Question

are moral economies compatible with markets according to Joseph Heath

Answer 1

The solution to market failures focuses on consumer efficiency, which is impeded by market failures. The ethical firm does not try to profit from market failures; "To profit from such behavior is therefore morally unacceptable, not because it violates any duty of consumer loyalty (as stakeholder theory would have it), but because it undermines the social benefits which justify the profit orientation in the first place" Again, rather than appealing to moral obligations or moral rights,

Everyday morality is insufficient for business, and most business ethics are useless for business and are generally viewed as anti-capitalist and touchy for a simple reason: business ethicists (particularly stakeholder theorists) tend to believe that rivalry is somehow unethical because it is adversarial. But healthy markets are competitive just as competitive a good game of football is. Competition allows you to be opponents to your competitor, at some point, and in such a case the golden rule's daily morality can not apply:

Efficiency has an inherent non-ideal morality inside it, given the fact that it appears counterintuitive not just because it opposes altruism but also because common questions regarding justice or equality are trumped up in business performance. That is because, according to Heath, the standard is restricted efficiency in business transactions. A simple example is hotel rooms that could triple the price on a busy weekend, not because it's just a luxury, but because people are willing to pay that luxury, because it's worth it to them. We also see this with labor compensation, where more demanding or difficult work does not automatically get more pay.

An significant argument here is that everyday morality does not extend well to industry, because many concepts of everyday morality are anti-capitalist, and in everyday life they find adversarial competition unethical.