CL wrote:
> declan_murphy@hotmail.com wrote:
> > Dan Rempel wrote:
> >> declan_murphy@hotmail.com wrote:
> >>> <newsgroups trimmed>
> >>> TXZZ wrote:
> >>>> REally, it does make sense.<snip>
> >>> No it doesn't. As the negi explains, this is just a straight forward
> >>> economic issue.
> > <snip>
> >> Thanks for the thought-provoking analysis. I wonder if the hand-job
> >> economic metric applies to other parts of the world?
> >
> > I would imagine so. During undergraduate daze I had to sit through a
> > few history of economic thought lectures taught as part of an effort to
> > produce a more broad minded generation of economists. Memory is hazy,
> > but didn't Adam Smith refer to a social mechanism that he called "the
> > invisible hand job" in his Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the
> > Wealth of Nations?
>
> Didn't Adam Smith say that the Invisible Hand moves, and having moved,
> moves on?  Seems as though that would not be an Invisible Hand job per
> se, but more like an Invisible cock tease ... or the Invisible tea time
> slut.

I don't think so. Though Smith's invisible hand metaphor included a
reference to promotion of an end which was no part of initial intention.