Michael Sandel on INET's What Money Can't Buy Video Series

Learn more at www.whatmoneyca...
Should you be able to sell your kidney? Should we auction off the right to immigrate? What about paying people to vote? Ahead of the launch of INET’s “What Money Can’t Buy: The Series,” Michael Sandel and INET President Rob Johnson discuss the commodification of everything, and the questions it raises about the kind of society we want to live in.

[@huehuecoyotl2]

I would take his phrase of economists pretending to be "neutral" and replace it with economists pretending to be "objective". That is the fundamental problem in my mind with the study of mainstream economics. It is masquerading as an objective science, when in fact it has little if any respect or attention to empiricism and pretends that the social systems it is trying to model are more simple than they really are. It results in a discipline that never advances in understanding and never develops tools that enable a better allocation of scarce resources (which are real goods and services).

[@smartiepancake]

I object! "The classical economists from Adam Smith to Karl Marx .. agreed that economics was a branch of moral philosophy" You mean, from Adam Smith to Henry George - the latter's writings are consumed like no other's by ethics and morality. Get the story right, please. Even the Pope couldn't dodge Henry George.

[@PoliticalEconomy101]

This is why these liberals dont make any sense. If you are going to have a more robust democracy, equality, and community it NO LONGER can be recognized as liberalism. You are essentially on your way to socialism, a superior ideology

[@smartiepancake]

Winston Churchill - liberalism v socialism: "Socialism seeks to pull down wealth; Liberalism seeks to raise up poverty. [Loud cheers.] Socialism would destroy private interests; Liberalism would preserve private interests in the only way in which they can be safely and justly preserved, namely, by reconciling them with public right. [Cheers.] Socialism would kill enterprise; Liberalism would rescue enterprise from the trammels of privilege and preference. [Cheers.] Socialism assails the pre-eminence of the individual; Liberalism seeks, and shall seek more in the future, to build up a minimum standard for the mass. [Cheers.] Socialism exalts the rule; Liberalism exalts the man. Socialism attacks capital; Liberalism attacks monopoly. [Cheers.]"

[@PoliticalEconomy101]

LOL great propaganda. Brainwashed much?

[@smartiepancake]

Labour and capital are not enemies. The "enemy" is state backed monopoly. Give me one argument. One.

[@greattimed]

A typical libertarian and simplistic argument. State vs the market is the most juvenile and fake dichotomies ever. You want to know how ''Capitalist'' South Korea developed? Through heavy government intervention. The same with Japan and MITI. Hell the United States had the Homestead Act where the government directed very cheap land to people. Go watch the ''Government as Entrepreneur'' video on here also.