Philosopher Ingrid Robeyns argues for the principle of limitarianism—that there should be a limit on the wealth that a single person can amass. Critics of limitarianism respond that it is unworkable, since it would require a universal and strict individual adherence to a code of ethics as well as worldwide cooperation among governments in areas such as economic policy, both of which are extremely unlikely. But some proponents of limitarianism hold that even if these claims have merit, they do not vitiate limitarianism’s value as a moral goal toward which we may be able to make some progress.
Desmos Graphing Calculator
Verbal·Information and Ideas·Command of Evidence
hardWhich statement, if true, would most strongly support the claim in the underlined sentence?
A
If one agrees that it is undesirable for a very small percentage of a society’s population to have a very large percentage of that society’s wealth, then it must therefore be desirable to place an upper limit on the wealth a person can have so that a society’s wealth is more evenly distributed.
B
There are reasons why a limited amount of difference in the wealth that people possess should be tolerated if not encouraged—for example, some jobs are more dangerous than others, and those jobs should therefore earn a higher income than others.
C
Successfully practicing limitarianism involves several categories of actions (structural actions, such as reforming institutions to provide a livable minimum wage; fiscal actions, such as implementing a progressive tax on wealth; and ethical actions, such as choosing to give away one’s wealth) and none of these actions will suffice alone.
D
Most of our societal ideals are regulative ideals, suggesting results that we ought to aim for even if they cannot be fully realized; for example, just because strategies to reduce poverty can never be completely effective for everyone does not mean it is foolish to attempt to reduce poverty.