This, of course, is highly unrealistic. We are usually very much aware
of natural endowments and liabilities - both ours and others'.
Therefore, the demand for such insurance is not universal, nor uniform.
Some of us badly need and want it - others not at all. It is morally
acceptable to let willing buyers and sellers to trade in such coverage
(e.g., by offering charity or alms) - but may be immoral to make it
compulsory.
Most of the modern welfare programs are involuntary Dworkin schemes.
Worse yet, they often measure differences in natural endowments
arbitrarily, compensate for lack of acquired skills, and discriminate
between types of endowments in accordance with cultural biases and
fads.
Libertarians limit themselves to ensuring a level playing field of just
exchanges, where just actions always result in just outcomes. Justice
is not dependent on a particular distribution pattern, whether as a
starting point, or as an outcome. Robert Nozick "Entitlement Theory"
proposed in 1974 is based on this approach.
That the market is wiser than any of its participants is a pillar of
the philosophy of capitalism. In its pure form, the theory claims that
markets yield patterns of merited distribution - i.
Pages:
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135