Value and Money

Money has the property of being exchangeable for anything which one can exchange for. It is the medium of fungible value, or to put it in the vernacular, it can buy anything that can be bought. There are valuable things which cannot be bought. These are internal goods, such as virtue, or social goods, such as community. These goods which cannot be purchased are still considered worth monetary value, however, via the supposed equivalency of time and money. The value of the internal goods may not correlate with how much time they require, however.

It is also worth noting that the value of items is variable. I do not simply mean that prices change, but that the value of an item is agent relative, and this in several ways. The most obvious way in which the value of an item is agent relative is that we prefer different things and have different needs. Another way in which things vary in value is that we have different funds, and thus for the poorer, the more essential items are worth more. The essentials are of basically infinite worth, although how one attains those essentials, what kind of food one gets, may depend on other factors, including one's budget.

Some of the preferences we have, and thus the values we regard things as having, are irrational. The costs of some items therefore do not fit with what it takes to make those items, but is simply dependent on how much we want them. This drives up costs for those who do not regard those items as worth the cost.

Some items could be made so that they would be worth more to us, and yet no one has any interest in producing them. In particular, planned obsolescence ensures that purchasers buy more often, and introduces more bad quality items into the market, and thus into the junkyard. If a company wants to prove that it cares about the environment, making products to last would be a good way. Other ways cost companies little, but gain them the applause of nominal environmentalists.

Some internal and social goods have an absolute value which is independent of both economic status and preferences. It is just as worthwhile to cultivate virtue and community no matter where one is in society. Nevertheless, it costs differently for different groups. The time it takes is actually worth more for those who are poor, despite their hourly wage generally being lower, because it costs more directly in the necessities of life. The rich can cultivate virtue in the spare time which they can afford because they have more money than is requisite to securing the necessities of life. The opportunity costs, then, of living a good life, are greater for the poor than for the rich.

In fact, this can be generalized to almost anything: opportunity costs of acquiring goods, internal or external, are greater for the poor than for the wealthy. Not every dollar is of equal value. Because of this, the less one has, the less ability one has to impact the economy, and thus the more one must buy according to a traditional account where quality and cheapness of the goods matters, and the supplier is fungible. Thus, the poor cannot use their purchasing patterns to push back against companies which hire them for little, because they are either dependent upon those companies for acquiring what they need, or could not purchase from those companies if they wanted to.

The same applies to work choices. The wealthy can afford to be concerned with life/work balance. The poor cannot. If a company requires workaholism (otherwise known as being "career oriented" "dedicated to the company" etc.), and it pays, then there is a class of workers which cannot avoid being formed into a vicious form of life.

None of this is limited to the poor qua low income. There is also a group which we may call the poor qua high outgo. What matters is that both groups get to keep a small amount of money, if any, after food is bought, bills are paid, etc. Whether this is due to loans or bad jobs, both are in a situation which is harmful to cultivating virtue and community. Companies then sell to these groups by promising them community and virtuous living--promises which cannot be kept, because they promise what cannot be sold.