I don't have much to say about this book. It's short, the author makes good arguments, and he writes in a very fluid manner about what would be, in another's hands, a very thorny issue.
Here are the two main points he presents in What Money Can't Buy:
"It's worth taking a moment to clarify these two arguments for the moral limits of markets. The fairness objection points to the injustice that can arise when people buy and sell things under conditions of inequality or dire economic necessity. According to this objection, market exchanges are not always as voluntary as market enthusiasts suggest. A peasant may agree to sell his kidney or cornea to feed his starving family, but his agreement may not really be voluntary. He may be unfairly coerced, in effect, by the necessities of his situation.
"The corruption objection is different. It points to the degrading effect of market valuation and exchange on certain goods and practices. According to this objection, certain moral or civic goods are diminished or corrupted if bought and sold. The argument from corruption cannot be met by establishing fair bargaining conditions. It applies under conditions of equality and inequality alike."
The rest of this book is basically and amplification and exploration of these two points. A related point being that markets are never morally neutral, and that commodification always implies certain beliefs and attitudes about the commodity in question. This, I think, is a very timely observation, and one that I hope we, as citizens of the world, can take a closer look at.
I didn't find this book as interesting or as eye-opening as the author's other book, Justice. Nevertheless it's still very good and raises many pertinent questions. If you've read Justice, What Money Can't Buy would be an excellent choice for further reading.
Related Entries:
"The Politics of Gun Control" by Robert J. Spitzer (1998)
Conversation with Bertrand Russell
"Postcapitalism" by Paul Mason (2015)
"The Death of Money" by James Rickards (2014)
沒有留言:
張貼留言