Holly's Secret Garden

繼「正義」一書後，Michael Sandel教授再度出擊，在「錢所不能買的東西」(What Money Can’t Buy) 這本書裡，直指金錢入侵民主社會各種領域後，對思想行為所造成的衝擊。

延續前書的論點，作者認為市場邏輯(market logic)已滲入社會各個層面，幾乎無所不在。這種邏輯根據自由派(libertarian)經濟思想而來，強調個人有權利自由買賣所擁有的東西；在買賣雙方達成交易後，兩方各得其利，有效率地讓物品得到適當的歸屬，發揮最大的用處。簡單來講，支持市場邏輯的兩個主要觀點是個人自由(individual freedom)和功利思想(utilitarian)。而反對市場邏輯也正好由此兩點下手。自由非真自由，而功利思想最終將腐蝕腐事物本質。歸納起來，反市場邏輯的主要論點，一是公平(fairness)，二是腐化(corruption)。公平者反駁個人自由之論，強調買賣雙方若在經濟不平等的條件下交易，賣方往往因經濟拮据，在不得已的情況下出賣擁有物。在被迫、利誘下做出的抉擇，不是真正的自由交易。另外，腐化之論在破除功利思想的迷思。容或金錢的買賣可以有效率的分配物品，但物品不見得就能適得其所，反而本質會被汙染，內在價值也隨之腐敗。整本書用市場邏輯和反市場邏輯的兩種論調，反覆檢驗社會發生的實際案例，逐一剖析市場價值的弊端，提醒我們建立正確的價值觀，共造美好的民主社會。以下簡要陳述書上所提及的案例，並引用這兩種思考角度來分析批判。 

1. 用錢買方便

美國社會有一種代客排隊的行業，可以替客人漏夜排隊，買免費的劇場票或替一些利益團體在聽證會的門口排隊卡位。此外，多花點錢請人排隊，能看名醫、得到專屬醫生全天候的照護、國家公園的露營權、教皇的彌撒大會入場券、搖滾音樂會的門票等。一切眾人擠破頭想得到的好東西，只要多花點錢，就有專業排隊人士替你辦到。快速通關也是用錢買特權的一例，多花點錢，可以優先通過機場安全檢查、使用快速道路、遊樂園設施、語音優先服務等。這種特權具體來講就是插隊權(que-jumping rights)。排隊展現了民主社會的公平理念，先到先服務(first come, first serve)，無階級貴賤之差別。現在用錢買插隊權，凸顯有錢階級享有美好事物的優先權，無錢者只能落後排隊，不確定的等待美好事物的降臨。

用錢買插隊權，以自由交易的觀點來看很合理。交易的雙方各得其利，替人排隊者得到該有的酬勞，出錢者得到想要的東西或服務，使用者付費也符合公平的原則，有何不對之處?簡單講，民主社會資源共享的理念，因金錢的介入而被破壞了。劇場、演唱會、聽證會、國家公園等是所有公民共享的公共空間，因容量有限，所以要排隊，讓先到者可以先擁有使用權。有沒有錢沒關係，只要你有時間有熱情，就來排隊等候。現在金錢的介入，讓有錢的人不必在人群中排隊，就能享受到美好的事物，拿走了有限的配額，讓排隊者空手而返。這意味著階級差別，有錢就有權，錢排擠了公共空間不分貴賤，市民一起參與、一起擁有的意義。錢腐化了美好事物本質的論點，在此應證。再者，用錢買的人，不見得比排隊等的人，更值得擁有這樣東西。有錢請人排隊，領取免費劇場票的人，對戲劇的熱情及品味，可能遠低於那些沒錢只能排隊的人。金錢可以有效率的買到這樣東西，但不表示買主是最有資格，最適合擁有這樣東西的人。功利思想者值得深思，市場邏輯不見得讓物品得到最好的分配。

