Lindblom - The Market System - Afghan Journalists' Committee

Quid Pro Quo 115I see the visitor the next day in a small group. He tells usthat his society goes through intermittent disorganization—everyten years or so a spasm, lasting from a fewmonths to a few years, of reduced production and employment.We have the same problem, we tell him. But it soonbecomes clear that his problem differs from ours. He learnsfrom us that when people in our society lose their jobs theylose their income. “For us,” he says, “that depends on howand why they lose their jobs.” We explain that in our societyit does not matter how and why. Our rule is no job, noincome. That disturbs him. “You don’t take away their incomeif something goes wrong with the system and peoplelose their jobs through no fault of their own?” Well, yes, wedo, one of us replies.In the parable, I have not fairly represented contemporaryearthly societies because I underplay such claims aspensions for the elderly, family allowances, and unemploymentcompensation. But to establish such claims societieshave had to turn away from the market system to other processes.The market system itself is as harsh as the visitorfinds it. Market interactions provide nothing to you or meexcept what we can get by making a market offer. That youand I might have rights or claims simply because we are humanbeings or members of society, or because we are formedby society, or because we play our roles in society as wehave learned to play them is irrelevant to what claims wecan make through the market system.Defenses of the RuleIn our day, perhaps most people would not defend the ruleof quid pro quo unless it were supplemented by other rulesand procedures, such as those of the welfare state. Some peo-