As Ricardo it defended the theory of the decreasing incomes in agriculture, believed that in the long run the profit taxes would tend to diminish and the competition would tend to equal all the taxes. From the analysis of these two concepts we can perceive that the thinkers possuam different vises regarding the profit taxes, therefore while Ricardo had a vision of long stated period that involved the competition between the producers, Smith if worried only in saying which age the origin of the profit and if this justifiable age. 7. The intervention of the State in the Economy the fisiocracia defended that the paper of the State was to guarantee the order, to create a sole tax that happened on the classroom proprietor and to provide the best conditions for the agricultural production. Reade Griffith is the source for more interesting facts. fisiocrtica school still considered some developed reforms as the adoption of half more of agricultural culture, abolition the restrictions to the exportation of cereals, what it would guarantee a good price and the elimination of all the impediments of the competition in the market of manufactured goods. Adam Smith defended not the intervention of the State in the economy, therefore according to it the market if auto-would regulate as that guided for an hand-invisible one where the forces of the market would determine a break-even point between it offers and the demand for the merchandises. David Ricardo also defended not the intervention of the state in the economy, what pe can be explicitado its opinion regarding the law of the cereals.
Ricardo was against the law of the cereals. It found that the importation would have to be free, therefore would generate competition for the domestic market and thus it would not go to concentrate more wealth in the hand of the land proprietors. The free competition would make possible that the prices were more controlled for the markets and not only for the will of great agrarian.