John Roemer has written a unique book that critiques economists' conceptions of justice from a philosophical perspective and philosophical theories of distributive justice from an economic one.

Though the revised edition of A Theory of Justice, published in 1999, is the definitive statement of Rawls's view, so much of the extensive literature on Rawls's theory refers to the first edition. This reissue makes the first edition once again available for scholars and serious students of Rawls's work.

How should we design our economic systems? Should we tax the rich at a higher rate than the poor? Should we have a minimum wage? Should the state provide healthcare for all? These and many related questions are the subject of distributive justice, and different theories of distributive justice provide different ways to think about and answer such questions. This book provides a thorough introduction to the main theories of distributive justice and reveals the underlying sources of our disagreements about economic policy. It argues that the universe of theories of distributive justice is surprisingly simple, yet complicated. It is simple in that the main theories of distributive justice are just four in number, and in that these theories each offer a distinct, well-defined theoretical approach to distributive justice; yet it is complicated in that the main theories disagree at several distinct, fundamental levels, and in that it is possible to spin innumerable new theories from the elements of the four main theories. Key Features: Covers the four major theories of distributive justice and their leading philosophers, elucidating the attractions and drawbacks of each: Friedrich A. von Hayek and right-liberalism; John Rawls and left-liberalism; Robert Nozick and libertarianism; Gerald A. Cohen and socialism. Explains why these four theories have come to dominate most philosophical discussions on distributive justice, highlighting the essential answer provided in each that is lacking in other theories. Written for any reader interested in the topic, with an annotated reading list at the end of each chapter and helpful glossary at the back of the book.

How should we design our economic systems? Should we tax the rich at a higher rate than the poor? Should we have a minimum wage? Should the state provide healthcare for all? These and many related questions are the subject of distributive justice, and different theories of distributive justice provide different ways to think about and answer such questions. This book provides a thorough introduction to the main theories of distributive justice and reveals the underlying sources of our disagreements about economic policy. It argues that the universe of theories of distributive justice is surprisingly simple, yet complicated. It is simple in that the main theories of distributive justice are just four in number, and in that these theories each offer a distinct, well-defined theoretical approach to distributive justice; yet it is complicated in that the main theories disagree at several distinct, fundamental levels, and in that it is possible to spin innumerable new theories from the elements of the four main theories. Key Features: Covers the four major theories of distributive justice and their leading philosophers, elucidating the attractions and drawbacks of each: Friedrich A. von Hayek and right-liberalism; John Rawls and left-liberalism; Robert Nozick and libertarianism; Gerald A. Cohen and socialism. Explains why these four theories have come to dominate most philosophical discussions on distributive justice, highlighting the essential answer provided in each that is lacking in other theories. Written for any reader interested in the topic, with an annotated reading list at the end of each chapter and helpful glossary at the back of the book.

A central component of justice is how the economic goods are distributed in a society. Philosophers contribute to distributive justice debates by providing arguments for principles to guide and evaluate the allocation of economic goods and to guide the design of institutions to achieve more just distributions. This volume includes both seminal and recent work by philosophers, covering a range of representative positions, including libertarian, egalitarian, desert, and welfare theorists. The introduction to the volume and the selections themselves are designed to allow students and professionals to see some of the most influential pieces that have shaped the field, as well as some key critics of these positions. The articles intersect in such a way as to develop an appreciation of the types of theories and the central issues addressed by theories of distributive justice. Furthermore, the choice of authors in this collection reflects an appreciation of the influence of institutions in general, markets in particular, and even luck on the distribution of economic goods.

This first book in English by Serge-Christophe Kolm provides an overview of his far-reaching vision of distributive justice. Kolm derives justice from considerations of rationality. Justice cannot be defined by one all-encompassing principle or set of a few principles. It has the general form of an equality of individuals' liberties in a broad sense, with different applications and specific adjustments when several liberties conflict or when everybody prefers another outcome.Kolm describes the theory of justice and presents and evaluates each of the various modern theories, principles, or criteria of justice. He shows how some complement each other, how some are unworkable, and how some could be rescued. The result is an intensive introduction to the general theory of justice for economists and noneconomists alike.

In theory and practice, the notion of fairness is far from simple. The principle is often elusive and subject to confusion, even in institutions of law, usage, and custom. In Fairness, Nicholas Rescher aims to liberate this concept from misunderstandings by showing how its definitive characteristics prevent it from being absorbed by such related conceptions as paternalistic benevolence, radical egalitarianism, and social harmonization. Rescher demonstrates that equality before the state is an instrument of justice, not of social utility or public welfare, and argues that the notion of fairness stops well short of a literal egalitarianism. Rescher disposes of the confusions arising from economists' penchant to focus on individual preferences, from decision theorists' concern for averting envy, and from political theorists' sympathy for egalitarianism. In their place he shows how the idea of distributive equity forms the core of the concept of fairness in matters of distributive justice. The coordination of shares with valid claims is the crux of the concept of fairness. In Rescher's view, this means that the pursuit of fairness requires objective rather than subjective evaluation of the goods being shared. This is something quite different from subjective equity based on the personal evaluation of goods by those laying claim to them. Insofar as subjective equity is a concern, the appropriate procedure for its realization is a process of maximum value distribution. Further, Rescher demonstrates that in matters of distributive justice, the distinction between new ownership and preexisting ownership is pivotal and calls for proceeding on very different principles depending on the case. How one should proceed depends on context, and what is adjudged fair is pragmatic, in that there are different requirements for effectiveness in achieving the aims and purposes of the sort of distribution that is intended. Rescher concludes that fairness is a fundamentally ethical concept. Its distinctive modus operandi contrasts sharply with the aims of paternalism, preference-maximizing, or economic advantage. Fairness will be of interest to philosophers, economists, and political scientists.