IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/b/cup/cbooks/9780521836357.html
   My bibliography  Save this book

Liberty, Desert and the Market

Author

Listed:
  • Olsaretti,Serena

Abstract

Are inequalities of income created by the free market just? In this book Serena Olsaretti examines two main arguments that justify those inequalities: the first claims that they are just because they are deserved, and the second claims that they are just because they are what free individuals are entitled to. Both these arguments purport to show, in different ways, that giving responsible individuals their due requires that free market inequalities in incomes be allowed. Olsaretti argues, however, that neither argument is successful, and shows that when we examine closely the principle of desert and the notions of liberty and choice invoked by defenders of the free market, it appears that a conception of justice that would accommodate these notions, far from supporting free market inequalities, calls for their elimination. Her book will be of interest to a wide range of readers in political philosophy, political theory and normative economics.

Suggested Citation

  • Olsaretti,Serena, 2004. "Liberty, Desert and the Market," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521836357.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:cbooks:9780521836357
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Claus Dierksmeier, 2018. "Qualitative Freedom and Cosmopolitan Responsibility," Humanistic Management Journal, Springer, vol. 2(2), pages 109-123, February.
    2. Michel Magnan & Dominic Martin, 2019. "Executive Compensation and Employee Remuneration: The Flexible Principles of Justice in Pay," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 160(1), pages 89-105, November.
    3. Andrew Lister, 2017. "Markets, desert, and reciprocity," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 16(1), pages 47-69, February.
    4. Emily Prehoda & Joshua M. Pearce & Chelsea Schelly, 2019. "Policies to Overcome Barriers for Renewable Energy Distributed Generation: A Case Study of Utility Structure and Regulatory Regimes in Michigan," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-23, February.
    5. Ricardo Guzmán & Michael Munger, 2014. "Euvoluntariness and just market exchange: moral dilemmas from Locke’s Venditio," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 158(1), pages 39-49, January.
    6. Andreas Siemoneit, 2021. "Justice as a Social Bargain and Optimization Problem," Papers 2106.00830, arXiv.org.
    7. Silvia Borzutsky & Mark Hyde, 2015. "A Just Retirement Future for Chilean Workers: Social Insurance or Private Savings?," Global Development Institute Working Paper Series 21415, GDI, The University of Manchester.
    8. Joakim Sandberg & Alexander Andersson, 2022. "CEO Pay and the Argument from Peer Comparison," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 175(4), pages 759-771, February.
    9. Dominic Martin, 2013. "The Contained-Rivalry Requirement and a ‘Triple Feature’ Program for Business Ethics," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 115(1), pages 167-182, June.
    10. Francesco Denozza, 2019. "Spettri del mitico ordo: diritto e mercato nel neoliberalismo (Ghosts of mytical ordo: Law and markets in neoliberalism)," Moneta e Credito, Economia civile, vol. 72(288), pages 327-348.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:cbooks:9780521836357. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Ruth Austin (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.