Debra Satz, in “Why Some Things Should Not Be for Sale”, argues for a more complex approach in market regulation, as some markets are more problematic than others. While economists tend to evaluate exchanges based only on proficiency (Satz 2010, p2), Satz considers the social context of individual practices in market relationships. In Staz proposed theory, there are four parameters of a market that can make it “noxious”. Noxious in this case meaning the effect of the market causes harmful consequences on society or persons involved. First, some markets may be reliant on the vulnerability of one party to trade. Second, some markets may have exceedingly bad consequences, in terms of welfare or status, for persons involved. Third, some markets may be one-sidedness because of insufficient information, knowledge, or ability to understand or forecast the consequences of an arrangement. Fourth, some markets may have bad consequences for society at large when they reinforce discrimination or inequality of status. For example markets that are considered noxious due to one or more parameters being present in their sale are child labor, prostitution and kidney exchange.
All markets may be affected by parts of the four criteria however, some markets are operationally reliant on on them, and these are the markets, Satz argues, are noxious markets, that need regulating. Satz focuses on “noxious markets” because they can restrain or undermine the development of desirable human qualities, shape preferences in undesirable ways or promote objectionable social relationships. Satz argues that the solution is not prohibition because the consequences of prohibition may be worse than the market itself. Satz instead states that markets need a greater r...
... middle of paper ...
...er analysis to reflections on economic desperation or injustices in the distribution of income or wealth. She also argues that some markets form and change societies and its citizens, and that because of that effect on our identities and personhood, some goods should not be for sale. Satz is able to convey her opinion in a concise manner as she uses the example of contract pregnancy and demonstrates how inequalities prevail in the market transactions. Satz shows how commodifying reproductive labor in society can reinforces gender inequality of status and promotes prejudices about the role of women in society. However, it is important to note that Satz argues that our negative reactions to noxious markets are not a result of any essential feature of such markets but rather, we react because of the social circumstances in which they operate, for example prostitution.
According to Karl Polanyi, a market is a meeting place for the purpose of exchange and transaction (Polanyi 1957, 56). The prompt states that a standard view of market holds that most or all values are external to the logic of self-interested, mutually beneficial exchange. Karl Polanyi and Friedrich Hayek analyze this view of market in their writings and evaluate it according to their own beliefs. Hayek seems to agree with the standard view. He believes that values like the concern for justice or the minimizing of people suffering are not embedded in the market, but are external from it. He supports this view by introducing the concept of what he calls “catallaxy.” Polanyi, however, takes an opposing view to externalized values by saying that values are, in fact, embedded in the market. He presents an overview of how history supports this view.
With prostitution still arising and thriving in present day America the Argument and war waged on it by media has changed from an advocated perspective, to being seen as present day slavery among women. Especially with modern practices of forced trafficking and drugged prostitution. the views have changed from one of a women's private and personal freedom of choice, to one of "the ones who weren't lucky enough to get away from being drugged, kidnapped and forced into slaved prostitution."
The free market is the only economic system consistent with personal freedom. It thus not only provides the basis for the greatest improvement in living standards, it also provides the basis for remaining
Commodities are at the top of this chain. A commodity is anything that is produced for exchange. They have two parts to them, the use of the commodity and its value. With women, and men the use of the human body is humanity, doing whatever it is that pleases you, whether it be riding your bike, reading, dancing, whatever, it comes down to your humanity. Their humanity is turned into a value when women have to sell their use to obtain different forms of commodities, to then exchange those commodities for more commodities. In capitalism women are defined by their bodies, and judged by what their bodies can do, and look like. Women have to sell their humanity because in capitalism that’s the only thing people have to sell. In capitalism it doesn’t matter who or what you are, as long as you’re producing something that will make money. Women sell their humanity in different ways, there seems to be a same scale in place with women’s jobs, modeling (which is at the far right), stripping (somewhere in between), and prostitution (which is at the far left). Most wouldn’t connect these three with having any basic ground (maybe stripping & prostitution), but their basic ground is that women are all selling there use for some form of a commodity, which most of the time is money.
McMahon, Darrin M. "The Market and the Pursuit of Happiness.” Society 43.2 (2006): 53-61. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 20 July 2011.
During this time in society the industry of prostitution was an economic gold mine. The women operate the brothel while very distinguished men in the community own and take care of the up keep. The brothel keepers are seen as nothing more than common home wrecking whores. However, the owners of the brothels are viewed as successful business men.
