Editing Neoclassical economics (section)

=== Ethics of markets ===
Neoclassical economics tends to promote [[commodification]] and [[privatization]] of goods due to its principle that market exchange generally results in the most effective allocation of goods. For example, some economists support markets for human organs, on the basis that it increases supply of life-saving organs and benefits willing donors financially.<ref>{{Cite news|last=topeditor|date=November 13, 2007|title=Econ Debate: A Market for Human Organs?|language=en-US|work=[[The Wall Street Journal]]|url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/BL-REB-725|access-date=May 2, 2021|issn=0099-9660|archive-date=May 2, 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210502154039/https://www.wsj.com/articles/BL-REB-725|url-status=dead}}</ref> However, there are arguments in [[moral philosophy]] that use of markets for certain goods is inherently unethical. Political philosopher [[Michael Sandel]] summarizes that market exchanges have two ethical problems: coercion and corruption.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Sandel|first=Michael|date=May 1998|title=What Money Can't Buy: The Moral Limits of Markets|url=https://tannerlectures.utah.edu/_documents/a-to-z/s/sandel00.pdf|website=The Tanner Lectures on Human Values, The University of Utah|access-date=May 2, 2021|archive-date=April 21, 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210421042506/https://tannerlectures.utah.edu/_documents/a-to-z/s/sandel00.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref> Coercion happens because market participation may not be as free as proponents often claim: people often participate in markets because it is the only way to survive, which is not truly voluntary. Corruption describes how commodification of a good can inherently degrade its value.