DISQUS

DISQUS Hello! Will Wilkinson is using DISQUS, a powerful comment system, to manage its comments. Learn more.

Community Page

Will Wilkinson

Jump to original thread »
Author

Opposite Day

Started by Will Wilkinson · 9 months ago

I really like Tyler’s Tyrone posts, and so in the spirit of unoriginality, I propose to do a few in the same vein. My friend Liam will happily defend any (non-offensive) position that I am known to reject. The first subject mentioned three times wins.
(By the way, if I reca ... Continue reading »

15 comments

  • PGR

    3 years ago

    Income inequality is bad.
    reply
  • Glen Whitman

    3 years ago

    Utilitarianism! (You may choose between act and rule utilitarianism. Or go with some combination or third variation, if you want.)
    reply
  • GilM

    3 years ago

    Moving towards privately owned retirement accounts is too risky.
    reply
  • Jake Winship

    3 years ago

    Negative internalities require societal restraints on individual action
    reply
  • Will Wilkinson

    3 years ago

    Jake, You'll have to phrase that more narrowly, since I don't disagree, unless you mean "all negative externalities..."
    reply
  • R.J. Lehmann

    3 years ago

    I think he's referring to "internalities," as in, people should be saved from themselves. But you may not disagree with that either, in certain circumstances.
    reply
  • Jake Winship

    3 years ago

    Yes, I meant the specific issue of negative results imposed on a person's "future self" by her voluntary decisions - I think this a harder sell than externalities, even post-Coase
    reply
  • asg

    3 years ago

    Property rights are very weak and originate from the state.
    reply
  • penner

    3 years ago

    Negative liberty ("right to be left alone") is what's really important; its value doesn't come from its contribution to positive liberty.
    reply
  • Javier

    3 years ago

    Equality of opportunity as the premier or central principle of distributive justice. And I mean equality of opportunity in the "fair" sense: everyone needs an equal starting chance, controlling for unequal social and natural endowments.
    reply
  • Javier

    3 years ago

    The "controlling for" bit should read "leveling out initially unequal social and natural endowments"
    reply
  • Ben A

    3 years ago

    I'll second Javier. Equality of opportunity is a/the central principle of distibutive justice.
    reply
  • Dallas

    3 years ago

    There are no objective moral truths.
    reply
  • Will Wilkinson

    3 years ago

    We're getting close, folks. Do I hear a third for equality of opportunity?
    reply
  • Jake Winship

    3 years ago

    I'll third the proposition, but I'm not sure that I entirely disagree with the premise. Execution can be a sticking point - maybe address that aspect.
    reply

Add New Comment

Returning? Login