Which concept refers to the moral limits imposed on market reasoning?

The concept of moral limits imposed on market reasoning is exemplified by the idea presented in "Jumping the Queue," as discussed by Michael Sandel. This concept focuses on how market mechanisms can sometimes conflict with ethical considerations in society. It raises important questions about the appropriateness of allowing market forces to dictate outcomes in situations that may have significant moral implications, such as access to healthcare, education, or basic services.

Sandel argues that certain goods, such as loyalty, love, or social justice, should not be subject to market transactions because they lose their inherent value when treated as commodities. This perspective encourages critical reflection on the boundaries of market reasoning and the moral dimensions of our economic decisions.

In contrast, the other options—such as the Law of Comparative Advantage, Opportunity Cost, and Surplus—deal primarily with economic principles and efficiencies rather than the ethical implications of how markets function. The Law of Comparative Advantage refers to the benefits of trade based on relative efficiencies, Opportunity Cost signifies the value of the next best alternative foregone when making choices, and Surplus describes the difference between what consumers are willing to pay and what they actually do pay. These concepts are critical to economic theory but do not inherently address the moral boundaries that Sandel highlights.