What would be the economic value of being a wizard in the Harry Potter universe? That is, what is the dollar value of being a wizard vs not being one?

[AdamWho]

Much has been written about the insane economics of the wizarding world in the Harry Potter universe, but I have a different question.

What is the economic benefit from being a wizard vs non-wizard, in dollars/yr?

Obviously, it is impossible to put an upper limit on the personal value of being able to do magic, that is subjective. But I think it is possible to find a minimum value you can expect to get from being a wizard.

Some starting ideas:

• Transportation is free, so there is no need of a car, trains or airplanes for many (most?) trips.

• Some healthcare is free but I don't know the extent of this. Teeth, vision definitely but I am uncertain if more serious illnesses or long-term care is free.

• Housing doesn't seem to be free because different families have different levels of quality.

• Education seems to be free with the exception of books and supplies but it requires a certain level of talent to get this education. Otherwise you don't seem to get any.

• Food seems to be free but this is unclear and under what circumstances.

• Clothing doesn't seem to be free because people have different quality levels.

────────

Of course, as a wizard you might be able to take what you want from Muggles but it would seem there are laws against this since wizards don't seem to live like they have infinite resources.

In general, wizards seem to live with similar levels of wealth as non-wizards with almost no obvious productive value. So at a minimum, I suggest being a wizard is at a minimum as valuable as the median income of the larger society.

 

[Politesse]

Food seems to be free but this is unclear and under what circumstances.

No, it's not; we see characters buy food on several occasions, and food is one of Gamp's exceptions, so it cannot be transfigured by a hungry wizard. Transportation is very cheap, but only free in the case of apparition, which not all wizards and witches feel comfortable performing regularly. Education is not free either, but there are scholarships for needy students, and it is also seemingly obligatory for all British citizens. Also, if we're going by the evidence of the books, it seems that there are only seven years of formal schooling for most wizards and witches, followed by a period of paid apprenticeship.

In general, the prices of most items we encounter in the Wizarding world explicitly seem either on par or significantly less than their Muggle counterparts. Wands, which are a functional combination of most every household or yard tool as well as a sword/gun, cost around 7 galleons, the equivalent of about £30 in 1997 and normally good for life. Harry's copy of Advanced Potion making cost him 9 galleons, about £45. Every beverage consumed in the books costs ~2 sickles, roughly 60p. The daily newspaper cost 5 knuts, which are equivalent to pence. At one point, Arthur Weasley wins a newspaper prize of 700 galleons (~£3500) and is able to afford a month-long vacation for seven to Egypt on the proceeds. At no point is taxation other than tariffs on imports ever mentioned; it either doesn't exist or isn't a significant burden even on the poorer families we encounter to merit mention.

On the other hand, it's less than clear what the standards are for work and compensation in the wizarding world. It seems like there would be a job shortage with a smallish population, less demand for most commercial goods, and direct competition between paid lower-class workers and a slave economy of house elves and other magical creatures. In general, the magical world seems stuck somewhere in the 19th century as a general rule, and the reaction of the students and staff to Hermione Granger's SPEW campaign strongly suggest that labour unions do not exist in the Wizarding world. So actual compensation for labour may be significantly less in the Wizarding world than one might expect in Muggle spheres, and a wizard is unqualified for most Muggle jobs unless they complete additional schooling at a Muggle Uni first, a task they would likely find incredibly challenging without any secondary training in mathematics or language studies. When Dobby the freedman elf first entered the workforce, Hogwarts paid him a galleon a week, about >£5, giving him a total of about £240 in total salary for full-time menial labour. It's implied that this is significantly less than what a human would make for the same work, but if this is a general impression of where the basement is for pay... that is significantly more like the economy of a post-colonial nation in the global South than it is like Muggle Britain. By comparison, Haiti's current minimum wage for household servants is 125 gourds per day, about £85. So even the poorest of Haitians if compensated legally make in one week what Dobby made in a year for equivalent labour.

Another hint about work conditions: The Weasleys are universally regarded as a poor family, and struggle to afford wands, books, food, and clothing for their seven children, despite the fact that within the time period of the books, at first three and eventually six of their adult members are employed, and the head of household is the head of a Ministry department, which you would expect to be a middle class role at least by Muggle analogy. Why are £10-£100 items difficult for them to afford? Most of the other non-aristocratic family homes we visit in the books: the residences of the Lovegoods, Snapes, Gaunts, and Bagshots, Shell Cottage,and the Shrieking Shack, are universally described in a way that makes them seem like they are in relatively shabby condition relative to your average Londoner's home (though with much more physical space due to the curious qualities of Wizarding spatial manipulation). A muggleborn barista working in a muggle shop could convert their income to galleons and live very comfortably in the Wizarding world.

In short, the cost of living is significantly lower, but so is compensation for labor if you aren't of the aristocratic class, and they might all be living in significant poverty in monetary terms, even if magic itself presents an alternative sense of capital that improves their lifestyle far beyond what a Muggle could manage on equivalent salary.

 

[AdamWho]

Your post is about the economic value of being a wizard within the wizard world.

I am asking about the economic value of being wizard with respect to being a human.

 

[Politesse]

Then, all of the things you mention as being free are most certainly not free in the muggle world.

It is unlikely that very many people will respond to this thread at all, let alone with any sort of detail or enthusiasm, so I fail to see the advantage in being rude to me.

 

[AdamWho]

I am not rude, just disappointed that you didn't responding meaningfully to the question,

Lets try again

You have two people one is a wizard one is not.

What is the economic value of the wizard compared to the non-wizard in dollars/yr

 

[hurtinbuckaroo]

Is the wizard a Republican?