Future of Capitalism: Should there be things money can't buy?
The congressional primary elections have come and gone, but the legacy remains on. Jonathan Herzog, the Yang Gang spin-out launched a doomed-to-fail attempt to overthrow Jerrod Nadler and bring attention to Universal Basic Income to US Congress. I believe in public debate and competition of ideas, so I encouraged the underdog and somehow found myself as one of 18 people watching the live stream of Herzog engaging Harvard Moral Philosophy Professor Michael Sandal in discussion. It didn't disappoint: Jonathan Herzog trying desperately to make UBI the solution, and Michael Sandal explaining how it's all a bit more complicated.
The Sandal point - that there are some things money shouldn't be able to buy and that is key to a functioning society - seemed like a morsel of sanity that could be brought back to our republic. So I bought the book: What Money Can’t Buy: The moral limits of markets.
As I was reading, I asked a friend who attended Harvard if he had heard of Sandal.
He replies: “Yes, of course, he teaches one of the most popular courses at Harvard. Everyone knows him.”
I responded: "Oh, that's great! Even Harvard students are interested in considering the moral philosophy around markets. People care!”
He paused, and dutifully retorted, "No. Lectures were conducted in a historic hall. The time of class was in the middle of the day, so it wasn't too early. And, most importantly, the class cross-coded as a credit for almost every major in the social sciences."
The reasons for its popularity were highly practical. Bummer.
The book, now 10 years old, is fantastic. Many of the ideas explain some of the acute tensions of our time: inequality, polarization, corruption.
Here’s Michael Sandal’s argument told through quotes:
1.) The reach of markets, and market-oriented thinking, into aspects of life traditionally governed by non-market norms is one of the most significant developments of our time. We need a public debate about what it means to keep markets in their place. We need to ask whether there are some things money should not buy.
2.) Why worry that we are moving toward a society in which everything is up for sale? One is about inequality; the other is about corruption. Consider inequality. In a society where everything is for sale, life is harder for those of modest means. The more money can buy, the more affluence (or the lack of it) matters.
If the only advantage of affluence were the ability to buy yachts, sports cars, and fancy vacations, inequalities of income and wealth would not matter very much. But as money comes to buy more and more - political influence, medical care, a home in a safe neighborhood, access to elite schools - the distribution of income and wealth becomes larger and larger. Where all good things are bought and sold, having money makes all the difference in the world.
There is a corrosive tendency of markets. Putting a price on the good things in life can corrupt them. That’s because markets don’t only allocate goods; they also express and promote certain attitudes toward the goods being exchanged.
3.) Without quite realizing it we drifted from having a market economy to being a market society.
A market economy is a tool - a valuable and effective tool - for organizing productive activity. A market society is a way of life in which markets values seep into every aspect of human endeavor. It’s a place where social relations are made over in the image of the market.
Katelyn: Do you know that person who scans the room for the most influential, highest net-worth person? They drop a conversation mid-line for the power player. That guy. I see it all the time. Find the most hyped financier or entrepreneur or whatever. “Who is killing it?” “Who is the next empire builder?” The people in our society with the most respect are those with the most money. It’s not even close.
4.) What are some solutions? Is this what people mean by 'the future of capitalism'?
The non-judgmental stance toward values lies at the heart of market reasoning and explains much of its appeal. But our reluctance to engage in moral and spiritual argument, together with our embrace of markets, has exacted a heavy price: it has drained public discourse of moral and civic energy and contributed to the technocratic, managerial politics that affect many societies today.
Disillusion with politics has deepened as citizens grow frustrated with a political system unable to act for the public good or to address the questions that matter most.
We live and work and shop and play in different places. Our children go to different schools. It’s not good for democracy, nor is it a satisfying way to live.
Katelyn: Is this reversible? Can we get back to a more equitable, or at least, shared existence? One is left to daydream.
Read more book recommendations: My Younger Self