What is distributive justice? In chapter 2 of Business Ethics, read the case study named, “Three Forms of Justice”. Based on that case study, answer the following question: When people debate distributive justice today, what concerns do they raise about it?
Distributive justice refers to the fair and equitable distribution of resources, benefits, and burdens in a society. It is concerned with how goods and services are allocated among individuals and groups, and whether this allocation is just or unjust. The principles of distributive justice can vary depending on the context, but they generally involve ensuring that everyone has access to basic necessities such as food, shelter, healthcare, and education (Byars & Stanberry, 2018).
There are several different approaches to distributive justice, including utilitarianism, egalitarianism, and libertarianism. Utilitarianism emphasizes maximizing overall happiness or well-being, while egalitarianism seeks to ensure that everyone has an equal share of resources and opportunities. Libertarianism emphasizes individual freedom and property rights, and argues that people should be free to keep what they earn without interference from the government. In practice, distributive justice involves making policy decisions about taxation, social welfare programs, and other forms of government intervention in the economy. It also involves addressing systemic inequalities such as racism, sexism, and economic inequality that can prevent certain groups from accessing resources and opportunities. Ultimately, the goal of distributive justice is to create a more equitable and just society for all (Byars & Stanberry, 2018).
When people debate distributive justice today, they raise concerns about the fairness and effectiveness of programs designed to distribute benefits and burdens equitably among the people. One of the primary concerns is the cost and efficiency of these programs. Critics argue that some safety net programs are too expensive and inefficient, and that they do not provide adequate benefits to those who need them most. They also argue that these programs can be unfair to those who pay into them but do not receive any benefit or say in their administration.
Another concern raised in debates about distributive justice is the impact of these programs on economic growth and individual incentives. Critics argue that high tax rates and generous welfare programs can discourage people from working hard and investing in their own future. They also argue that these programs can create a culture of dependency that undermines individual responsibility and self-reliance (Reamer, 2015).
Proponents of distributive justice, on the other hand, argue that these programs are necessary to ensure that everyone has access to the basic resources they need to live a decent life. They argue that the benefits of these programs outweigh the costs, and that they are essential for reducing poverty and inequality in society.
In addition to these concerns, debates about distributive justice also raise questions about the role of government in society. Critics argue that government intervention in the economy can be counterproductive and that it can limit individual freedom and choice. Proponents argue that government has a responsibility to ensure that everyone has access to basic resources and that it can play a positive role in promoting social and economic justice. Overall, debates about distributive justice reflect fundamental disagreements about the role of government and the nature of social and economic justice in society (Reamer, 2015).
References
Byars S., Stanberry K. (2018). Business Ethics. Retrieved from https://my.uopeople.edu/pluginfile.php/1693125/mod_page/content/12/BusinessEthics.pdf
Reamer F. (2015, January). Eye on Ethics. Retrieved from https://www.socialworktoday.com/news/eoe_011515.shtml