Skip to main content

What Money Can't Buy (A Review)


Michael Sandel’s What Money Can't Buy : The Moral Limits of Markets aims to awaken the public to the increasingly perverse role prices play in our lives. Everything appears to be up for sale. We appear to have moved from having a market to being a market. This triumphal encroachment of the price mechanism in every facet of life has been defended by its proponents as necessary for our “social good”. Sandel believes it’s precisely the opposite. Far from being neutral, as usually assumed by economists, prices corrupt the good things we value and care about in life. Reliance on prices diminishes social value hence the urgent need for everyone to take a step back and decide the moral limits of markets. For in doing so we are ultimately defining what society we want to live in.


According to Sandel, the increasing reliance on the price mechanism could be socially tolerated if it was a true measure of value. Unfortunately not only is it broadly accepted that prices can be a poor signal of "social value", but relying on them as signal of value ignores one important consideration. Namely, that for certain goods the attachment of prices diminishes their value, which in turn robs society of their worth. But even for goods where prices have a role to play, interventions which act solely on that basis ignores that markets are not merely mechanisms, but also embody certain norms valued by society e.g. shared responsibility, respect. It follows that interventions that may increase material wealth may come at the expense of undermining such norms. This raises the important question of the basis on which trade-offs are made between market and “non-market” norms in policy making.

Such issues highlight an important dimension often ignored by some economists: market reasoning and moral reasoning are interlinked. Implicit in the economic utilitarian framework is the moral assumption that society’s goal is to maximise total welfare. However, it is not clear why society should maximize total welfare at all. Sandel observes that some economists usually defend reliance on price based solutions because of the misguided view that virtue is in short supply and therefore need to be conserved. The proper response to scarcity of virtue, argues Sandel, is more encouragement of it. Virtue is a like muscle, it grows with every exercise. Failure to allow space for virtue diminishes it rather than conserving it.

The obvious challenge is that in a plural society different people will not only have different conceptions of virtue, but also different visions of what society they want to live in. How is consensus reached? Sandel acknowledges the difficulty of the question but suggests the bigger challenge is that this precise question is currently not asked in public debate at all! For fear of disagreement many avoid bringing moral and spiritual convictions in the public square. The failure to do so is leading to a market triumphalism that continues to erode the very fabric of our society. So in the end, Sandel’s main policy prescription is more public debate and a little bit more courage for those with stronger moral convictions.

The diagnosis of the problem is difficult to fault, but the prescription will certainly disappoint those who prefer to see the end from the beginning. But that is an impossible feat given the general complexity of the issue. Sandel’s assessment should rightly be judged on the extent to which he successfully challenges current thinking not whether a full alternative has been developed. The gauntlet has now been successfully laid down against everyone to explore further how to ensure different conceptions of the “good life” are successfully integrated in public discourse alongside the dominant utilitarian conception that underpins modern approaches to public policy. Sandel’s point, which makes hard reading for economists but can’t be easily dismissed, is that by their sheer intellectual dominance of policy making process, economists have imposed a utilitarian narrative on the public that may be damaging the social good, now it’s the public’s turn to join the debate about what society they want to live in.

A much more credible complaint is that Sandel does not discuss macroeconomic issues. Given that much of the current public discourse is focused on the role of markets and governments at the macro level it is missed opportunity. This oversight is more glaring given the otherwise excellent contribution the book makes on an important subject.

Copyright © Chola Mukanga 2013

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

I am what I am by Gloria Gaynor

Beverly Knight closed the opening ceremony of the Paralympics with what has been dubbed the signature tune of the Paralympics. I had no idea Ms Knight is still in the singing business. And clearly going by the raving reviews she will continue to be around. One media source says her performance was so electric that "there wasn’t a dry eye to be seen as she sang the lyrics to the song and people even watching at home felt the passion in her words" . The song was Gloria Gaynor's I am what I am . Clearly not written by Gloria Gaynor but certainly musically owned and popularized by her. It opens triumphantly: I am what I am / I am my own special creation / So come take a look / Give me the hook or the ovation / It's my world that I want to have a little pride in / My world and it's not a place I have to hide in / Life's not worth a damn till you can say I am what I am The words “I am what I am” echo over ten times in the song. A bold declaration that she

Pornography as Occultism

There is a kind of helplessness that a man engaged in pornography exhibits. He often speaks of it in terms of a “struggle” or an “addiction.” Now both of those terms are accurate, I believe, but they distance a person from his sin in a soul-decaying manner. Pornography is not just an addiction; it is occultism. The man who sits upstairs viewing pornography while his wife chauffeurs the kids to soccer practice is not some unusual “pervert”; he is (like his forefather Adam) seeking the mystery of the universe apart from Christ. That’s the reason the one picture, stored in his memory, of that naked woman will never be enough for him. He will never be able to be satisfied because he will never be able to get an image naked enough. I say pornography is occultism because I believe the draw toward it is more than biological (though that is strong). The satanic powers understand that “the sexually immoral person sins against his own body” (1 Cor. 6:18). They understand that the pornographic

Inconsistency of Moral Progress

If morality, if our ideas of right and wrong, are purely subjective, we should have to abandon any idea of moral progress (or regress), not only in the history of nations, but in the lifetime of each individual. The very concept of moral progress implies an external moral standard by which not only to measure that a present moral state is different from an earlier one but also to pronounce that it is "better" than the earlier one.  Without such a standard, how could one say that the moral state of a culture in which cannibalism is regarded as an abhorrent crime is any "better" than a society in which it is an acceptable culinary practice? Naturalism denies this. For instance, Yuval Harari asserts: "Hammurabi and the American Founding Fathers alike imagined a reality governed by universal and immutable principles of justice, such as equality or hierarchy. Yet the only place where such universal principles exist is in the fertile imagination of Sapiens, and in th