The Morality Of The Market System

Many economic and ethical theories support the idea of a free market leading to ideal and ethical solutions, with dissenters often claiming that the theories at the heart of such arguments are premised upon so greatly idealized circumstances that they are not useful. However, the argument that basing business decisions on profits leads to desirable outcomes has to be made with models, because “real” economic conditions are far to complex to be evaluated without the aid of models.

The principle of market justice is a system where medical care and benefits are distributed on the basis of people willing and able to pay. Moreover, the principle of market justice assumes that the free-market forces for supply and demand can govern health care, individuals are responsible for their achievements, and the market works best with minimal inference with the government (Shi and Singh, 2013). On the contrary, the principle of social justice is when health care is equally distributed, and it is a societal responsibility. Social justice regards health care a social good that should be available to all citizens regardless whether they can pay or not. The social justice method assumes that the government can decide through rational planning how much health care to produce and how to distribute it among all citizens. The problem is that the United States does not follow free-market principles, which can be seen in market justice, and social justice has been ongoing and gradual in the United States. Social justice drives publically financed programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. However, market justice drives employer-based insurance (Shi and Singh, 2013). Nonetheless, there are many Americans who cannot afford insurance, or do not have a job and do not qualify for any public programs. The amount of Americans uninsured is because of health care costs. As health care costs go up, the middle class is diminishing. Health care can very well be a factor contributing to

In the article, "Moral Criticism of the Market", author Ken S. Ewert lays out a formidable rebuttal of the Christian Left's criticism of the free market economic system. This view has taken a stronger rise in the past couple years, along with the rise in popularity among many around socialism. Since I have the luxury of having lived long enough to see several attempts at socialism/communism rise and fall, I found its resurgence in popularity during the last election somewhat surprising.

What Money Can’t Buy; The Moral Limits of Market by Michael Sandel argues the relationship between markets and our morality. His central concern is the influence of money on the sphere of life traditionally governed by nonmarket norms such as rights as a citizen, care for others, and civic duties. He demonstrated that market is responsible for destroying our sense of morality by placing monetary value to it. This paper will argue the relationship between market and morality through demonstrating the type of goods corrupted by money, the flaws in the market system that causes such problems, and the political solution for this problem as suggested by Michael Sandel respectively.

In the article “Moral Criticisms of the Market”, Ken S. Ewert elaborates on the many critiques of the “Free Market” made by the so called Christian left. He essentially defends the free market against the many accusations, blaming it for the selfishness, materialism, individualism as well as the drive for power within the economic system. Furthermore, although he acknowledges that these issues exist, he doesn’t feel the “Free Market” is the ultimate cause. “The free market is innocent of the charges against it by Christian critics. Its alleged shortcomings are things that can occur to mankind in both a free or command economic system” (Ewert, 1989). Additionally, he suggests that the state intervention and not the free market has caused the

The first characteristic of market society that causes the change to market society essential is that within the economy there is self-regulation and it is defined as “market economy” (Polanyi 68).

We are living in market society, which is so different from previous societies. In market society, the whole of society is a system of self-regulating market (Polanyi 43). In order to make the market society function, people need to think and act in certain ways(Polanyi 68). For example, people in market society think that economic relations are much more important than interpersonal relations (Polanyi 44). Polanyi calls the emergence of market society “the great transformation”. My thesis statement is that the shift to market society is a

As Milton Friedman once said, “Freedom is a rare and delicate plant. Our minds tell us and history confirms that the great threat to freedom is the concentration of power. Government is necessary to preserve our freedom, it is an instrument through which we can exercise our freedom; yet by concentrating power and political hands, it is also a threat to freedom.” Friedman’s “Capitalism and Freedom” takes us into the mind of an economic genius and shows us his beliefs in a free market and the threat it presents to a dictatorship. Friedman, clearly a supporter of the free market, gives examples to show how a free market can aid a society in striving for success, becoming more dominant, and becoming more powerful. Though, at times he does show how a free market has disadvantages and he makes us aware as to how it can aid people in gaining individualism, knowledge, and overall improving a society. A free market is one that the price of a good or service is determined by supply and demand, in theory, rather than by government regulation. Milton’s thoughts and theory is that through a robust free market with political freedom, economic freedom will follow. Showing how economic freedom is a crucial toward the success of political freedom, Friedman’s theory of a free market and the Do Nothing Principle are major themes throughout his book.

