Title: Market Harms and Market Benefits.

Abstract: Our actions in the marketplace often harm and benefit others. For instance, buying emissions-intensive products leads to further atmospheric warming, which leads to further rises in sea levels, and thereby harms those in low-lying island nations (among others). But in almost every market interaction we impose harms and benefits of another, widely overlooked, kind: market harms and market benefits. These are harms and benefits imposed via changes to the goods and/or prices available to others in that market. On the face of it, such harms and benefits may seem both 1) quite minor in practice, and 2) something we should ignore in moral decision-making, as has been argued by philosophers from John Stuart Mill to Ronald Dworkin. Here, I argue against both claims—market harms and benefits are often severe in practice, and there is little moral justification for ignoring them. In particular, when concentrated on the global poor, they can be especially severe: for instance, when a regular consumer decides whether to spend just $10 on either wheat products or quinoa, their choice can redistributes roughly $19-81 (in expectation) from poor to rich or from rich to poor, leading to significant losses or gains in welfare. Because of this, many of us plausibly have strong moral reasons to drastically change our consumption habits