Relative disparities of wealth
are bound to emerge, regardless of the nature of income distribution.
Some say that excess wealth should be confiscated and redistributed.
Progressive taxation and the welfare state aim to secure this outcome.
Redistributive mechanisms reset the "wealth clock" periodically (at the
end of every month, or fiscal year). In many countries, the law
dictates which portion of one's income must be saved and, by
implication, how much can be consumed.
This conflicts with basic rights like the freedom to make economic
choices.
The legalized expropriation of income (i.e., taxes) is morally dubious.
Anti-tax movements have sprung all over the world and their philosophy
permeates the ideology of political parties in many countries, not
least the USA. Taxes are punitive: they penalize enterprise, success,
entrepreneurship, foresight, and risk assumption. Welfare, on the other
hand, rewards dependence and parasitism.
According to Rawles' Difference Principle, all tenets of justice are
either redistributive or retributive. This ignores non-economic
activities and human inherent variance. Moreover, conflict and
inequality are the engines of growth and innovation - which mostly
benefit the least advantaged in the long run.
Pages:
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133