Premium
JUSTIFICATIONS FOR REDISTRIBUTION: A CRITIQUE
Author(s) -
Vaubel Roland
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
economic affairs
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.24
H-Index - 18
eISSN - 1468-0270
pISSN - 0265-0665
DOI - 10.1111/ecaf.12295
Subject(s) - redistribution (election) , utilitarianism , happiness , economics , redistribution of income and wealth , positive economics , law and economics , economic justice , public economics , neoclassical economics , law , political science , politics , public good
Abstract It is striking that there are so many theoretical justifications of redistribution by government. Is it because each single justification is weak? I review and criticise the various arguments advanced in the literature. The main distinctions are between (a) Paretian justifications asserting that all, including the net payers, benefit from redistribution, (b) theories of justice and (c) utilitarianism. My conclusion is that redistribution ought to be based on Paretian arguments as far as possible and that helping the poor is more likely to maximise the happiness of all than is a general levelling of income differences.