Comments on: Pre-Tax Inequality and Distributive Versus Allocative Justice http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2007/10/18/pre-tax-inequality-and-distributive-versus-allocative-justice/ The Sweet Release of Reason Thu, 09 Feb 2012 18:11:50 +0000 hourly 1 By: stuart http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2007/10/18/pre-tax-inequality-and-distributive-versus-allocative-justice/#comment-11063 stuart Thu, 18 Oct 2007 19:50:29 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2007/10/18/pre-tax-inequality-and-distributive-versus-allocative-justice/#comment-11063 "Now, I understand not everyone (anyone?) shares my special interest in applied Rawlsianism. I share it! But mostly as a spectator. “Now, I understand not everyone (anyone?) shares my special interest in applied Rawlsianism.

I share it! But mostly as a spectator.

]]> By: stuart http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2007/10/18/pre-tax-inequality-and-distributive-versus-allocative-justice/#comment-11064 stuart Thu, 18 Oct 2007 19:50:00 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2007/10/18/pre-tax-inequality-and-distributive-versus-allocative-justice/#comment-11064 "Now, I understand not everyone (anyone?) shares my special interest in applied Rawlsianism. I share it! But mostly as a spectator. “Now, I understand not everyone (anyone?) shares my special interest in applied Rawlsianism.

I share it! But mostly as a spectator.

]]> By: The Bellows » Power Laws http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2007/10/18/pre-tax-inequality-and-distributive-versus-allocative-justice/#comment-11062 The Bellows » Power Laws Thu, 18 Oct 2007 18:04:51 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2007/10/18/pre-tax-inequality-and-distributive-versus-allocative-justice/#comment-11062 [...] responds: My original thought was that if greater U.S. inequality was a function of uniquely weak unions, [...] [...] responds: My original thought was that if greater U.S. inequality was a function of uniquely weak unions, [...]

]]> By: Rue Des Quatre Vents http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2007/10/18/pre-tax-inequality-and-distributive-versus-allocative-justice/#comment-11061 Rue Des Quatre Vents Thu, 18 Oct 2007 17:10:27 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2007/10/18/pre-tax-inequality-and-distributive-versus-allocative-justice/#comment-11061 The term "basic structure" has always seemed to be excessively vague and almost without a referent. If by laws and norms, Rawls means basic structure, then the Rawlsians ought to show some parsimony and simply say "laws and norms". Question: Gregory Clark has made a big splash lately suggesting that "labor quality" was the key factor in bringing about the industrial revolution. Clark even suggests this quality could be a genetic factor. Would Rawlsians say that "labor quality" is part of the basic structure? If anything makes the worst off better than they otherwise would be under different arrangements, is that something thereby deemed to be part of the "basic structure"? The term “basic structure” has always seemed to be excessively vague and almost without a referent. If by laws and norms, Rawls means basic structure, then the Rawlsians ought to show some parsimony and simply say “laws and norms”.

Question: Gregory Clark has made a big splash lately suggesting that “labor quality” was the key factor in bringing about the industrial revolution. Clark even suggests this quality could be a genetic factor. Would Rawlsians say that “labor quality” is part of the basic structure?

If anything makes the worst off better than they otherwise would be under different arrangements, is that something thereby deemed to be part of the “basic structure”?

]]> By: Rue Des Quatre Vents http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2007/10/18/pre-tax-inequality-and-distributive-versus-allocative-justice/#comment-11065 Rue Des Quatre Vents Thu, 18 Oct 2007 17:10:00 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2007/10/18/pre-tax-inequality-and-distributive-versus-allocative-justice/#comment-11065 The term "basic structure" has always seemed to be excessively vague and almost without a referent. If by laws and norms, Rawls means basic structure, then the Rawlsians ought to show some parsimony and simply say "laws and norms". Question: Gregory Clark has made a big splash lately suggesting that "labor quality" was the key factor in bringing about the industrial revolution. Clark even suggests this quality could be a genetic factor. Would Rawlsians say that "labor quality" is part of the basic structure? If anything makes the worst off better than they otherwise would be under different arrangements, is that something thereby deemed to be part of the "basic structure"? The term “basic structure” has always seemed to be excessively vague and almost without a referent. If by laws and norms, Rawls means basic structure, then the Rawlsians ought to show some parsimony and simply say “laws and norms”.

Question: Gregory Clark has made a big splash lately suggesting that “labor quality” was the key factor in bringing about the industrial revolution. Clark even suggests this quality could be a genetic factor. Would Rawlsians say that “labor quality” is part of the basic structure?

If anything makes the worst off better than they otherwise would be under different arrangements, is that something thereby deemed to be part of the “basic structure”?

]]>