University of Sydney
Two Ideas for Treating
People as Equals
Thomas Pogge
Rawls’s own favored
comprehensive
doctrine / favored
domestic conception
of social justice
Qualifying conditions for
comprehensive doctrines /
domestic conceptions of
social justice or decency to
which Rawls is willing to
assign equal standing.
Three such competitors
that qualify by Rawls’s
lights
Qualifying conditions for
comprehensive doctrines /
domestic conceptions to which
competitor 1 is willing to
assign equal standing.
Qualifying conditions for
comprehensive doctrines /
domestic conceptions to which
competitor 2 is willing to assign
equal standing.
Qualifying conditions for
comprehensive doctrines /
domestic conceptions to which
competitor 3 is willing to assign
equal standing.
UPSHOT: The qualifying
competitors do not
really get equal standing
Evolution of US National Household Income
Distribution (Top Ten Percent)
Segment of
U.S.
Population
Share of U.S. Share of U.S.
Household
Household
Income
Income
1928
1978
Share of U.S.
Household
Income
2007
Absolute
Change in
Income Share
1978–2007
Relative
Change in
Income Share
Richest 0.01
Percent
5.02
0.86
6.04
+5.18
+602%
Next 0.09
Percent
6.52
1.79
6.24
+4.45
+249%
Next 0.9
Percent
12.40
6.30
11.23
+4.93
+78%
Next 4
Percent
14.62
13.09
15.17
+2.08
+16%
Next 5
Percent
10.73
11.45
11.07
-0.38
-3%
Evolution of the Global Household Income
Distribution at Market Exchange Rates
Share of
Global
Household
Income
1988
Share of
Global
Household
Income
2005
Absolute
Change in
Income
Share
42.87
46.36
+3.49
+8.1%
Next 5
Percent
21.80
22.18
+0.38
+1.7%
Next 15
Percent
24.83
21.80
-3.03
-12.2%
Second
Quarter
6.97
6.74
-0.23
-3.3%
Third
Quarter
2.37
2.14
-0.23
-9.7%
Poorest
Quarter
1.16
0.78
-0.38
-32.8%
Segment
of World
Population
Richest 5
Percent
Relative
Change in
Income
Share
Global Household Income Distribution 1988
Richest
Ventile: 42.87%
Top Five
Percent
42.87%
1.16%
2.37%
Second
Quarter
6.97%
Next
Twenty
Percent
46.63%
S
Data Branko Milanovic, World Bank
Global Household Income Distribution 2005
Richest
Ventile: 42.87%
Top Five
Percent
46.36%
0.78%
2.14%
Second
Quarter
6.74%
Next
Twenty
Percent
43.98%
S
Data Branko Milanovic, World Bank
Treating Citizens Fairly
• Prodecural Fairness, formal: equal political participation
• Procedural Fairness, material: fair value of political liberties
• Substantive (Outcome) Fairness, formal: non-discrimination
• Substantive (Outcome) Fairness, material — at least: In the
choice between two candidate national legislative outcomes,
N1 and N2, if the representative groups that would do better
with a decision in favor of N1 are (i) larger, (ii) worse off and
also (iii) more strongly affected by the outcome than the
representative groups that would do better with a decision
in favor of N2, then the basic commitment to fairness
requires that N1 be chosen over N2.
Treating Human Beings Fairly
• Prodecural Fairness, formal: equal political participation
• Procedural Fairness, material: fair value of political liberties
• Substantive (Outcome) Fairness, formal: non-discrimination
• Substantive (Outcome) Fairness, material — at least: In the
choice between two candidate global agreements, G1 and
G2, if the representative groups that would do better with
a decision in favor of G1 are (i) larger, (ii) worse off and
also (iii) more strongly affected by the outcome than
the representative groups that would do better with a
decision in favor of G2, then the basic commitment to
fairness requires that G1 be chosen over G2.