In 1776 Adam Smith published the book The Wealth of Nations. In his book Smith proposed a new economic system, the Free Market. Driven by an invisible hand, people working in their own self interest would naturally do what is right and drive the economy forward, without government intervention. The recently independent United States adopted this theoretical economic system. Two-hundred-twenty-three years later we examine this now matured economy, and look at whether Smith's theory works in practice.

 In support of Smith's no government intervention theory there are several valid and convincing arguments. The first that would come to mind is consumer sovereignty, where the people, as a collective, decide which goods and services are available based upon their purchases. Another obviously key argument would be one of the many rags to riches success stories that are so prevalent in the market economy, such as those of Ray Kroc and Mary Kay. To top it all off one would probably comment on the low tax rate of the American economy.

 Then, of course, there are those who would argue that, contrary to what Smith theorized, government intervention is neccesary and that the invisible hand is nothing more than an impracticable theory. This group would argue that social services are jeopardized, if not non-existent, without government intervention because helping others is not profitable. Another detail that would be brought up by this group is that without government intervention monopolies are formed, robbing consumers of their sovereignty and destroying competition. To hammer home their point they would bring up child labour legislation.

 When the ponts of both groups are weighed and considered it is only natural to come to the conclusion that government intervention is necessary and that the invisible hand does not work under current, and will not work under future economic conditions. Government intervention is absolutely neccesary to ensure that there is a social safety net, to ensure that the public is not abused by big business, and to ensure that the quality of life is high for all people. The United States market economy relies on market forces to provide many services, including health care, to a new immigrant this seems to be of no consequence - until hsi first visit to the hospital. With probably no medical plan from his/hers employers, if (s)he is yet employed, (s)he is deeply indebted due to the thousands of dollars in user fees. And, the cost of an overnight hospital stay in case of life-threatening illness, or major surgery, a fee that can reach more than ten thousand dollars per day, will further worsen his already miserable financial position. Another problem with the reliance on market forces to create hospitals and clinics is that in some areas, which sorely need a hospital, there are none due to the fact that that particular area is not the best place for business - with or without the thousands of dollars in user fees. If this were Canada, for example, health care would be funded by taxes and run by the government, and therefore available in all areas where it is required and at no additional cost to the patient. All because fo government intervention.

 Monopolies in the market economy are common, even though they eliminate the competition, and therefore go against the basis of the market economy. A recent, and well publiscized, example of this is Bill Gates' Microsoft Corporation. Bill Gates used hsi financial power to crush the competition and better their own bank accounts. They left thos who dare oppose them half-naked in the streets. They bought and sold peoples lives and dreams as only the devil could. He succeeded in robbing consumers of their soveriegnty through the elimination of the competition, therefore forcing consumers to purchase their products at their prices, without giving them a choice. This man, working in hsi self-interest eroded at the basic principle of the market economy. He proved that Adam Smith's invisible hand is inadequate in a world where big business is a reality.

 Big business tends to take advantage of the individual when it is working in self interest. A prime example of this is child labour. In pursuing the all mighty dollar corporations look for the cheapest way to manufacture goods, the easiest way to cut costs is to use cheap labour. Becuase children in third world countries are sometimes forced by circumstance to get a job manufacturers take advantage of them, an excellent example of this is Nike Incorporated. There are two reasons for this: 1) children are less aware of their rights as employees, and 2) children are less likely than adults to act in force when oppressed. Third world countries such as Vietnam or Burma have very little in the way of enforced child labour legislation. Working conditions for children are often below the atrocious levels of the early industrial revolution. The majority of businesses employing and exploiting these children are corporations based in the United States. Nike and their foreign subcontractors, fro example, force children to work 65 hours per week for a paltry $10. Just imagine the torture that the American children would face if the united States government had stuck to Smith's laissez-faire ideals. Smith's invisible hand/self-interest theory is driving producers to exploit children, this is evil at its height.

 The people within the capitalist economy are said to have sovereignty. What a joke! Lokk at advertising, it is all producers looking to rob this independance and replace it with obedience. Manufacturers are luring customers into stupid, unnecesary purchases - sovereignty indeed! Then there are the success stories, Ray Kroc for instance. He bought out the founders of McDonalds, and then bulldozed their original restaurant, if this is what he did to his ex-partners, what do you think he did to the anonymous competition, the family business? If this is what success and the invisible hand do to someone in the market economy, then up with government control! Then, of course, there is the low tax rate in the United States, well guess what, the lower the taxes the fewer and the poorer the social programs.

 In conclusion, it is evident that the American economy is a corrupt, shameless place at the present time and requires government interventionif the quality of life for the citizens of this country is to increase. Adam Smith's invisible hand is and should remain just an outdated theory in a book and should never be attempted in practice again.