tavis: good evening. from los angeles, i am tavis smiley. his justice class at harvard became a sensation online and on pbs for that matter, following the success of the book by the same name. his latest text is and look at how american society has been negatively impacted, including the widening gap between the haves and the have nots. his book is called "what money can't buy." michael sandel, coming up. >> every community has a martin luther king boulevard. it's the cornerstone we all know. it's not just a street or boulevard, but a place where walmart stands together with your community to make every day better. >> and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like

you. thank you. tavis: michael sandel is a harvard professor, who became a hit on line and for that matter on pbs. once again, one of those books that makes us stop and think about the times we are living in. it is called "what money can't buy." >> great to be here, tavis. tavis: it suggests at some level that morality is at play, but it does have limits. i am not sure i buy the argument. convince me that morality is

somehow in play in our markets as we have it. >> there are some people believe that whatever emerges from a free-market exchange is just, is there, and there is no further question. i disagree. i think markets by themselves serve a valuable functions. they are good organizing productive activity and economic growth, but they cannot by themselves define what is just and what is fair, and they are not sufficient instruments for achieving the public good. that depends on us as democratic citizens. so we have to ask as a society, where do markets served the public good, and where do they not belong? markets have been reaching into spheres of life in recent decades traditionally governed by other values, so we need to ask where do market along, and where might they do more harm than good, crowding out other values.

tavis: are there any values that play in the market today other in and read? >> well, the danger of extending market logic to everything, to education, to help, to personal relations, to civic life, the danger of that is that it encourages us to think of ourselves only as consumers, and that krantz -- crowds out our identity as citizens. now, we do not allow -- even though some people will say the system we have comes dangerously close, but the markets have encroached on almost every sphere of light. -- life. if you use the standard logic of mainstream economics, it is hard to say, "why not? " half of the people do not vote

even in presidential elections. why not let them sell their boats to the highest bidder? there will be people willing to buy them, and yet, we do not, and that is because we think the vote is not a piece of personal property. it is an expression of civic virtue. so what i would like to do, and one of the purposes of the book, is to invite us to ask and to argue as a society in what spheres to markets belong, and where should there be a market values? tavis: some examples of where we do not allow merkin valdez to dictate. the encroachments of these market values in our lives and are a concern right now. >> right. let me start with some small areas of everyday life. more and more these days, you can pay to jump to the head of the line.

at the security checkpoint in airports these days, if you buy an expensive ticket, you get to go to the head of the line, and even if you are flying in a coach, the airlines will sell you and all the cart -- a la carte perk. going to the amusement park, it used to mean waiting in line with everyone else. no longer. today, if you can afford it, if you do not want to stand in the line, you can buy a ticket that lets you go to the head of the line at amusement parks. i did not even know about this until i was doing the research for the book. in washington, there are long standing companies that because congress has a certain number of seats for the public to sit in at congressional hearings, first-come, first-served,

sometimes, the lines are very long, and they have to wait overnight, more than a day. lobbyists want to attend the hearings, but they do not want to stand in the long range, maybe in the rain. there are companies that in turn hire homeless people and other people for an hourly wage to stand in the line, and just before the hearing begins, a lobbyist takes the place of his or her line standard and marches into the hearing room. these are small examples, but they reflect a shift in our ethic away from the idea of the democratic experience of waiting your turn toward the idea that money pays. money can get you to the head of the line. tavis: to your point, these are small examples, but what i am pressing now is since when have the elite, since when have the moneyed not been able to get to

the front of the line? the rich and the lucky have always. >> have always had an advantage, but there is a difference in a society -- it has always been true that those with money can buy educations and yachts and luxuries that the rest of us cannot. that is all true, but today, money buys more, not only in the small places of everyday life but access to the best help -- best health care. you can jump a line to see the doctor with a concierge or boutique service. some have reduced their practice to just a few, and for a yearly retainer fee, $2,500 to $25,000, and you get same-day appointments and the cell phone number of your doctor. these have come in in the last

few decades. now, more consequential than buying your way to the head of the line. we see it in schools. we see it in military, the growing use of markets. in iraq and afghanistan, there were more private military contractors on the ground than there were u.s. military groups. now, we have not had a public debate about whether we wanted to outsource more to private companies. that is what has happened, and the trend for marketizing, putting everything up for sale has been, i think, unfolding over the last three decades. we have shifted from a market economy to becoming a market society. a market economy is a tool and a valuable tool, but the american society is a place where everything is up for sale, a place where market values invade every sphere of life, from

personal relations to health to civic light to military service, for-profit prisons, another example. it has gathered force and momentum over the past few decades. tavis: what is the danger for you and for us of this new way of life? >> right. i think the danger is when markets reach into places where they do not belong, they crowd out other values. one of the most important places where this happens is that markets crowd out civic spaces and a sense of shared citizenship. let me give you an example. i am a baseball fan. a kid growing up in minnesota, following the minnesota twins. in those days, there were box seats and seats that were cheaper. the difference in price between the most expensive seat and the cheapest was $2.50.