2. 用錢當誘因

雖說有錢能使鬼推磨是自古以來不變的事實，但近年來錢能辦到的事，卻越加光怪陸離。慈善團體花錢請身染毒癮的婦人節育，杜絕將來生出毒癮寶寶，這該是崇高的行為，哪裡不妥? 因為出售身體貶損了人的尊嚴。收取金錢放棄生育權等於是把身體當成物品來販賣。再者，毒癮婦女因有錢可賺，放棄生育權，這是出於經濟的需要，不是真正自由的買賣，因雙方的立足點並不平等。為錢而出售身體的例子，還包括在身體上刺青替商家打廣告等。醫療機構為節省醫療資源，花錢請體重過重的危險族群減重，這是一種防微杜漸，避免這些高危險群將來罹患各種疾病，浪費更多醫療資源的明智之舉，這樣也有問題嗎? 有。金錢的介入，汙染了追求健康的正確動機。現在減重是為了錢，不是因自愛、自律而追求健康。金錢模糊了人對健康該抱持的正確態度。儘管買賣雙方各得所需，但對身體的正確態度已被扭曲。

金錢腐蝕美好事物的本質，扭曲正確價值觀的案例層出不窮。學校付錢獎勵學生閱讀，破壞了閱讀的意義。學生為錢而讀，不是因閱讀帶來的內在滿足喜悅感而讀。中國一胎政策下，有錢的夫妻向窮人買生育劵，想多生幾胎繼承家業；窮人願意販賣生育權，反正可能養不起，不如拿錢當報酬。金錢買到生孩子的權利，卻汙染了為人父母(parenthood)的意義。不管富人窮人，都有為人父母、疼愛子女的人權。有錢的企業花錢購買排放廢氣的權力，顯示了金錢腐蝕身為世界公民的意義，金錢泯滅了做為世界公民該有的合作、自律及責任感。另外，花錢獵殺犀牛、近距離射殺海象等行為，可以滿足買賣雙方的需求，一方是要錢的飼主以及擁有射殺海象權的少數民族伊努特人，一方是要滿足獵殺野生動物成就感的獵人，所謂的成就感，是近乎變態的傲慢與自大(曾經有射殺黑犀牛者宣稱，射殺犀牛是對犀牛的最高敬意!!)在錢的利誘下，對野生動物該有的尊重與保護，都可棄之不顧。

3. 金錢的染污

有些東西，錢可以買，但買了之後就會汙染其本質。奧斯卡獎盃可以出售，但出價買它的人，並沒有買到它所代表的藝術成就。棄嬰可以標價被收養，價格高低依其外表討喜度決定，但此時嬰兒已與網拍的物品無異。道歉啟事、婚禮祝詞都可以委託專業人士代為操刀。如果對方是知己好友，這份祝福及道歉就顯得十分廉價無意義，因為文中沒有你的真情義至。經濟學者認為給朋友禮物不如給現金，現金可以讓朋友買到他想要的東西，給禮物他不見得喜歡。所以給禮物沒效率，給錢才能滿足對方所需。錢一旦進入友誼這塊神聖領域，就會貶損友誼的真諦。錢驅趕了禮物所蘊藏的體貼、關懷與情意。贈與朋友自己喜歡的物品，或者考慮朋友的喜好、處境後選擇禮物送他，這才是友誼的精神。禮物或許不適用，但其中的真情是金錢無法取代的。

錢還會污染人類的同理心。一個有趣的案例是接小孩放學。某學校想要家長放學時準時接小孩，於是規定遲到的家長要罰錢。結果卻是遲接的情形不減反增。原因為何? 金錢趕走了歉意和體貼。不罰錢時，遲到的家長對留校照顧孩童的老師還會心懷愧疚，對耽誤老師下班時間深感抱歉。一旦罰了錢，遲到再久都沒關係了，反正給了錢當老師的加班費，不用再對老師感到有所虧欠。這是把罰金(fine)當付費金(fare)的心態。殊不知罰金的意義是對某事的不贊同、不允許。把罰金當付費金是花錢買方便的心態，就自己的方便，做出與社會倫理相違的事情。無奈現在把罰金當付費金的例子越來越多。

