3 ms·
> I'm one of those, treat everyone equal, types. Would like to hear your reason. Here's a thought experiment: Imagine that you are born as any random person in
by jabl 8y ago
> I'm one of those, treat everyone equal, types. Would like to hear your reason.
Here's a thought experiment: Imagine that you are born as any random person in a society. You could be born as a white male of exceptional intelligence with 1% rich parents, or you could be born as a girl of a minority race to junkie parents and suffer from mental health issues your entire life. Now, without knowing what kind of person you're born as, design a just society in terms of, say, the level of income redistribution, tax-provided health care, or whatnot.
Getting back to your original question of whether somebody should pay more for a laptop than somebody else; well, IF you accept (some amount of) income redistribution, it's more of a technical question how to implement it. I imagine it'd be easier to implement with income redistribution, social spending on low-income citizens or whatnot rather than having wealth- or income-dependent prices on everything.
- esotericn 8y agoThe problem with such an argument (imagine that you're born as...) is that it presupposes an arbitrary line based on the limits of your imagination. You could just as well be born a farm animal, or a blade of grass. Absurd? Perhaps. It's no more absurd to me than attempting to imagine being born as a Frenchman.
- cuillevel3 8y agoHuman rights apply to farm animals now? :)
- Johnny555 8y agoIt's just as easy to imagine yourself living as a blade of grass as it is living as another human? The line between humans and other species doesn't seem that arbitrary.
- pas 8y agoYou don't have to imagine. You have to consider for fairness. This argument is usually attributed to Rawls. He wrote extensively about it in his A Theory of Justice (1971).
- jabl 8y ago> This argument is usually attributed to Rawls. He wrote extensively about it in his A Theory of Justice (1971). Bingo! I didn't mention it in my original comment, partially because I was interested if anyone would spot it. (And partially because it wasn't per se relevant to the argument itself)