What it was founded on is not really relevant. It does not represent Adam Smith, who disliked rentiers: > “As soon as the land of any country has all become p

What it was founded on is not really relevant. It does not represent Adam Smith, who disliked rentiers: > “As soon as the land of any country has all become private property, the landlords, like all other men, love to reap where they never sowed and demand a rent even for its natural produce.” They do not make their prospectus visible. If you do not subscribe you cannot even read their principals. In any case writing one thing down and doing another is very common. The Economist is obsessed with financialisation and cheer-led the utter mess the UK and USA are in for decades. Obviously it's up to each person if they continue to read it. I dispute it's quality, I think it's neoliberal propaganda and nothing more.