What would be an ethical position with regards to wealth distribution?

Abortion, euthanasia, genetic engineering, Just War theory and other such hot topics.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
Aisling
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 6:22 pm

What would be an ethical position with regards to wealth distribution?

Post by Aisling »

Hi beautiful people,

I am an economics student so my knowledge with regards to ethics is very limited. I have been however wondering since time immemorial is it Ethical to have a lot while other people around you have very little, so little that their basic needs are not even met.

Since I was little I was bothered to see people who earn very little or people who sleep on the street, while me and my parents were able to buy whatever food we wanted, go on vacation and spend money on luxury goods which we didn't really need. How much responsibility do we bear to reduce other people's suffering? What would be an ethical position to wealth distribution?

Given that how I am doing in life does not really depend on me, but rather on numerous circumstances which are beyond my control, for example the family I have been born in. The difference between me and the person on the street is really no more than a dice roll.
Furthermore the wealth we produce is often produced collectively by society yet its benefits are appropriated individually. For example the success of google is directly dependent on the public research carried out for decades, yet the profit is captured only by google. I would like to further say the same about its staff and engineers, their education, identity,skills are derived from society, yet the ability of these engineers are again appropriated privately. (I am not sure how to exactly express this point well. What I want to convey, is that if I am a journalist and I just woke up and am walking through Venice and I am mesmerized by the beauty of the city, further I meet some delightful people who make me very happy, being so happy and inspired by Venice I write a great article. The article is written by me, but at the same time without having been inspired by the city and made happy by other people I would have never been able to produce said article, yet neither said people nor the city derive and monetary benefit from the article. To add one more point, it also appears that wealth accumulation often takes place in a manner that the more wealth one posses the less wealth possess the other people. For example, if I am a tailor in a small village and I decide to charge more for my services I will be able to make greater profit, yet at the same time the villagers will have less income. The villagers will still use my services because I am the only available tailor in the vicinity and I will not be charging so much as to out-price the villagers, however at the same time some people will be going through great pain in order to be able to afford my services, while the marginal benefit for me will be comparably smaller than the "suffering" endured by some villagers. Therefore it seems the better off I will be, the worse will be the villagers.

Taking into account these points what would be an ethical position with regards to wealth distribution?

Thank you for your thoughts!:)
Post Reply