tavis: i was close with $25. >> it has changed so dramatically. $1 to sit in the bleachers. the effect was going to the ball game was a class missing experience -- mixing experience. everybody waited in the same long line to go to the restroom, and when it rained, everyone got wet, and now, over the last few decades, the stadiums have skyboxes, which separate the privileged fans from the masses in the seats below, and so going to a baseball game is no longer the democratic, civic experience that it once was. and this is happening. this is my worry. where money buys, more and more.

we have experienced the skybox ification. we work, live, and shop in different places, which and poor. we send our kids to different schools. this is what i mean by the skyboxification of life. that makes it difficult for us to share a common life, and that makes it difficult for, citizens to be engaged in common purposes. that is my worry. tavis: talking about the issue of poverty in this country, and there was this conversation with you given what this text is about, in part, if you are right, and i believe you are, and this is my way of saying it, that everybody and everybody is up for sale.

if everybody and everything is up for sale, then how in that space do you even get a conversation with traction about morals? about values? it is almost an oxymoron. >> it is hard to do now because to have a serious public debate about big questions, including, i would say, questions about justice and the common good, what it means to be a citizen, we have to have enough of a share common life so that there is enough social solidarity to care about. democracy does not require perfect equality, but it requires that there be enough public common spaces where people from different walks of life can comfort one another, a bump up against one another in the order records of live, because this is how we learn to

negotiate our differences, and this is how we come to care for the common good. i want to enlarge our sense or contribute to a public debate about the big moral questions, including those to do with the structure of the economy and the question of the world and reach of markets. -- the role and reach of markets. we disagree about values and ethical conceptions, and how to value health or military service. we do disagree, but unless we elevate the terms of our public discourse and engage in these bigger questions, including about markets, we will continue to have a kind of empty doubt. tavis: here is the problem though, and if you are mitt romney, and i am not saying this to cast aspersion of him. you were at harvard. he was the governor in massachusetts. it gets you labeled as mitt romney as engaging in politics

and the. he was bold enough or oversimplistic enough to say that, but i suspect that he is not the only one that feels that way. those that raise these kinds of questions are engaging in the politics of envy. you are raising this conversation because you do not have what i have, and it is your own character flaw, and i have what i have because i worked hard. do not hate on me because i can afford it, and you cannot, and do not engage in the politics of envy. >> here is what i would say. first of all, the kind of politics we have now is largely managerial, technocratic talk on the one hand, where passion enters, too often, it is shouting matches, on cable television or talk radio, but what is missing is a recent

public discourse about these big moral questions, so my answer to that challenge would be is not about class warfare. as i have a hunch that even those of us to oftentimes occupy the skyboxes would rather have a public life, public services and public spaces that were good enough, flourishing enough so that everyone, rich and poor, would want to join in them. public schools strong enough so the affluent would not have to take their kids out. so i think this is not only a complete at the bottom about fairness, the fairness is important. i think this is also an important question about what kind of society do we want to have? do we want a society where

people from different walks of life, which and poor alike, can send their kids to excellent public schools? can all take advantage of first-rate, reliable public transportation? can all have access to decent health care at municipal facilities? museums and cultural institutions? my hunch is that even those who could buy their way out from public services and public institutions and places would find it more attractive to descend from the sky boxes and join in with their families and their kids to be shared spaces and democratic life. you do not think so? tavis: i think that is a charitable and generous reid, and i think so because the last person to try to get us to have this conversation, and he may have put it this way, what ever

happened to the conversation of love? as dr. king would suggest. we all share the democratic spaces, even if you have more than i have, but the last person who wanted to have a conversation like this, they shot him down like a dog on a balcony in memphis. to have this conversation, with all due respect to michael sandel, who is going to lead us in that conversation? >> we have to have leaders, but we also have to build, and so does society, between the market on the one hand and the government on the other hand, it institutions of civil society, where people gather together initially in small places, and learn the art, the habit, of civil discourse and democratic discourse an argument and then gradually enlarge the reach, so