錢污染的神聖事物，還包括善心。拿捐血來講，有些人認為該用錢鼓勵捐血，這樣血源才不虞匱乏，光呼籲大家發揮愛心捐血是不切實際的。愛心像稀有的礦藏，越挖掘越少，所以不能光靠宣揚愛心，用錢買血才能立竿見影。為錢賣血的行為，汙染了捐血助人的意義。人與人之間互相關懷幫助，是構成美好社會的要素，金錢的入侵，趕走了這種特質。認為非得靠錢，才能買到足夠的血這樣的說法，小看了人性的光明面。愛心不是存量有限的稀有礦物，挖久了就沒了；愛心是越挖越多的寶藏，源源不絕，待人開發。捐血行善，內心得到助人的滿足，這份喜悅將激發下次的捐血，何來愛心匱乏之慮?為錢而捐血就失去了純粹為助人而捐血的意義，錢染汙了行善的動機。

4. 用錢賭人命

保險的用意在保障個人福利，萬一受傷或身故，可以對家庭有經濟上的補助。現在許多公司替員工投保壽險，幫員工出錢繳保費，目的不為保障員工福祉，卻是等待他們死亡，有身故保險金可領。替員工保險變成一種賭注，一種邪惡的期待，期待他們死亡帶來豐厚的利潤，也暗示著員工活著不如死去對公司來的有價值。老闆出錢替員工買保險，下意識裡懷抱著對死亡的期盼，扭曲了對生命的尊重。更甚者，在網路上集體下注，賭名人何時死亡，押對者得大筆獎金，也是把人命當物品看待，拿別人的死亡當賺錢的管道。表面看來，這種賭注不對當事人造成任何傷害，名人反正是陌生人，押他們的生死不會真的造成他們的死亡，何來非道德的撻伐?其實看似無害的賭注，卻是對生命的不尊重，遊戲般猜測、預估、論斷他人的死亡或災難，人命顯得輕如鴻毛。期待別人的死亡為自己帶來財富是金錢對人最大的污辱。

5. 用錢置入行銷

現今的大企業，已滲透到運動、市政、學校等公共領域，展開置入性行銷的大戰。以棒球為例，贊助球隊的企業，對球隊或球場有命名權。轉播球賽的同時，要求播報員在報導中穿插企業名字。政府管理的公共領域也快速的淪為企業必爭之地。地鐵、公園、風景區、警車，小至滅火器都充斥著贊助廠商的廣告。企業贊助政府買警車或滅火器，政府以廣告空間或獨家販售權來回饋企業，依自由貿易的角度，這是兩者互惠的行為。但從另一個角度看，這代表公共領域淪為企業的私有化，有錢的企業在眾人出入最頻繁的空間中，獨享曝光權或販售權。試想，執法的警車外殼漆上企業的標語在街上巡邏，執法的公信力還存在嗎? 即使警方強調執法的公正不受企業贊助的影響，但企業享有某種特權已是默認的事實。

在金錢的攻勢下，連學校這塊神聖的淨土也淪陷了。企業提供的免費教材，內容呈現偏頗或具偏見的事實。例如支持煤炭產業的企業所提供的能源教材，只會強調煤炭的好處，完全不提煤災、有毒廢料及溫室效應等燃煤後所引起的後遺症。容或企業贊助的免費教材內容無偏頗，但商品的置入性行銷卻是不可避免。免費視聽教材、教具等處處烙印著企業品牌。當A企業的科學教材裡要傳授濃度的概念時，不忘在學習包裡附上有過濾功能的湯匙，可以證明其公司生產的麵醬，濃於死對頭B企業的麵醬。知名糖果公司提供數學教材，教小朋友數其製造的糖果來練習算數。或者提供免費的軟糖請小朋友從中間咬下去，感受爆漿的滋味，藉以說明火山爆發時，熔岩從火山口噴發的感覺。企業贊助學校，提供免費教材、視聽設備等，經費拮据的學校當然求之不得，但讓商業利益進入校園，破壞了學校教育的真諦。學校要教育學生有反省批判力，反省自己的欲求是否恰當，是否該修正、該提升。這和企業強行置入，誘導孩童消費是相違的。企業鼓勵消費，滿足慾望；學校該做的是陶冶品格，讓學生知所反省節制。兩者逕渭分明並不相容。

