边沁与亚当·斯密论高利贷法:对边沁的“斯密式”回答与一个新问题

IF 0.6 3区 经济学 Q4 ECONOMICS European Journal of the History of Economic Thought Pub Date : 1999-12-01 DOI:10.1080/10427719900000042
S. Hollander
{"title":"边沁与亚当·斯密论高利贷法:对边沁的“斯密式”回答与一个新问题","authors":"S. Hollander","doi":"10.1080/10427719900000042","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"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.","PeriodicalId":51791,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of the History of Economic Thought","volume":"6 1","pages":"523-551"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"1999-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10427719900000042","citationCount":"24","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Jeremy Bentham and Adam Smith on the usury laws: a 'Smithian' reply to Bentham and a new problem\",\"authors\":\"S. Hollander\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10427719900000042\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"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.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51791,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of the History of Economic Thought\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"523-551\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"1999-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10427719900000042\",\"citationCount\":\"24\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of the History of Economic Thought\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10427719900000042\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of the History of Economic Thought","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10427719900000042","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 24

摘要

亚当·斯密为当代的高利贷法律辩护,并受到边沁和大多数现代作家的严厉批评,但重要的例外是J.M.凯恩斯。我们认为,与边沁相比,斯密并没有打算排除所有“风险”企业的贷款融资,并给予安全投资“垄断”,也没有忽视黑色信贷市场的潜在出现。然而,考虑到18世纪70年代末政府借款率的显著上升,斯密本应独立于边沁的批评而修改自己的立场。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Jeremy Bentham and Adam Smith on the usury laws: a 'Smithian' reply to Bentham and a new problem
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.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
28.60%
发文量
67
期刊介绍: The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought (EJHET), a peer-reviewed journal, has quickly established itself as a leading forum for lively discussion on a wide range of issues in the history of economic thought. With contributions from both established international scholars and younger academics, EJHET is entirely pluralist and non-partisan with regard to subjects and methodologies - it does not subscribe to any particular current of thought, nor relate to any one geographic zone. The Managing Editors and Editorial Board and Advisory Board members are drawn from throughout Europe and beyond, and are committed to encouraging scholars from around the world to contribute to international research and debate.
期刊最新文献
European Journal of the History of Economic Thought vol. 30, issue 6 (December 2023) Wartime in the history of economic thought: episodes in European history The Palgrave companion to Oxford economics, Adam Smith: Sytematic Philosopher and Public Thinker James Steuart and the making of Karl Marx’s monetary thought
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1