JUSTIFICATIONS FOR REDISTRIBUTION: A CRITIQUE
Roland Vaubel ()
Economic Affairs, 2018, vol. 38, issue 2, 166-184
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.
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:ecaffa:v:38:y:2018:i:2:p:166-184
Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.blackwell ... bs.asp?ref=0265-0665
Access Statistics for this article
Economic Affairs is currently edited by Philip Booth
More articles in Economic Affairs from Wiley Blackwell
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().