who was not an american but, of course, was around the time of the find founding, the wealth of nations talks about dupes. but then suddenly it took an ugly upsurge with the founding of the wolf vick revolution in russia and the launching of the bolshevik revolution in russia in october 1917. and then after that even more specifically with the founding of the common the term, the communist international in moscow in march of 1919. if you're following this con logically, it gets really bad with the founding of the communist party in america in chicago this september of 1919. as i was looking in one particular cache of documents which are right over here at the library of congress, i mean, there's hundreds of reels of microfiche. and when i would go there in the summertime when professors and academics are off -- not like we work a lot to begin with during the school year -- i never once, even one time was told by an archivist, oh, you can't have the reel because somebody else has it out. hardly anyone's even looking at this stuff. and that's because most academic historians ar

that's different than the originalness of the internet which was kind of a constant paradise of adam smith of new companies, like new york restaurants. there's hundreds of them and you can't count them. >> rose: finally, wikileaks, what does it say about amazon and others who are prepared to say "no more business for me." >> rose: well, wikileaks is... one thing i talk about in the book is how radical the idea of the internet was. >> rose: right. >> it is a strange idea and everyone knows it, we're used to it but it's a real idea that's decentralized. it was a huge challenge to at&t and all of these other things. and what wikileaks shows is the internet still has some weird tricks to play, it's not done yet as a medium. it's still surprising people. i think no one expected this thing to come out of nowhere. >> rose: can you think it's a good thing or a bad thing? >> do i think the leaks are... >> rose: yeah. >> i think that wikileaks itself deserves a full protection of the first amendment. i think it is in the classic position of any intermediary entrusted with secret information. so i do

the founder of capitalism, when i studied economics at cambridge, we studied adams smith. the first book he wrote before he wrote "the wealth of nations -- the wealth of nations" was the theory of moral sentiment. you cannot have a thriving capitalist system without a moral foundation. that is what is missing right now and what needs to be recreated. >> there are a number of issues and jumping off here and it is getting fund. i want to put to issues out, dana, but i want to combine what john chen and arianna huffington said -- we are in need of an attitude adjustment as far as education. we need an attitude adjustment. i wonder if you think he is right that we need an attitude adjustment? and the suggestion that there are a lot of people turning on government. a lot of people turning on government is the attitude of turning on government these days a justifiable attitude to have? does that make sense? >> it does. and i want to amplify that point. let's start by saying i think there is more agreement here that people realize. i don't think there is anyone on this stage who

the founder of capitalism, when i studied economics at cambridge, we studied adams smith. the first book he wrote before he wrote "the wealth of nations -- the wealth of nations" was the theory of moral sentiment. you cannot have a thriving capitalist system without a moral foundation. that is what is missing right now and what needs to be recreated. >> there are a number of issues and jumping off here and it is getting fund. i want to put to issues out, dana, but i want to combine what john chen and arianna huffington said -- we are in need of an attitude adjustment as far as education. we need an attitude adjustment. i wonder if you think he is right that we need an attitude adjustment? and the suggestion that there are a lot of people turning on government. a lot of people turning on government is the attitude of turning on government these days a justifiable attitude to have? does that make sense? >> it does. and i want to amplify that point. let's start by saying i think there is more agreement here that people realize. i don't think there is anyone on this stage who

my view is that of adam smith, that trade is beneficial for every party, really. artificial barriers to trade cause more harm than good. if the government says i cannot buy a product from somebody because they live in another country, that does mean harm because it raises the prices of my goods and services. the harm that it does for me outweighs whatever benefits of bestowed upon the producers in the u.s. i would argue that there's a dynamic effect where it harms the producer in the long run because it makes them less competitive. the auto industry in the u.s. benefited from intervention on trade policy for decades. over the long run it makes them less competitive and less appealing to consumers. host: there's a great deal of popular sentiment that suggests otherwise. people often say it field trade agreements have decimated our manufacturing base. guest: manufacturing is going down in just about every country in the world. the reason is the economy is changing. the service sectors are improving. this is thinking turn. this is what happens in an economy, it's ver

my view is that of adam smith, that trade is beneficial for every party, really. artificial barriers to trade cause more harm than good. if the government says i cannot buy a product from somebody because they live in another country, that does mean harm because it raises the prices of my goods and services. the harm that it does for me outweighs whatever benefits of bestowed upon the producers in the u.s. i would argue that there's a dynamic effect where it harms the producer in the long run because it makes them less competitive. the auto industry in the u.s. benefited from intervention on trade policy for decades. over the long run it makes them less competitive and less appealing to consumers. host: there's a great deal of popular sentiment that suggests otherwise. people often say it field trade agreements have decimated our manufacturing base. guest: manufacturing is going down in just about every country in the world. the reason is the economy is changing. the service sectors are improving. this is thinking turn. this is what happens in an economy, it's ver

the founder of capitalism, when i studied economics at cambridge, we studied adams smith. the first book he wrote before he wrote "the wealth of nations -- the wealth of nations" was the theory of moral sentiment. you cannot have a thriving capitalist system without a moral foundation. that is what is missing right now and what needs to be recreated. >> there are a number of issues and jumping off here and it is getting fund. i want to put to issues out, dana, but i want to combine what john chen and arianna huffington said -- we are in need of an attitude adjustment as far as education. we need an attitude adjustment. i wonder if you think he is right that we need an attitude adjustment? and the suggestion that there are a lot of people turning on government. a lot of people turning on government is the attitude of turning on government these days a justifiable attitude to have? does that make sense? >> it does. and i want to amplify that point. let's start by saying i think there is more agreement here that people realize. i don't think there is anyone on this stage who