結論

以上所引的例子，說明市場價值觀盛行的今日，似乎已經沒有金錢買不到的東西了。這樣的社會對大家好嗎? 這是本書一直要大家思考的問題。美好生活的標準在哪裡?甚麼樣的生活才算美好?這是一個沒有標準答案的議題，卻是世人共同追尋的目標。

從本書中，我們看見自由交易和倫理道德兩種觀點的互相辯證。前者為市場價值護航，後者提出質疑反思。前者已是主流意識，侵入社會各個階層，廣為人民接受。後者以倫理角度，探討事物本身的意義，是否因金錢而扭曲變質，民主社會講求的公平原則，是否被金錢腐蝕。答案是肯定的。例如，在金錢萬能的今日，棒球場已不是往昔貧富共聚一堂，為鍾愛的球隊加油的公共領域了。現今的球場，貧富已被區隔，富者高坐於遮風擋雨的貴賓席觀賞球賽，和露天下的觀眾形成強烈對比。以前球星的簽名、衣服、球具、球場上遺留的一切「聖物」，積極熱情的球迷都有機會拿到。現在這些聖物，無一不被標價，無一不是有錢才買得起的收藏品。金錢腐蝕了公共空間，區隔了貧富，公民意識(citizenship)無從凝聚，這對民主社會的族群融合是極大的傷害。貧富差距自古皆有，為何今日要特別加以審視?原因就在富者今日能買的東西，遠超過以前的年代。不像過去，富人有錢買豪宅遊艇等奢侈品而已。現在有錢可以買到命名權、廣告權、插隊權、生育權等。這些不純粹只是物品而已，而是蘊含人權的抽象意義，錢可以買的其實是優勢與特權，這正是問題所在。當金錢跨越了物品的藩籬，入侵公共生活領域時，就徹底破壞了公共領域該有的公平與中立性，加深了貧富的鴻溝。美好的生活不該是如此。市場價值觀的氾濫，已經到了我們不能不覺察、反省、抉擇、然後行動了!

Excerpt from What Money Can’t Buy by Michael Sandel

There are some things money can’t buy, but these days, not many. Today, almost everything is up for sale. Here are a few examples:

• A prison cell upgrade: $82 per night. In Santa Ana, California, and some other cities, nonviolent offenders can pay for better accommodations---a clean, quiet jail cell, away from the cells for nonpaying prisoners.

• Access to the car pool lane while driving solo: $8 during rush hour. Minneapolis and other cities are trying to ease traffic congestion by letting solo drivers pay to drive in car pool lanes, at rates that vary according to traffic.

• The services of an Indian surrogate mother to carry a pregnancy: $6,250. Western couples seeking surrogates increasingly outsource the job to India, where the practice is legal and the price is less than one- third the going rate in the United States.

• The right to immigrate to the United States: $500,000. Foreigners who invest $500,000 and create at least ten jobs in an area of high unemployment are eligible for a green card that entitles them to permanent residency.

• The right to shoot an endangered black rhino: $150,000. South Africa has begun letting ranchers sell hunters the right to kill a limited number of rhinos, to give the ranchers an incentive to raise and protect the endangered species.

The cell phone number of your doctor: $1,500 and up per year. A growing number of “concierge” doctors offer cell phone access and same-day appointments for patients willing to pay annual fees ranging from $1,500 to $25,000.

• The right to emit a metric ton of carbon into the atmosphere: €13 (about $18). The European Union runs a carbon emissions market that enables companies to buy and sell the right to pollute.

