@bigdoggproblem saidIf some people are better at creating income, then I think uneven levels of wealth would be "fairness of outcome". Outliers and extreme examples aside, I wonder what the "wealth gap" is in the societies with the least income equality? I also wonder how a society should best go about deciding what "fair" financial and personal contributions to the collective endeavours and arrangements would be.
"Fairness" of outcome is not always attainable. Some people are just better than others at some, or all, of these things.
1 edit
@fmf saidWell, maybe. There are valid reasons for unevenness of wealth, such as superior skill, and even dumb luck [say, one guy strikes oil while his neighbor does not]; while there are also invalid reasons for such unevenness, such as racial/gender discrimination, unfair laws, government corruption, etc.
If some people are better at creating income, then I think uneven levels of wealth would be "fairness of outcome". Outliers and extreme examples aside, I wonder what the "wealth gap" is in the societies with the least income equality? I also wonder how a society should best go about deciding what "fair" financial and personal contributions to the collective endeavours and arrangements would be.
Here's a an article from good ol' Wikipedia with a nice map of income inequality across the nations:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality
Interestingly, the worst cases are in Africa, South America, and Saudi Arabia, while the the best are predominantly northern countries. Bad governments tend to worsen equality, while less populous, colder nations have an easier time improving equality.
The graph does not, however, indicate the weighted impact of wealthier nations. The middle-range income inequality in the USA and China, for example, has got to impact the pie chart more heavily than other countries, just because those two economies are the biggest.
@bigdoggproblem saidI think control of, or access, to natural resources is a major factor behind income inequality ~ and the solution to the detrimental effects of that kind of inequality could well be found in looking at that control and access, and considering for what or for whom the income generated is used.
Well, maybe. There are valid reasons for unevenness of wealth, such as superior skill, and even dumb luck [say, one guy strikes oil while his neighbor does not]; while there are also invalid reasons for such unevenness, such as racial/gender discrimination, unfair laws, government corruption, etc.
I also think that systematic discrimination could legitimately be one of the kinds of things those "collective endeavours and arrangements" I mentioned could address.
@fmf saidA society should be organized around a clear understanding of what is right and wrong, and an established authority that adheres to the highest standards of conduct while administering punishment to those that do wrong and praise for those that do right.
What does "fair" mean for you when talking about how you think society should organize itself?
Fair = justice
@secondson saidDo you have any examples of things that you personally think are "wrong" that you nevertheless think would be permissible in a fair society?
A society should be organized around a clear understanding of what is right and wrong, and an established authority that adheres to the highest standards of conduct while administering punishment to those that do wrong and praise for those that do right.
Fair = justice
@secondson saidhighest standards of conduct
an established authority that adheres to the highest standards of conduct while administering punishment to those that do wrong
and
administering punishment
They seem diametrically opposed to me.