Name: Instructor: Course: Date: Our Government Ought Not To Redistribute Wealth Wealth redistribution can be defined as the transfer of property or income from one set of individuals to another. The cause of this distribution is by social mechanisms that range from tort law, divorce, charity, or, in this case, welfare, monetary policies, and taxation…
Governments will normally utilize two types of methods to redistribute wealth. These are the use of vouchers, for instance, food stamps, and the use of subsidies (Hochschild 13). These programs that aim at transfering payment can be funded through such initiatives such as general taxation, which has a disproportionate benefit for those in poverty and others who are expected to pay fewer taxes. Persons who benefit from these programs sometimes prefer to be given money directly, although, some more palatable forms of redistribution may be put, in place, to control the expenditure from these funds. In this paper, I intend to use Nozick’s argument to argue that the governmnent ought not to redistribute wealth. In his article, Anarchy, State, and Utopia, Robert Nozick builds his argument against John Rawl’s argument in his article A Theory of Justice, going on to reject what he refers to as liberal egalitarianism and instead plumping for pure libertarianism. He derives his ideas from the ideology of Lockean that places emphasis on one’s natural rights to property, liberty, and life (Nozick 45). There is now logical manner in which these rights are liable to revocation. In this sense, any constraints or violations on the individual’s rights and liberty are immoral, especially if done without consent. Only those acts that come about through voluntary means by every party involved without infringing on the natural rights of other parties are just. In addition, those governments that aid poor citizens in wealth redistribution from those who are wealthier do so via unjust means. Indeed, these governments are upsetting the very course of action they are attempting to put in place. Wealth redistribution by the government is not a voluntary process and, as such, is not just and, therefore, must not be allowed (Nozick 50). Nozick’s ideas on libertarianism are reflective of the idea that human beings, as rational beings, should practice self-ownership. Borrowing from Immanuel Kant’s work from his article Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals, Nozick presents one imperative that makes necessary the idea that individuals should respect their rational nature and that of the other people. Using man as a way of satisfying the desires of other people, as well as those of oneself, is a violation of the rational nature present in humans (Nozick 71). This nature gives an individual inherent dignity, which could undergo forfeiture if this person’s only use is as a means to an end. Rational beings are able to enjoy self-ownership inclusive of their labor, abilities, abilities, talents, and body, as well as that existing as a direct result of their labor, abilities, and talents. Wealth results from the labor of an individual in accordance to the thesis of self-ownership with a person entitled to wealth for which they have labored. Wealth redistribution causes people to renounce whatever rights they held over their wealth (Nozick 72). Nozick’s entitlement theory, more specifically, argues against wealth redistribution by the government. It establishes that a person can legitimately attain ownership of property through three ways that are just. These are legitimate holdings transferred legitimately and through voluntary consent, acquiring holdings that had previous ownership, as ...
Cite this document
(“In this paper, I argue that our government ought not redistribute Essay”, n.d.)
Retrieved from https://studentshare.net/philosophy/84912-in-this-paper-i-argue-that-our-government-ought
(In This Paper, I Argue That Our Government Ought Not Redistribute Essay)
“In This Paper, I Argue That Our Government Ought Not Redistribute Essay”, n.d. https://studentshare.net/philosophy/84912-in-this-paper-i-argue-that-our-government-ought.
It was intended to prevent one person from gaining too much power which can lead to graft, corruption, abuses, nepotism and despotism (Northrup, 2003, p. 44); framers of the American Constitution were so obsessed with preventing this from happening after experiencing cruelty by absolutism under the British monarchy before gaining their independence.
On a larger scale, Hobbes also argue that states are also by nature guided by self-interest and destructive, thus, the necessity of a leader; the idea which I do not agree with. I did not agree with Hobbes’ argument about individuals being chaotic and miserable by default and that the basis of government is to put order upon this chaos.
Workplace culture and alcohol availability are the greatest factors in the workplace that affect alcoholism in the workplace. Every one of us is very well acquainted with the hazardous effects of alcoholism. Job related hazards lead to poor performance at work, which may lead to poor career profile.
The tools that eventually comprised this neo-liberal economic agenda included “liberalization of cross-border transactions, deregulation of market dynamics, and privatization of both asset ownership and the provision
The story of the play is introduced through the narration of the Stage Manager, who appears off and on the play bearing a decisive role in the plot of the story. The play brings to the audience the activities of a typical American day tinted with the pantomime of the
First of all, my society’s history during the fore pointed time period can be divided into: I Dynasty (established under the king known as Scorpion II) and II Dynasty (established under the king known as Hotepsekhemui). Besides, our I Dynasty originated
5 Pages(1250 words)Essay
GOT A TRICKY QUESTION? RECEIVE AN ANSWER FROM STUDENTS LIKE YOU!
Let us find you another Essay on topic In this paper, I argue that our government ought not redistribute wealth for FREE!