Recently I had to face the
prospect of moving a large amount of house hold waste to the dump
without access to a car or van of any sort. I do not have a driving
licence so renting one was out of the question. The solution to this
problem was evident; find an obliging friend who would happily drive
my broken old furniture to the dump. This was easily done but a
second problem quickly emerged, how best to pay my friend for his
time and the use of his car. A simple cash payment between friends
seemed crass, more akin to a business relationship than an honest
friendship, so I was left with a dilemma.
What I actually
wanted to acquire from my friend was use of his vehicle and his
skills as a driver. Obtaining these for myself had been options in
the past, but I deemed the cost of learning to drive and purchasing a
car too high and thus declined. This afforded me more money to
indulge in my other interests such as buying minimalistic furniture,
however the keen investor is usually proved right and thus when some
large items of furniture were broken beyond repair I needed to find
some means of economic exchange to secure the removal of a broken
wardrobe from my living room.
If hard currency was
out of the question, what could I offer in exchange for my friend’s
Sunday afternoon and his driving skills? Eventually I settled on the
idea of a goods exchange. I would use some of my current wealth to
purchase goods, which could be given to my friend in exchange for the
use of his car and driving skills, which he had invested past wealth
in. Both of us being fans of real ale I bought a selection from a
local microbrewery for him to enjoy after he had driven home. I made
it clear that I was not offering an incentive to violate
drink-driving laws.
After our exchange
of goods and labour was completed, the whole process made me think.
How could I be sure my friend had received a fair price for his
labour and the investment he had made in the car? The wardrobe was
quite a problem for me and I might have valued the use of the car
more highly than the payment I offered. In a competitive market
place, where there are no restrictions of friendship then the use the
car might have fetched a far higher price in terms of bottles of ale.
The whole situation
reminded me of Ayn Rand’s novel Atlas Shrugged in which Midas
Mulligan insists his friend charges him for the use of his car
rather than simply borrowing it for free. Rand being a believer in
the virtues of selfishness saw it as socialism to lend goods for
free.
Perhaps this is an extreme
interpretation of what she thought but the economics behind her ideas
were simple. Someone invests time and money in learning to drive and
buying a car. Those who choose otherwise should have to sacrifice
some form of economic gain in order to get the benefit of what they
have not invested time and money into.
I think Rand is missing a
truth to this situation, which played out through my own experiences
this weekend. On some level I was offering goods I purchased in
exchange for the use of skills and equipment but there was another
transaction taking place. My friend was sacrificing his Sunday
afternoon to help me out of a situation, a choice which carried with
it an opportunity cost. As part of this exchange he was building up
good favour with myself which is in turn an investment which will
yield fruit later, perhaps in the form of me fixing his computer or
helping him clean up after a party. This relationship is not
quantified by a direct exchange of goods and labour, but it is still
taking place.
In short there is a human
exchange taking place as well as an economic one. This human exchange
can lead to an economic benefit in the future and the good
relationships human exchanges foster can form the basis of strong
long term economic alliances of the variety that really benefit
communities and the wider economy. Not short term valuation aiming to
get the maximum value for minimum input.
In Rand’s world we are
all selfish machines, doing what is best for ourselves in the hope
that this will somehow make human society richer as a whole. As the
economic crash of the 2000s shows unbridled selfishness ultimately
makes us all poorer. Human trust is an important commodity and good
relations make as much sense economically as they do socially. I am
very pleased that my friend gave up his Sunday afternoon to help me
and I feel that it brought us closer together in a spirit of
co-operation, a closeness that can help us overcome economic
hardships.
Rand’s bleak view
of humanity misses our real strengths; our willingness to sacrifice
for each other that helps us collectively overcome great hurdles.
What this all boils down to is that in the future, if I owned a car
and Ayn Rand asked to borrow it, the price would not simply be
economic and I doubt she could afford it.
No comments:
Post a Comment