Mr. Marshall states (1) that many, many people make their living from the production and distribution of junk mail and (2) that the junk mail industry would not exist if it were not successful at selling products. Mr. Marshall also states that "the appropriateness of the product" is "another issue."
I agree with the first statement, on its face, but disagree with the suggestion that "the appropriateness" is a different issue. As is the case with many realms of economic activity in our society, the concept of "the market" is rhetorical and the activity in fact operates in a non-market context. I.e., there is substantial "market failure" -- the forms of cost externalization, monopoly, information asymmetry or public goods, canonically recognized by economists, or other forms, such as preference manipulation and internal psychological deceptions, wealth differences resulting in differences in marginal utilities, etc., that economists desperately refuse to recognize (since they foul up all of the equations that allow economists to believe that their discipline is a real "science") but that can be even more consequential. In the case of junk mail, to what degree does the cost of junk mail production and delivery incorporate the cradle-to-grave environmental costs of producing, transporting and disposing of the material? To what extent is the cost of distribution subsidized by other classes of mail or the U.S. taxpayer in general? What are the social costs -- unquantifiable though they may be -- to the 95% of junk mail recipients to whom the mail is an irritation or a violation, and who are forced to bear the inundation? To what extent is the ease of catalog ordering supporting addictive buying behavior by those who cannot afford it? If these costs -- and others of which I surely am not thinking -- were internalized by those who send the junk mail, would it still be cost-effective? This does not even begin to address the bigger, more controversial market failure issues that look to the preference-distorting consumption-promoting messages that dominate our society at every level. Yes, many people make their living in the junk mail industry. This does not mean that the industry is, overall, socially productive. Look at the weapons industries (sorry, I couldn't resist). The fact is, while one can say, tautologically, that whatever commercial/economic activity exists must provide a social benefit or it would not exist, on more critical examination we would find that vast sectors of our economy exist within realms of market failure and reduce overall social welfare. There is a social -- distributional -- benefit to providing employment to people. However, there are other means of achieving this benefit that avoid the negative social outcomes of the activity, but these, unfortunately, are taboo to discuss -- such as promoting critical thinking to see through social messages that distort preferences, reducing consumption and consequently overall societal economic activity, reducing wealth and income disparities through very mild redistribution, and having a society in which everyone has a lot more time to spend with family, friends, nature and whatever else moves them, rather than keyboarding without bathroom breaks in poorly ventilated workspaces and working three jobs cleaning restrooms. I guess this isn't really a Minneapolis issue. My apologies. Chuck Holtman Prospect Park --__--__-- Message: 1 From: "Ray Marshall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 18:19:37 -0600 Subject: [Mpls] RE: Mpls digest, Vol 1 #1248 - 12 msgs >Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 12:09:36 -0600 >Subject: Re: [Mpls] but it IS Junk mail. >From: Robert Schmid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: Minneapolis Issues List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Merriam Webster is wrong. >To be more fair, Merriam Webster is out of date. >The modern definition of junk mail is best defined as; >Unsolicited mail, email, fax or phone calls for the purpose of >generating sales, support, contributions or marketing information. You may call it "junk mail", but the hundreds of thousands of people employed in the paper, printing, ink, mailing, transportation, delivery, fulfillment, marketing, advertising, manufacturing, and label industries, at a start, consider it to be their livelihood. And the governments who collect the taxes from those individuals and industries are "truly thankful." Believe it or not, these people would not do this if it were not a successful means of selling their products. You want to talk about the appropriateness of the product, that's another issue. Ray Marshall Minnehaha _______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