it is just a choice between markets and consumer identities on the one hand or the government, then there is very the space in between that can cultivate the common life that i think we need, so we need leaders who can inspire, who can elevate our vision, but we also need institutions, educational institutions, unions, various social movements that can. and local schools, institutions of higher education are another. various forms of the media that lean against the current are another. morally robust public conversation, with regard to these scenes about a conversation about where money and markets along. tavis: i will refresh you again

on this. i am not -- i think your point is aspirational. for example, so it is not just dr. king. warren buffett. he came out with his statement have his secretary pay more taxes than he did. they spank him. he took a deep down for a bunch of people who happen to be wealthy. if warren buffett wants to pay more taxes, let him pay more taxes. so his comment was not met with applause by the 1%. number two, warren buffett and bill gates got others to famously sign on. and others have signed on, but they are not coming out of the sky boxes. philanthropy and justice. you are talking more about justice. i am still trying to figure out if warren buffett gets pushed, and mitt romney to could be president calls it the politics

of envy, and billionaires are not signing up in droves even to give money away, just giving some money, there are not people lining up to do that. i am just trying to figure out, it is a dynamic conversation i want to entertain, but i just do not know how that goes. what has happened to unions? the 1% and the others, the pushback on unions, the demonization of unions, the bashing of those who want collective bargaining where education is concerned, what do they want to do? privatize education. he tried to imagine where are these people are that you know that are willing to come out of the skyboxes? i do not see the evidence of it. >> well, we have to try. tavis: i am all for that. >> a group of investors, and warren buffett gave a talk, and he gave his same message, that his taxes should be the same as

his secretary's, and some of the people in the audience, i was watching, they had heard it before, and some were startled, and some were listening. you never know where this can go. and contributions to this discourse can come from surprising directions, and of course, there will be pushback. i plead guilty, tavis, to be an aspirational. this is a book in part about the moral and civic ideals that we should aim at, a kind of public discourse that we should try to achieve. from where will it come at a time when our public discourse is so impoverished? i think that is a fair question. i accept that, but we have to begin somewhere, and i suspect

there may be surprising responses coming from different quarters. i mentioned educational institutions, unions, religious communities are another possible source, and venue. and i think what we need to look for is the venues, convening places throughout our society that take questions of meeting seriously that want to have debates about justice in citizenship and what it means to be a citizen and how the particular experiences that people bring to those venues, whether they be religious or be connected to the world of work and unions, or whether they are constituted and other ways, centers and institutions, cultural centers. we need convening places, then use, but we also need, and you

have to plead guilty to this to, being aspirational. tavis: guilty. >> reached for american civil discourse, and that is what this is about. tavis: the question, if i said to you that i am with you on the aspirational part, i get this. i am just playing devil's advocate. but i guess, if i said to you that the evolution of our culture and the decay of our civilization has moved us beyond any capacity to have a conversation, the vitriol and the venom and our society has us on the precipice of going over the cliff in this country, i am not an optimist, but i am a prisoner of hope, so give me a reason to believe. >> i have been teaching the subject, as you mentioned, and have been teaching the scores on justice, and the way i go about

it is i start with where the students are, which is why this book is filled with examples and stories, large and small, just to illustrate the way markets have been crushed into aspects of life, where many people would be actually quite surprised. stories, for example, about commercial advertising now reaching people's bodies. body billboards. there is a story in here about a woman who for $10,000, she installed a permanent tattoo of an online casino on her forehead. i think it is possible to engage even the most ardent, free-market advocate with some of these examples. and then, what about the next, and the next?

how far would you take that? so you would not carry that logic all of the way. by that, i need economic logic, the free-market exchange, but this is where we begin. tavis: for more examples from professor sandel, where the market does have moral limits, on our website. there are some examples on the book. we thank him for already starting across the country a conversation that does in fact make me hopeful. the book is "what money can't buy." professor sandel, it is an honor to have you on the program. >> thank you. tavis: that is our show for tonight. for next time, keep the faith. >> for more information on at pbs.org. conversation with --

former nbc entertainment chief warren littlefield. that is next time. we will see you then. >> every community has a martin luther king boulevard. it's the cornerstone we all know. it's not just a street or boulevard, but a place where walmart stands together with your community to make every day better. >> and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. >> be more. pbs. >> be more. pbs.