Abstract
This chapter notes that, were the Just Deserts proposal in fact implemented, the economy would look much different. As such, the chapter highlights three areas of impact: philanthropy, women, and disability. By separating chance from merit, philanthropic organizations will see the characteristics of their beneficiaries radically change. Surprisingly, and justly, the economic gender gap will disappear. Lastly, disability is likely to receive increased attention as ability, opportunity, and desert begin to play such an important role in people’s lives. The hope is that philanthropists, feminists, and stakeholders in the disability field will consider Just Deserts an ally and will seek to further its aims by refining its estimates of merit.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Cf. Arneson (2007), 270–210.
- 2.
- 3.
Nagel (1979), 24.
- 4.
Anderson (1999).
- 5.
Abramovitz (1996).
- 6.
Weichselbaumer and Winter-Ebmer (2005).
- 7.
Brault (2012), 10–12, also cf. Table 1. Note, by individuals I refer to civilian, non-institutionalized persons.
- 8.
Arneson (2007).
- 9.
Scanlon (1986), 116–117.
- 10.
Lake (2001), 57.
- 11.
- 12.
Preferences should here be understood to mean first-order or second-order desires or volitions as long as such may be exogenously dependent upon circumstances of chance. Frankfurt (1971), 7–14.
- 13.
- 14.
Admittedly, I would like to give more thought to the question of what we owe, if anything, to children under a Just Deserts proposal. Here I proceed tentatively and assume that the skeptic has not persuaded us that post-birth humans are moral agents.
References
26 U.S. Code § 63 - Taxable Income Defined. 2000.
Aaberge, Rolf, Magne Mogstad, and Vitorocco Peragine. 2011. Measuring Long-Term Inequality of Opportunity. Journal of Public Economics 95 (3): 193–204.
Abramovitz, Mimi. 1996. Regulating the Lives of Women: Social Welfare Policy from Colonial Times to the Present. Boston, MA: South End Press.
Adler, Matthew. 2011. Well-Being and Fair Distribution: Beyond Cost-Benefit Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Allaire, J.J., et al. 2018. rmarkdown: Dynamic Documents for R. R package version 1.11.
Almås, Ingvild, et al. 2011. Measuring Unfair (in)Equality. Journal of Public Economics 95 (7–8): 488–499.
Alperovitz, Gar, and Lew Daly. 2008. Unjust Deserts: How the Rich Are Taking Our Common Inheritance and Why We Should Take It Back. New York, NY: The New Press.
Alstott, Anne, and Bruce A. Ackerman. 1999. The Stakeholder Society. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Anderson, Elizabeth. 1999. What Is the Point of Equality? Ethics 109 (2): 287–337.
Anderson, Elizabeth. 2015. The Fundamental Disagreement Between Luck Egalitarians and Relational Egalitarians. In Distributive Justice and Access to Advantage: G. A. Cohen’s Egalitarianism, ed. Alexander Kaufman, 21–39. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Aristotle. 1999. Nicomachean Ethics. 2nd ed. Trans. Terence Irwin. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc.
Arneson, Richard J. 1989. Equality and Equal Opportunity for Welfare. Philosophical Studies 56 (1): 77–93.
Arneson, Richard J. 1990. Liberalism, Distributive Subjectivism, and Equal Opportunity for Welfare. Philosophy & Public Affairs 19 (2): 158–194.
Arneson, Richard J. 2003. The Smart Theory of Moral Responsibility. In Desert and Justice, ed. Serena Olsaretti, 233–258. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Dwyer, J.d.l.T. (2020). The Just Deserts Economy. In: Chance, Merit, and Economic Inequality. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21126-4_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21126-4_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-21125-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-21126-4
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)