What Money Can’t Buy: The Moral Limits of Markets

Michael Sandel argues that the ethical consequences of free-market values are frequently downplayed or ignored. What are some of these ethical consequences, according to his analysis? Can ethical values and free-market values ever be reconciled, or are they inherently opposed to one another?

Do you believe that the entrances to more expensive, shortcut lines should be visible to the public, or intentionally separate? Are lines without any financial shortcuts inherently fairer, as Sandel suggests, or do they simply reflect one’s access to another valuable commodity (e.g., disposable time)?

Research some of the ideas of Greg Mankiw. How do his economic theories compare to Sandel’s? In what ways are the two thinkers different or similar to one another in their analytical approaches, values, and/or assumptions?