IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/gla/glaewp/2015_21.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Laissez-faire versus Pareto

Author

Listed:
  • Kristof Bosmans
  • Z. Emel Ozt ̈urk

Abstract

Consider two principles for social evaluation. The first, ‘laissez-faire’, says that mean-preserving redistribution away from laissez-faire incomes should be regarded as a social wors- ening. This principle captures a key aspect of liberal political philosophy. The second, weak Pareto, states that an increase in each individual’s disposable income should be regarded as a social improvement. We show that the combination of the two principles implies that total disposable income ought be maxi- mized. Strikingly, the relationship between disposable incomes and laissez-faire incomes must therefore be ignored, leaving little room for liberal values.

Suggested Citation

  • Kristof Bosmans & Z. Emel Ozt ̈urk, 2015. "Laissez-faire versus Pareto," Working Papers 2015_21, Business School - Economics, University of Glasgow.
    • Handle: RePEc:gla:glaewp:2015_21
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.gla.ac.uk/media/media_426514_en.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Louis Kaplow & Steven Shavell, 2004. "Any Non-welfarist Method of Policy Assessment Violates the Pareto Principle: Reply," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(1), pages 249-278, February.
    2. Mill, John Stuart, 1848. "Principles of Political Economy (II): Distribution," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, volume 2, number mill1848-2.
    3. Mill, John Stuart, 1848. "Principles of Political Economy (III): Exchange," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, volume 3, number mill1848-3.
    4. K. J. Arrow & A. K. Sen & K. Suzumura (ed.), 2011. "Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare," Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 2, number 2.
    5. Fleurbaey, Marc, 2012. "Fairness, Responsibility, and Welfare," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199653591.
    6. Marc Fleurbaey & François Maniquet, 2006. "Compensation and responsibility," Working Papers halshs-00121367, HAL.
    7. Mill, John Stuart, 1848. "Principles of Political Economy (I): Production," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, volume 1, number mill1848-1.
    8. Marc Fleurbaey & Bertil Tungodden & Howard F. Chang, 2003. "Any Non-welfarist Method of Policy Assessment Violates the Pareto Principle: A Comment," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 111(6), pages 1382-1386, December.
    9. John E. Roemer & Alain Trannoy, 2013. "Equality of Opportunity," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1921, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    10. Louis Kaplow & Steven Shavell, 2001. "Any Non-welfarist Method of Policy Assessment Violates the Pareto Principle," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 109(2), pages 281-286, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Kristof Bosmans & Z. Emel Öztürk, 2021. "Measurement of inequality of opportunity: A normative approach," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 19(2), pages 213-237, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kristof Bosmans & Z. Emel Öztürk, 2022. "Laissez-faire versus Pareto," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 58(4), pages 741-751, May.
    2. Weinzierl, Matthew, 2014. "The promise of positive optimal taxation: normative diversity and a role for equal sacrifice," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 128-142.
    3. Jean-François Carpantier & Christelle Sapata, 2016. "Empirical welfare analysis: when preferences matter," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 46(3), pages 521-542, March.
    4. McCloskey Deirdre Nansen, 2018. "The Two Movements in Economic Thought, 1700–2000: Empty Economic Boxes Revisited," Man and the Economy, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 1-20, December.
    5. Eloi Laurent & Jacques Le Cacheux, 2006. "Integrity and Efficiency in the EU: The Case against the European economic constitution," Working Papers hal-00972707, HAL.
    6. Peter T. Leeson, 2009. "The Laws of Lawlessness," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 38(2), pages 471-503, June.
    7. Ian Keay, 2019. "Protection for maturing industries: Evidence from Canadian trade patterns and trade policy, 1870–1913," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 52(4), pages 1464-1496, November.
    8. Robert Scherf & Matthew Weinzierl, 2020. "Understanding Different Approaches to Benefit‐Based Taxation," Fiscal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(2), pages 385-410, June.
    9. Mariotti, Marco & Veneziani, Roberto, 2013. "On the impossibility of complete Non-Interference in Paretian social judgements," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(4), pages 1689-1699.
    10. Dario Stevanato, 2017. "Tassazione progressiva, equit? del prelievo e Flat Tax," ECONOMIA E SOCIET? REGIONALE, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2017(1), pages 122-147.
    11. Melitz, Marc J., 2005. "When and how should infant industries be protected?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 177-196, May.
    12. Jacobsen, Catrine & Piovesan, Marco, 2016. "Tax me if you can: An artifactual field experiment on dishonesty," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 7-14.
    13. John A. Weymark, 2017. "Conundrums for nonconsequentialists," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 48(2), pages 269-294, February.
    14. Martimort, David, 1996. "The multiprincipal nature of government," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 40(3-5), pages 673-685, April.
    15. Oscar Molina Tejerina & Luis Castro Peñarrieta, 2020. "Unexplained Wage Gaps in the Tradable and Nontradable Sectors: Cross-Sectional Evidence by Gender in Bolivia," Investigación & Desarrollo 0120, Universidad Privada Boliviana, revised Nov 2020.
    16. Felipe Rivera, 2017. "Health opportunities in Colombia," Lecturas de Economía, Universidad de Antioquia, Departamento de Economía, issue 87, pages 125-164, Julio - D.
    17. Deepak Lal, 2003. "Free Trade and Laissez Faire: Has the Wheel Come Full Circle?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(4), pages 471-482, April.
    18. Wurm, Laura, 2021. "Strangling speculation: The effect of the 1903 Viennese futures trading ban," QUCEH Working Paper Series 21-09, Queen's University Belfast, Queen's University Centre for Economic History.
    19. Doris Neuberger & Udo Reifner, 2020. "Systemic Usury and the European Consumer Credit Directive," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 89(1), pages 115-132.
    20. Vittorio Pelligra, 2013. "Trust," Chapters, in: Luigino Bruni & Stefano Zamagni (ed.), Handbook on the Economics of Reciprocity and Social Enterprise, chapter 40, pages 411-420, Edward Elgar Publishing.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Laissez-faire; Pareto; Libertarianism; Equal sacrifice taxation; Liberal reward;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement

    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:gla:glaewp:2015_21. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Business School Research Team (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dpglauk.html .

    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.