You must have Credits on your Balance to download this sample
In this paper, I argue that our government ought not redistribute wealth.
Pages 4 (1004 words)
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. ...
Not exactly what you need?