禀赋与不平等

Daniel N. Shaviro
{"title":"禀赋与不平等","authors":"Daniel N. Shaviro","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.180577","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Neither income, consumption, nor wealth is an \"ideal\" tax base, or one that plausibly identifies what one really should want to tax. Rather, they are best justified as imperfect stand-ins for some underlying (but unobservable) metric of inequality that may be relevant to distributive justice under a variety of normative views.This paper examines a more fundamental inequality measure that we might call \"endowment,\" \"ability,\" or \"wage rate,\" and explores its relevance to distribution policy under welfarist and liberal egalitarian approaches to distributive justice. It argues that, while endowment taxation is not practically feasible, conventional rejections of it as an orienting idea, sometimes explained on the ground that it would require enslaving a beachcomber who could have been a Wall Street lawyer, are in key respects confused.","PeriodicalId":180571,"journal":{"name":"Tax Law & Policy eJournal","volume":"20 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1999-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Endowment and Inequality\",\"authors\":\"Daniel N. Shaviro\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.180577\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Neither income, consumption, nor wealth is an \\\"ideal\\\" tax base, or one that plausibly identifies what one really should want to tax. Rather, they are best justified as imperfect stand-ins for some underlying (but unobservable) metric of inequality that may be relevant to distributive justice under a variety of normative views.This paper examines a more fundamental inequality measure that we might call \\\"endowment,\\\" \\\"ability,\\\" or \\\"wage rate,\\\" and explores its relevance to distribution policy under welfarist and liberal egalitarian approaches to distributive justice. It argues that, while endowment taxation is not practically feasible, conventional rejections of it as an orienting idea, sometimes explained on the ground that it would require enslaving a beachcomber who could have been a Wall Street lawyer, are in key respects confused.\",\"PeriodicalId\":180571,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Tax Law & Policy eJournal\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1999-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Tax Law & Policy eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.180577\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Tax Law & Policy eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.180577","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

收入、消费和财富都不是一个“理想的”税基,也不是一个能合理确定人们真正应该征税的税基。相反,它们被认为是一些潜在的(但不可观察的)不平等指标的不完美替身,这些指标可能与各种规范观点下的分配正义有关。本文考察了一个更基本的不平等衡量标准,我们可以称之为“禀赋”、“能力”或“工资率”,并探讨了在福利主义和自由平等主义的分配正义方法下,它与分配政策的相关性。它认为,尽管捐赠税在实际操作上并不可行,但传统上对捐赠税的反对在关键方面是令人困惑的,因为它有时被解释为需要奴役一个本来可以成为华尔街律师的流浪汉。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Endowment and Inequality
Neither income, consumption, nor wealth is an "ideal" tax base, or one that plausibly identifies what one really should want to tax. Rather, they are best justified as imperfect stand-ins for some underlying (but unobservable) metric of inequality that may be relevant to distributive justice under a variety of normative views.This paper examines a more fundamental inequality measure that we might call "endowment," "ability," or "wage rate," and explores its relevance to distribution policy under welfarist and liberal egalitarian approaches to distributive justice. It argues that, while endowment taxation is not practically feasible, conventional rejections of it as an orienting idea, sometimes explained on the ground that it would require enslaving a beachcomber who could have been a Wall Street lawyer, are in key respects confused.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信