Justice Attitudes Towards The Wage Distribution

Fairness of wage distribution – or the perception of such – is a phenomenon crucial for the stability of new democracies. While theories exist about how change of the political system trickles down to the attitudinal level, the systematic analysis of the effect of economic transition on public attitudes has been neglected to a large extent. Wage Distribution Fairness in Post-Socialist Countries proposes a conceptual framework to measure the fairness of wage distribution. Indeed, looking particularly at wage distribution fairness in three post-socialist societies (Hungary, East Germany, Czech Republic) since the transition in 1989, this challenging monograph also aims to understand if, and to what extent, the experience of a socialist regime motivates individuals to consider wage distribution as fair. Contributing to our understanding of the relevance of socialization and other situational factors influencing economic legitimacy, Wage Distribution Fairness in Post-Socialist Countries will appeal to undergraduate and postgraduate students, as well as postdoctoral researchers, interested in fields including: Sociology, Eastern European Studies and Political Economics.

This book gives a systematic and extensive comparative analysis of public beliefs about social justice. Contrary to previous studies it attempts to link public opinion to the philosophical debate on distributive justice, but more importantly it connects the different opinion surveys with the current economic and political situation in the various countries. What can explain the cross-national variations, and if opinions do change over time, why is this so? Are people’s beliefs influenced by existing welfare practices in the country? Do different policy regimes trigger different pattern of belief among the members of society? This book should be of interest to researchers and students both in the field of Comparative Opinion Studies, but also those interested in the relationship between public opinion and the political elite.

This book explores the foundations and potential of a theory of need-based distributive justice, supported by experimental evidence. The core idea is that need-based distributive justice may have some legitimatory advantages over other important principles of distribution, like equality and equity, and therefore involves less dispute over the distribution and redistribution of scarce resources. In seven chapters, eleven scholars from the fields of philosophy, psychology, sociology, political science and economics outline the normative and positive building blocks of such a theory by critically reviewing the literature on distributive justice from their respective disciplinary perspectives. They address important theoretical and practical issues concerning the rationality of needs identification at the individual level and the recognition of needs at the societal level. They also investigate whether and how the dynamics of distribution procedures that allocate resources according to the need principle leads to social stability, focusing on the economic incentives that arise from need-based redistribution. The final chapter provides a synthesis and outlines a framework for a theory of justice based on ten hypotheses derived from the insights presented.

This in-depth examination of the major theories of economic justice focuses on the central question: What should the economic distribution of goods and services be based on?

This book presents an entirely new answer to the question: "What is fair?" In their radical approach to ethics, Frohlich and Oppenheimer argue that much of the empirical methodology of the natural sciences should be applied to the ethical questions of fairness and justice.

Sheds new light on the injustice arising from the widening gap between rich and poor in the United States.

The search for equality has been an enduring one in the United States. Yet there has been little significant change in the distribution of wealth over the generations, while the political ideology of socialism has been rejected outright by most people. In a sensitive rendering of data, Jennifer Hochschild discovers that it is the nonrich themselves who do not support the downward redistribution of wealth. Using a long questionnaire and in-depth interviews, she examines the ideals and contemporary practices of Americans on the subject of distributive justice. She finds that both rich and poor Americans perceive three realms in their lives: the private, the political, and the economic. People tend to support equality in two of the realms: the private, where fundamental socialization takes place in the family, school, and neighborhood, and the political, where issues arise about taxes, private property, rights, political representation, social welfare policies, and visions of utopia. But in the economic realm of the workplace, class structure, and opportunity, Americans favor maintaining material differences among people. Hochschild shows how divergence between ideals and practices, and especially between Americans' views of political and economic justice, produces ambivalence. Issues involving redistribution of wealth force people to think about whether they prefer political equalization or economic differentiation. Uncertain, Americans sometimes support equality, sometimes inequality, sometimes are torn between these two beliefs. As a result, they are often tense, helpless, or angry. It is not often that Americans are allowed to talk so candidly and within rigorous social science sampling about their lives. Hochschild gives us a new combination of oral history and political theory that political scientists, philosophers, sociologists, and policymakers can read with profit and pleasure.