Moderate

Rawls's miximin criterion does not mean that there should be redistribution so as to equalise everyone's incomes in society because ?

Correct answer: C. Such redistribution would remove the incentive to work hard, so society's total income would fall, and so the least well off person would be worse off than they could be under a system in which there was some inequality income.

  • A. Such redistribution would mean that those who worked hard were no better off than those who were lazy and this would be unfair.
  • B. such redistribution would not maximize the total income of all members of society
  • C. Such redistribution would remove the incentive to work hard, so society's total income would fall, and so the least well off person would be worse off than they could be under a system in which there was some inequality income.
  • D. such redistribution would amount to confiscation of honestly earned income from higher earners and so would be unjust.

Explanation

Rawls's maximin rule permits inequality when it makes the worst-off person better off than complete equality would. Equalising incomes could reduce work incentives, lower total output, and ultimately harm the least advantaged.

Last updated

About Public Finance

Government revenue and expenditure are analysed through taxation, public borrowing, budgets, subsidies, transfers and public debt. The topic explains how fiscal policy affects resource allocation, income distribution, economic stability and growth, while distinguishing direct from indirect taxes, progressive from regressive taxation, and public goods from goods supplied by private markets.

Practise Public Finance

369 free Public Finance MCQs from Economics, each with the correct answer and an explanation. Unlimited attempts, no account needed.

Exams that ask Economics questions like this

Economics is on 2 papers prepared for on TestUstad, and all of them draw the same bank, so this question is worth knowing for every one of them.

Related questions