• Admission of your child to a prestigious university: Although the price is not posted, officials from some top universities told The Wall Street Journal that they accept some less than stellar students whose parents are wealthy and likely to make substantial financial contributions.

Not everyone can afford to buy these things. But today there are lots of new ways to make money. If you need to earn some extra cash, here are some novel possibilities:

• Rent out space on your forehead (or elsewhere on your body) to display commercial advertising: $777. Air New Zealand hired thirty people to shave their heads and wear temporary tattoos with the slogan “Need a change? Head down to New Zealand.”

• Serve as a human guinea pig in a drug safety trial for a pharmaceutical company: $7,500. The pay can be higher or lower, depending on the invasiveness of the procedure used to test the drugs effect, and the discomfort involved.

• Fight in Somalia or Afghanistan for a private military company: $250 per month to $1,000 per day. The pay varies according to qualifications, experience, and nationality.

• Stand in line overnight on Capitol Hill to hold a place for a lobbyist who wants to attend a congressional hearing: $15-$20 per hour. The lobbyists pay line-standing companies, who hire homeless people and others to queue up.

• If you are a second grader in an underachieving Dallas school, read a book: $2. To encourage reading, the schools pay kids for each book they read.

• If you are obese, lose fourteen pounds in four months: $378. Companies and health insurers offer financial incentives for weight loss and other kinds of healthy behavior.

• Buy the life insurance policy of an ailing or elderly person, pay the annual premiums while the person is alive, and then collect the death benefit when he or she dies: potentially, millions (depending on the policy). This form of betting on the lives of strangers has become a $30 billion industry. The sooner the stranger dies, the more the investor makes.

We live at a time when almost everything can be bought and sold. Over the past three decades, markets and market values have come to govern our lives as never before. We did not arrive at this condition through any deliberate choice. It is almost as if it came upon us.

As the cold war ended, markets and market thinking enjoyed unrivaled prestige, understandably so. No other mechanism for organizing the production and distribution of goods had proved as successful at generating affluence and prosperity. And yet, even as growing numbers of countries around the world embraced market mechanisms in the operation of their economies, something else was happening. Market values were coming to play a greater and greater role in social life. Economics was becoming an imperial domain. Today, the logic of buying and selling no longer applies to material goods alone but increasingly governs the whole of life. It is time to ask whether we want to live this way.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Why worry that we are moving toward a society in which everything is up for sale? For two reasons: one is about inequality; the other is about corruption. Consider inequality. In a society where everything is for sale, life is harder for those of modest means. The more money can buy, the more affluence (or the lack of it) matters.

If the only advantage of affluence were the ability to buy yachts, sports cars, and fancy vacations, inequalities of income and wealth would not matter very much. But as money comes to buy more and more---political influence, good medical care, a home in a safe neighborhood rather than a crime-ridden one, access to elite schools rather than failing ones---the distribution of income and wealth looms larger and larger. Where all good things are bought and sold, having money makes all the difference in the world.

This explains why the last few decades have been especially hard on poor and middle-class families. Not only has the gap between rich and poor widened, the commodification of everything has sharpened the sting of inequality by making money matter more.

The second reason we should hesitate to put everything up for sale is more difficult to describe. It is not about inequality and fairness but about the corrosive tendency of markets. Putting a price on the good things in life can corrupt them. That’s because markets don’t only allocate goods; they also express and promote certain attitudes toward the goods being exchanged. Paying kids to read books might get them to read more, but also teach them to regard reading as a chore rather than a source of intrinsic satisfaction. Auctioning seats in the freshman class to the highest bidders might raise revenue but also erode the integrity of the college and the value of its diploma. Hiring foreign mercenaries to fight our wars might spare the lives of our citizens but corrupt the meaning of citizenship.

Economists often assume that markets are inert, that they do not affect the goods they exchange. But this is untrue. Markets leave their mark. Sometimes, market values crowd out nonmarket values worth caring about.