Search results

Inhaltsverzeichnis: 1. Introduction -- Part I: Why institutions matter in ideal theory: 2. Ideal theory and the basic structure -- 3. Knowledge, not incentives -- Part II: Distributive justice and the knowledge problem: 4. Rawls' neoclassical economics -- 5. The burdens of knowledge -- 6. Why capitalism -- 7. Why not market socialism -- 8. Why not economic democracy -- Part III: Distributive justice and the incentive problem: 9. Fairness failure -- 10. The constitutional point of view -- 11. The robust case for behavioural symmetry -- Part IV: Distributive justice and economic liberty: 12. Basic economic liberties and the moral powers -- 13. The subjective and objective conditions of the circumstances of justice -- 14. Developing moral capacities -- Part V: Robust property-owning democracy: 15. Defining property-owning democracy -- 16. The robustness critique of property-owning democracy -- 17. The case for a robust property-owning democracy -- 18. Conclusion -- Index.

Liberal egalitarians argue that the state is justified in taxing members of a political community to achieve distributive justice and ensure political equality and regime stability. This involves an uneasy compromise between equality and efficiency, a compromise that many argue has recently been undermined by the growth of unchecked wealth and income inequality. This paper argues that there also exists a trade-off between selecting fair processes for taxation and aiming for particular distributive outcomes. The way people accumulate wealth and the way states tax often matters more than distributive outcomes. Policymakers must allow for the fair assessment of tax liabilities, avoid excessive enforcement costs and prevent political actors from using tax systems to achieve their partial ends. Recognising these considerations both justifies a systematic scheme of taxation while constraining the mechanisms for collecting revenue. I justify this position using comparative analysis which I contrast with the conceptual intuitionistic approach associated with egalitarianism.

AbstractLiberal egalitarians argue that the state is justified in taxing members of a political community to achieve distributive justice and ensure political equality and regime stability. This involves an uneasy compromise between equality and efficiency, a compromise that many argue has recently been undermined by the growth of unchecked wealth and income inequality. This essay argues that there is also a trade-off between selecting fair processes for taxation and aiming for particular distributive outcomes. The way people accumulate wealth, and the way states tax often matters more than distributive outcomes. Policymakers must allow for the fair assessment of tax liabilities, avoid excessive enforcement costs and prevent political actors from using tax systems to achieve their partial ends. Recognizing these considerations justifies a systematic scheme of taxation while constraining the mechanisms for collecting revenue. I justify this position using comparative analysis, which I contrast with the conceptual intuitionistic approach associated with egalitarianism.

How can Hayek's epistemic institutionalism contribute to seeking social justice? I contribute to Peter Boettke's project by bridging the gap between the Hayekian critique of social justice and its reception among normatively committed theorists and philosophers. I begin by summarizing some inter-related cases proposed by political theorists for rejecting Hayek's critique of social justice. I add to Boettke's resources some context around Hayek's epistemology that establishes quite how deep the problem of coordination goes. I explain the necessary role that appreciative theory plays in our way of understanding the relationship between social morality and society. I then explain how appreciative theory goes some way to answering Hayek's critics. This highlights the possible overlap between Rawlsian and Hayekian approaches to public policy. Finally, I outline how a positive research program might combine Hayekian insights with the pursuit of social justice, or at the very least the progressive amelioration of the conditions of the relatively disadvantaged.