The wants whose satisfaction we discussed in the previous chapter are often a source of pain before they are satisfied. Should one then say that the market is primarily a pain-relieving mechanism or is it primarily a ministry of pleasure? Our analysis of satisfaction and dissatisfaction pointed out the benefits and healthy associations of dissatisfaction. But if dissatisfaction is painful, does this not suggest an asceticism (or martyrdom) that Bentham “took pains” to excoriate and that violates the basic utilitarian basis of the market? The unfinished business of the previous chapter leads to a further analysis of how the market deals separately and jointly with the pains and pleasures that fall within its reach.

To complete the discussion in Chapter 23 of the pains and pleasures that do and do not pass through the market we will start with the classic formulations of Jeremy Bentham, as these are supplemented by his modern empirical successors, showing again the limits of the market's reach. Since these formulations deal with the effects of circumstances on thought and behavior, they have to be supplemented by a further analysis of the internal properties that modify the hedonic effect of what the market presents. We are then ready for the main business of the chapter: How do individuals achieve a balance among these positive and negative stimuli and their internal representations? Toward the end of this discussion we find reasons for assigning the relief of pain to government and the provision of pleasure to the market – and reasons to modify that assignment.