110 likes | 299 Views
Distribution and social justice . Points covered: - ‘Patterned’ vs. ‘historical’ principles of justice. - Justice of ownership. Liberty Talents. Libertarianism. What is liberty and why is it good? Any form of coercion (especially by the government) infringes one’s liberty and rights.
E N D
Distribution and social justice Points covered: - ‘Patterned’ vs. ‘historical’ principles of justice. - Justice of ownership. Liberty Talents
Libertarianism What is liberty and why is it good? Any form of coercion (especially by the government) infringes one’s liberty and rights.
Patterned principles of justice A principle of justice which envisages a particular (just) pattern of distribution to which society’s distribution is to conform. Examples: • Equality of income and wealth. • Distribution of wealth according to need. • Distribution of income so that the income of the least well is as high as possible.
Historical principles Historical principles of justice ask notwhether distribution conforms to a particular pattern but whether distribution came about by just means or through a just process. If it did, then each person is entitledto what s/he owns.
Justice in acquisition One can justly take ownership of something in two ways: • Through original acquisition, • Through transfer (purchase or receipt as a gift). Acquiring wealth in these ways entitles you to your wealth. (Rights and utilitarianism)
Liberty upsets patterns Wilt Chamberlain example: no distributional pattern can be maintained unless the state continuously interferes in people’s lives and curtails their liberty.
Taxation What’s so bad about taxation for a libertarian? Beyond that which is necessary to sustain a ‘minimal state’, taxation is akin to enslavement. (Self-ownership)
Nozick on natural talents People are entitled to own their talents (and all benefits, e.g. income, which derive from them). We do not infringe anyone else’s rights by having natural talents, and hence we cannot be compelled to share any of the benefits with other, less fortunate, people.
Counterarguments • Is taxation for redistributional purposes in a democratic society acceptable? • Do need and poverty create no claims to redistribution? • What about desert? • What if we take history seriously?