税收与正义:古典自由主义视角

IF 0.5 Q4 ECONOMICS
Petra Orogványiová
{"title":"税收与正义:古典自由主义视角","authors":"Petra Orogványiová","doi":"10.51952/przx4958","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We attempt to present a classical liberal perspective on the subject of taxation and justice. We Start by reviewing the development of the notion of justice over time and across various schools of thought. We then proceed to examine John Rawls’ theory of justice and its policy implications and economic theory of optimal taxation. After finding both approaches unsatisfactory, we defend a libertarian stand on the issue of justice. The main result of our reflections are three criteria which we afterwards use to examine normatively different ways of taxation. We conclude by saying that current tax Systems satisfy neither of these criteria and deserve being changed.","PeriodicalId":53126,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Finance and Public Choice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2005-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Taxation and Justice: A Classical Liberal Perspective\",\"authors\":\"Petra Orogványiová\",\"doi\":\"10.51952/przx4958\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We attempt to present a classical liberal perspective on the subject of taxation and justice. We Start by reviewing the development of the notion of justice over time and across various schools of thought. We then proceed to examine John Rawls’ theory of justice and its policy implications and economic theory of optimal taxation. After finding both approaches unsatisfactory, we defend a libertarian stand on the issue of justice. The main result of our reflections are three criteria which we afterwards use to examine normatively different ways of taxation. We conclude by saying that current tax Systems satisfy neither of these criteria and deserve being changed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53126,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Public Finance and Public Choice\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2005-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Public Finance and Public Choice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.51952/przx4958\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Public Finance and Public Choice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.51952/przx4958","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们试图提出一个古典自由主义的观点对税收和正义的主题。我们首先回顾正义概念随着时间的推移和不同思想流派的发展。然后,我们继续研究约翰·罗尔斯的正义理论及其政策含义和最优税收的经济理论。在发现两种方法都不令人满意之后,我们在正义问题上捍卫自由意志主义的立场。我们反思的主要结果是三个标准,我们随后使用这些标准来检查规范性的不同征税方式。我们的结论是,目前的税收制度既不满足这些标准,也值得改变。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Taxation and Justice: A Classical Liberal Perspective
We attempt to present a classical liberal perspective on the subject of taxation and justice. We Start by reviewing the development of the notion of justice over time and across various schools of thought. We then proceed to examine John Rawls’ theory of justice and its policy implications and economic theory of optimal taxation. After finding both approaches unsatisfactory, we defend a libertarian stand on the issue of justice. The main result of our reflections are three criteria which we afterwards use to examine normatively different ways of taxation. We conclude by saying that current tax Systems satisfy neither of these criteria and deserve being changed.
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
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
33.30%
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信