Justice and Inequality

Wall Street Journal ^ | 23 July 2007 | DAVID LEWIS SCHAEFER

[shrinkermd]

Judging from the rhetoric of leading Democratic candidates Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards, a major domestic issue in the 2008 presidential campaign is the supposed problem of rising economic inequality.

What is striking is that problem is being debated amid substantial evidence that the steady improvement in the economy since 9/11 -- largely under the impetus of the much-derided Bush tax cuts -- has benefited Americans of all income levels, and that the rich are paying a higher share of total taxes than ever before. But as Lawrence Mishel, president of the left-leaning Economic Policy Institute, revealingly acknowledged last year as an expression of the left's current economic thinking, "it's a distraction [from the actual situation of middle-class Americans] to debate whether we have a higher standard of living now [compared to 1979] or not. We probably do. But so what? Middle-class Americans are not getting their fair share."

In other words, the absolute economic well-being of most Americans matters less than their relative position.

[shrinkermd]

"...In his most widely read book, "A Theory of Justice" (1971), Rawls professed to summarize the requirements of institutional justice in two principles. The first principle mandated that the "equal basic liberties" of all citizens be maximized. The second (the "difference principle") ordained that inequalities in social and economic goods were allowable only to the extent that they improved the condition of the "least advantaged" members of society.

[Popocatapetl]

[Dilbert San Diego]

Unbelievable to think that they consider it a meaningless debate as to whether middle class Americans have a higher standard of living than in 1979.

They say that doesn’t matter??? The only thing that matters is some nebulous concept of the “fair share” of the wealth? Are these guys communists?

[quant5]

These people have read or watched Robin Hood once to often. They don’t like the current king of free market enterprise where one has a right to become something and reap the reward of America. They wish to replace it with their own Monarchy and decide how the peasants are fed. Hey wait, maybe they will create their own Robin Hood movie! They must be watching a different movie made by Michael Moore...

[HKMk23]

They don’t like the current king of free market enterprise where one has a right to become something and reap the reward of America. They wish to replace it with their own Monarchy and decide how the peasants are fed.

If all you had in your nail bag of life was what these morons have in theirs, wouldn't you?

The reason these people are so opposed to capitalism, is because they KNOW they could NEVER cut the mustard if they had to run their own private enterprises. It's nothing more than sheer 'sour grapes' from beginning to end.

[DMZFrank]

A just society DEMANDS inequality. Not inequality under the law or equality of opportunity. But inequality of results. Guaranteed outcomes demand tyranny to implement, and only serve to create an “animal farm” elite.

[Eagles6]

"Are these guys communists?"

That was rhetorical, right?

[quant5]

Good point. I own a successful marketing business and know exactly what you mean.