Reading the papers this morning, it's easy to get distracted by the war of words brewing between the Business Secretary Vince Cable and the outgoing head of the CBI Richard Lambert.
The Business Secretary has launched a review into corporate governance and economic short-termism, attacking the worst of the excesses of the past decade:
"Short-termism and shareholder disengagement are an increasing problem for our economy. Short-term investors and financial gamblers value a quick buck above all else, for example, by driving company boards into accepting takeover bids that make no economic sense. We need shareholders that act like long-term owners, alive to the risks of instability and the broader consequences of how the companies they own behave...Alongside ongoing work into the shape of regulation and narrative reporting, we aim to put responsible shareholders back in the driving seat of our economy."
Richard Lambert from the CBI - already at the Lib Dem conference chairing a fringe event - pushed back in this morning papers:
"It's odd that he thinks it sensible to use such emotional language...Mr Cable has harsh things to say about the capitalist system: it will be interesting to hear his ideas for an alternative."
And already the twit-o-sphere is linking Cable to every Marx from Karl to Groucho.
Well, the Business Secretary's could have chosen better words. By singling out 'corporate' excess, Mr Cable is intentially trying to tap in to a rich vein of public frustration with fat cat financiers.
But in doing so, he also casts a shadow over many legitimate businesses and sectors - such as manufacturing - that invest for the long-run. And he also runs the risk of any much needed regulation of short-termism in parts of financial markets spills over into the rest of the economy.
Yet casting Mr Cable as against the capitalist system and as a Marxist, is to willfully ignore everything we know about Mr Cable, who is a keen student of Adam Smith.
In the Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith sets out his laws of the market.
His first law of the market is self interest, or the profit motive. Ask the Business Secretary and I doubt he'll have any problem with this law.
But if the first law that motivates markets is essentially greed - Mr Cable's murky economic short-termism - what ensures that the economy isn't overwhelmed and ruined by profiteers?
It's Adam Smith's second law of the market: competition. This is the famous 'invisible hand' that allows markets to self-correct against greed as as firms compete on prices or wages. For Smtih, competition keeps greed in check and ensures the profit motive works for the benefit of society.
Look at Mr Cable's comments again in this light, and what he appears to be saying is that the second law wasn't working properly over the past decade and that this market failure needs to be corrected.
It also means that he's not attacking capitalism - he just wants it to work better. And it means that he's likely a better disciple of Adam Smith than many calling him a Marxist.