The current issues that have been created by the market have trapped our political system in a never-ending cycle that has no solution but remains salient. There is constant argument as to the right way to handle the market, the appropriate regulatory measures, and what steps should be taken to protect those that fail to be competitive in the market. As the ideological spectrum splits on the issue and refuses to come to a meaningful compromise, it gets trapped in the policy cycle and in turn traps the cycle. Other issues fail to be handled as officials drag the market into every issue area and forum as a tool to direct and control the discussion. Charles Lindblom sees this as an issue that any society that allows the market to control government will face from the outset of his work.
This essay aims to focus on the inequalities that exist in the family household and the labour market with the purpose of analysing how men and women’s roles in society have been affected by them. When an individual is born they are given a sex, male or female. This is an ascribed status an individual has no control over. Gender is a social status, man or woman. This is given to an individual by society and decrees the traditional stereotypical qualities associated with the specific gender. Traditionally a man is known to be dominant, strong, and competitive where as a woman is known to be caring, giving, and compassionate.
The emergence of market society is what Polanyi refers to as “the great transformation” (Polanyi, 1957). This great transformation is significant when discussing market society, as it is a transformation of all society. It brought forth change in the organization of the market system, and therefore society due to its efficiency in production, distribution and commodification of labour, land and money. Many changes took place with the emergence of market society, especially in relation to labour, or the work of people.
The main objective of this essay is to understand how market society emerged, but first the defintion and characteristics of a market society must be understood. According to Polanyi, “Market economy implies a self-regulating system of markets.... it is an economy directed by market prices and nothing but market prices”(Polanyi 43). Similarily, Heilbroner explains how the market “allows society to ensure its own provisioning”(Heilbroner 12). Both of these explanations describe how the market economy is self regulated, meaning that this “economic system is controlled, regulated and directed by markets alone...
Class this semester was widely based on the ideas and problematic events in which revolve around the idea of globalization. This term, idea, or concept poses many negativities to the gender of women. Despite the media and the common portrayal that the idea of globalization is a positive thing for the world, in many instances it is causing great negativity for people, specifically women. Globalization can be applied to many aspects of culture but many times it is applied in terms of economics. In the patriarchal world in which exists when speaking about economics it is typically a male centered conversation due to the males typically being in lead roles of the work force despite many women in this country and well across borders in other countries being very highly educated and capable of carrying out such jobs. Many of these women who seek to be educated and successful in the workforce do not achieve their goals and fall back into their gender roles which goes against their personal goals. This was demonstrated very well by the case study of “Clashing Dreams: Highly Educated Overseas Brides and Low-Wage U.S. Husbands” written by Hung Cam Thai. Not only are these brides in which are talked about in this essay failing at their personal goals they are also failing at the goals in which Estelle B. Freedman discusses in her book No Turning Back. In this work she speaks much about transnational feminism and the objectives in which much be met to obtain equality rights for women transnational. The link between Freedman’s work and the study of Vietnamese brides marrying transnational is undeniable not for positive outcomes but for negative. By linking these two works not only will it show what needs to be done for women to obtain equal ri...
This essay will examine the concept of market failure and the measures that governments take remedy the failure of the market.
Therefore a free market is not desirable as maximizing their utility is priority. So government is expected to correct the market failure by choosing to char...
The objective of my paper is to examine the connection between Capitalism and women’s both social and economical inequality. Marxist feminism explores this question by laying out an economic theory that shows a correlation between the emergence of capitalism, production and private property and the continued oppression of women. Other theorists argue that this oppression is due to an already existing patriarchal society.
Women’s subordination within the labour market is seen by Marxist feminists as suiting the needs of capitalism as women are considered a ‘reserve army of labour’ as they are a more disposable part of the workforce. According to Beechey (1986) women are a cheap ‘reserve army of labour’ that are brought in during economic booms but then thrown out during slumps. Women are often not members of trade unions and are prepared to work for less money as their wage could be a second income. This benefits capitalism as a group of unemployed people looking for work creates competition and exploitation. Employers are given an advantage which allows them to reduce wages and increase the rate of exploitation. Benston (1972) supports this as women are used to benefitting the operation of the capitalist economy by carrying out unprepared work in the home. This proves that patriarchy dominates women which leads to women’s subordination. Hartmann (1981) believes that patriarchy and the economy both play a crucial role in explaining and understanding gender inequality. Historically, men have controlled women especially by control of labour power. This can come through legislation that operates economically to the benefit of men, for example Maternity and Paternity Rights. This proves that patriarchy and economics together explains gender inequality. However, Walby (1986) argues that women staying at home can actually harm capitalism because if women were to compete for jobs with men this would lower wages and increase profits. Women who earn also have superior spending power which would boost the economy and benefit