it's not the invisible hand of adam smith. it is not the sort of organic way the economy works. that's all nonsense. the way you know it's nonsense is if you look at a couple of things. you look at the fact that the bailout is continuing. it's continuing through 0% interest rate at the federal reserve that's accessible by the larger corporation. if anyone of us have access to billions of dollars at 0%, arafat than you could probably make some money. i'm willing to test that theory by asking that the fed gave me about 5 billion for about two weeks. i will come back and testified that i am sinfully wealthy commandline brilliant in business. anyone can be brilliant in business if you're saturated in cash. that's what both large earnings are not good earnings. and that is why the bailout continues. at some .0% interest as the end. and when that happens, we will see the real complexion of the economy. in fact come the largest banks are earning those dollars not based on contributing to productivity or jobs. it's not a result of lending. it's a result of proprietary trading. all one h

my view is that of adam smith, that trade is beneficial for every party, really. artificial barriers to trade cause more harm than good. if the government says i cannot buy a product from somebody because they live in another country, that does mean harm because it raises the prices of my goods and services. the harm that it does for me outweighs whatever benefits of bestowed upon the producers in the u.s. i would argue that there's a dynamic effect where it harms the producer in the long run because it makes them less competitive. the auto industry in the u.s. benefited from intervention on trade policy for decades. over the long run it makes them less competitive and less appealing to consumers. host: there's a great deal of popular sentiment that suggests otherwise. people often say it field trade agreements have decimated our manufacturing base. guest: manufacturing is going down in just about every country in the world. the reason is the economy is changing. the service sectors are improving. this is thinking turn. this is what happens in an economy, it's ver

it is not the invisible hand of adam smith. it is not the organic way the economy works. that is all nonsense. the way you know it is nonsense is that he look at the couple of things. the bailout is continuing. it is continuing through the 0% interest rates. if anyone of us had access to billions of dollars at 0%, you could probably make some money [applause] . i am willing to test that theory by asking the fed to give me about $5 billion for two weeks. i will come back and testify at i am sinfully wealthy and i am brilliant in business. anyone can be brilliant in business if you are saturated in cash. that is why those large earnings are not good earnings. that is why the bailout continues. the 0% interest has to end. when that happens, we will see the real complexion of the economy. the largest banks are earning those dollars not by contributing to productivity or creating jobs. it is a result of proprietary trading. all you have to do is look at the book of business and you will see something striking and disturbing. banks got billions of dollars for second liens. they

my view is that of adam smith, that trade is beneficial for every party, really. artificial barriers to trade cause more harm than good. if the government ys i cannot buy a product from somebody because they live in another country, that does mean harm because it raises the prices of my goods and services. the harm that it does for me outweighs whatever benefits of bestowed upon the producers in the u.s. i would argue that there's a dynamic effect where it harms the producer in the long run because it makes them less competitive. the auto industry in the u.s. benefited from intervention on trade policy for decades. over the long run it makes them less competitive and less appealing to consumers. host: there's a great deal of popular sentiment that suggests otherwise. people often say it field trade agreements haveecimated our manufacturing base. guest: manufacturing is going down in just about every country in the world. the reason is the economy is changing. the service sectors are improving. this is thinking turn. is is what happens in an economy, it's very pain

my view is that it's basically the view that economists have had since adam smith which trade is beneficial for every party refuel and artificial barriers to trade cause more harm than good. if the government says that i can't buy a product from somebody because they live in another country, that does me harm because it's raising the prices of my goods and services, and the harm it does for me outweighs whatever benefit bestowed on the producer and pass up benefits from this. i argue there's a dynamic effect where it harms the producer in the long run because it makes them less competitive. the auto industry in the u.s. benefited from a lot of intervention on trade policy for decades, and i think over the long run, it made them less competitive and unable to please consumers. >> host: there is a sentiment that we hear from people who view that the trade agreements decimated our manufacturing base in this country. what's your response? >> guest: the truth is manufacturing is going down in just about every country in the world and that's because the economy is changing and service sectors are

anna smith bought a refurbished xbox 360 for christmas he expected it would come with all the parts. but to his son's disappointment, the unit showed up without an external hard drive. and when adam called game stop customer service, he says the rep kind of chuckled and told him, refurbished systems don't come with external hard drives. even though it doesn't say that anywhere on the product page or the game stop website. adam emailed us and we contacted them. they overnighted him his external drive. >>> when the perez family didn't get any hot water, they called above all plumbing. the technician fixed the problem for $387. but the next day they lost water pressure. so the technician came back. couple weeks later the family called again and then again. the final straw broke when they made the fourth service call and were told they would have to pay $750 for parts for a problem they believe was caused by the original technician. our volunteers called the company's owner who was extremely helpful. he told us this was the first he had heard of the problem and incested it was not caused by -- insisted it was not caused by his technician but honored his 100% satisfaction policy and p