I say these are uneducated because I really don’t know
much about the free market, but I learned some things today, and this is my
push back:
Unprofiting endeavours
Children
Profit motivation
And workers.
There are some things which do not create a profit even
though they are worthwhile endeavours. I found out today that my uncle had a cancerous
polyp removed so a thought that came to me is cancer research. One could spend their entire life searching
for a cure, find things that point other researchers in the right direction,
but ultimate find nothing they can sell.
A similar concern I have is with Children. I think they should all get equal opportunities. I hope they can all have quality
education.
I think in the ideal free market, teachers and
researchers would be funded by donations of the people. It would be neither force nor coercion that
made people pay taxes to the system, but out of freewill and goodness people
would donate to such noble causes.
Sounds great, but what if people don’t donate very much? Is it right for a researcher to struggle to
get by because people give him little support?
Or what if he takes a pay cut to get cutting edge technologies. Worse even would be if the leading
researchers and top teachers gave up their jobs to become dog trainers because
it made them more money.
I think profit motivation is ugly. It seems to suggest that more money brings
more happiness. I doubt this is the
case. I am not alone in this doubt:
(but how can one measure happiness?)
It seems criminal to me for a society to function by profit motivation. Perhaps I am unrealistically optimistic in believing motivation could happen any other way. However, Seeking more money is akin to seeking more stuff in a world of limited resources. Th more I take for myself, the less there is for others. As Walter Rauschenbusch wrote in Christianity and the Social Gospel, “The rule of trade, to buy in the cheapest market and sell in the dearest, simply means that a man must give as little to the other man and get as much for himself as possible. This rule makes even honest competitive trade – to say nothing of the immense volume of more or less dishonest and rapacious trade – antagonistic to Christian principles. The law of Christ, wherever it finds expression, reverses the law of trade. It bids us demand little for ourselves and give much service. A mother does not try to make as rich a living as possible, and give minimum of service to her children. It would be a sorry teacher who would lie awake thinking how he could corner the market on education and give his students as small a chunk of information as possible from the pedagogic ice-wagon.” I have a hard time meshing the profit motif with love, generosity or compassion. Profit maximizing often leads to exploitation.
It seems criminal to me for a society to function by profit motivation. Perhaps I am unrealistically optimistic in believing motivation could happen any other way. However, Seeking more money is akin to seeking more stuff in a world of limited resources. Th more I take for myself, the less there is for others. As Walter Rauschenbusch wrote in Christianity and the Social Gospel, “The rule of trade, to buy in the cheapest market and sell in the dearest, simply means that a man must give as little to the other man and get as much for himself as possible. This rule makes even honest competitive trade – to say nothing of the immense volume of more or less dishonest and rapacious trade – antagonistic to Christian principles. The law of Christ, wherever it finds expression, reverses the law of trade. It bids us demand little for ourselves and give much service. A mother does not try to make as rich a living as possible, and give minimum of service to her children. It would be a sorry teacher who would lie awake thinking how he could corner the market on education and give his students as small a chunk of information as possible from the pedagogic ice-wagon.” I have a hard time meshing the profit motif with love, generosity or compassion. Profit maximizing often leads to exploitation.
Two things were mentioned today that I have a hard time
reconciling. “No minimum wage” and “do
no harm.” Let’s face it, people in
difficult situations will be willing to work for exceedingly little. Humans enter into exploitative environments
because they feel they have no choice.
Desperation will lead one to work 14 hours a day in unsafe conditions
with the hope of feeding the children, even if nothing is left for oneself. Just because someone, by choice, enters into
an exploitative situation does not mean they deserve to be exploited. Such
situations are harmful. If someone if
doing valuable work, they deserved to be paid a minimum wage. They deserve to eat and feed their family and
have a place to live. To pay them any less
is harmful, it’s ugly. While our system
is not free today, such situations still happen. A successful way of lowering costs (ergo
increase profit) is to pay your workers less.
If people can get away with paying their workers less, they will, even
if their workers are worth more. In my
estimation, a free market without regulations ensuring the rights of workers to
earn a fair wage will exploit the poor for profit.
As mentioned above, I don’t know tons about the free
market ideal. These are just some of my
hesitations based on my (mis)understandings.
Please, push back.