A free market allows businesses to compete among themselves without restrictions in hopes of encouraging competitive pricing and earning honest success. In this sense, a free market is governed almost entirely by ethics. But without restrictions, businesses can choose to collectively participate in unethical actions which would make the market corrupt and faulty. As evident in Ethan Watters ' "The Mega-Marketing of Depression in Japan", Michael Moss ' "The Extraordinary Science of Addictive Junk Food", and Joseph Stiglitz 's "Rent Seeking and the Making of an Unequal Society", [thesis: free market operates on the choice of ethics of the businesses within the market and so becomes faulty when ethics are not followed] [for example the neglection of laws, participating in anti-competitive behavior, and manipulating ethics itself]. [faulty = overpriced products, money not going to support honest companies, etc].

One of the issues that economists fail to discuss, then, is the fact that market-oriented economics is merely an artifact of our own social structure and that the grounding concepts of economics are quite different. Indeed, the grounding concepts of economics deal with the fact that people need to produce food, shelter, and clothing for their survival and that "economics" is born within the formation of any arrangement to solve the survival problem. The essential factors are production and distribution by and within the community. Economics, in other words, is part of the culture of any surviving community.

According to Polanyi, a market economy becomes a market society when all land, labour and capital are commodified (Polanyi, 1957). A market society is a structure, which primarily focuses on the production and distribution of commodities and services. This takes place through a free market system, which allows

One topic subject to never-ending debate that is reviewed, revised, then and disputed among scholars, is the market and the economy. In the book, "The Mind and The Market" by Jerry Muller (2002), he discusses the different viewpoints of scholars about capitalism in the market and the influence society holds on it. This writing is comprised of summaries of several reviews from a variety of authors, which will include their viewpoints, their criticism, and an overall review from Muller 's work. These authors include Brian Fox, Patrick Murray, Charles Tilly, and Fritz Ringer. Each author originates from respected and prestigious journals from different universities, programs, and other education systems. All intellectuals are experts in their field of study with a background in either philosophy, history, or economy, making their viewpoints meaningful, insightful, and relevant. Following the summary of each review will be a comparison and contrasting piece, continuing into an evaluation addressing if they captured the book in an appropriate way. Concluding the essay will have an input of my own personal review of the book. As shown, the reviews vary with their personal opinions regarding the positives and negatives of Muller 's work.

Milton Friedman was a 20th century American economist who advocated free-market capitalism. In 1970 he submitted an editorial article entitled “The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits” to the New York Times. In the article, Friedman argues that in free market systems it is nonsensical to make corporate entities adhere to “social responsibilities of business” pushed by activists, as corporations are artificial in nature, and thus do not have any social responsibilities other than to make money for the shareholders of the company. I will argue against this paper and support the claim corporations do in-fact have moral and ethical obligations to more than just their shareholders, and that many individuals have their stakes and livelihoods embedded within the acts of corporations. As well, the idea in the article that corporations are not moral agents has led to unsavory violations of human rights across the world, failing Kant’s second formulation of the Categorical Imperative, as well as not satisfying Act Utilitarianism. Thus, corporations, and individuals within those corporations, possess considerable ability to make ethical decisions that have great impact to many people, culminating in the truth that corporations have moral status.

The most fateful change that unfolded in the last three decades was not an increase in greed. It was the expansion of markets, and of market values, into spheres of life where they don’t belong. (4)

The economic base of society is significant as it shapes the superstructure of society. Capitalism is an unethical economic system that ultimately results to failure in blame of it’s contradictions.