Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I think normally 'social justice' is threefold - demands for progressive taxation play a part, but as with many arguments in the UK it's principally imported inappropriately from US bulletin boards.


Taxation in the US is demonstrably less progressive than in the UK, and so the focus loses its validity when it's applied to the UK where welfare, health and education play a very egalitarian role in society.


Conversely, 'social justice' is also heavily reliant on redistribution of wealth and property, something rarely pursued by successful communities as it disempowers the individual in favour of the state.


This has a failure rate so high that it's frankly surprising that any remotely educated adult would espouse it.


However, the idea was supported by John Rawls, who was notable for other very bright ideas such as equality in the eyes of the law, and democratic consensus. Most of these ideas were evidently agreeable, and at the time he was fighting 1950s and 60s American extremist politics.


So I prefer to think the redistribution of wealth and property was the product of his age, and leans toward a revolutionary fringe that doesn't seem so valid today.


Mainly though, it's another boring American idea that's inappropriate for an essentially socialist UK society.


I do note though, that Rawls thought humanity to be both reasonable and rational - something that UDT would probably not agree with - so he'd be an unwilling bed partner to UDT's foil hat defensiveness.

"Conversely, 'social justice' is also heavily reliant on redistribution of wealth and property, something rarely pursued by successful communities as it disempowers the individual in favour of the state.


This has a failure rate so high that it's frankly surprising that any remotely educated adult would espouse it. "


Man, you are on FIRE lately. The happiest and in many cases most successful communities (your Scandinavians, Germans etc) have all leaned more towards that model than us, uk or Singapore.


Is not impossible

Erm.... Taxation in SG is very progressive, just not substantial.


Wasn't my choice anyhow, just seems to work quite well.


Gonna have to check whether Scandis spend wisely. Last time I checked there was a political rebellion about siding with the Krauts, or anyone in Europe. Great if you've changed your mind.


Neither society believes in redistribution of wealth or property.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Would wholeheartedly recommend Aria. Quality work, very responsive, lovely guy as well. 
    • A positive update from Southwark Council - “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.“  
    • A solicitor is acting as the executor for our late Aunt's will.  He only communicates by letter which is greatly lengthening the process.  The vast majority of legal people deal by modern means - the Electronic Communications Act that allows for much, if not all of these means is now 25 years old.   Any views and advice out there? In fuller detail: The value of the estate is not high.  There are a number of beneficiaries including one in the US.  It has taken almost three years and there is no end in sight.  The estate (house) is now damp, mouldy and wall paper falling off the wall. The solicitor is hostile, has threatened beneficiaries the police (which would just waste the police's time), and will not engage constructively. He only communicates by letter.  These are poorly written, curt or even hostile, in a language from the middle of last century, he clearly is typing these himself probably on a type writer.  Of course with every letter he makes more money. We've taken the first steps to complain either through the ombudsman and/or the SRA.  We have taken legal advice a couple of times, which of course isn't cheap, and were told that his behaviour is shocking and we'd be in our right to have him removed through the courts. But.... we just want him to get on with executing the will, primarily selling the house. However he refuses to use any other form of communication but letter.  So writing to the beneficiary in the 'States can take a month to get a reply. And even in this country a week or more. Having worked with lawyers in the past I am aware that email, tele and video conferencing and even text and WhatApp are appropriate means for communication.  There could be an immediate response to his questions.   Help!        
    • Labour should be applauded for bringing in the Renter's Rights Act.  But so many of you are carried away with slagging them off. Married couples with busy lives sometimes forget who did what. On this occasion Mr Rachel Reeves was sorting out the rental agreement.  Ms Reeves was a bit flumoxed with all the grief/demonsing/witch hunts she is getting so forgot to check with her other half.   Not the first or last time this will happen with couples. (That's not having a go at the post above)
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...