|
The global resources dividend (GRD) is a method of tackling global poverty advanced by the philosopher Thomas Pogge. 〔 He presents it as an alternative to the current global economic order. Under the scheme nations would pay a dividend (tax) on any resources that they use or sell, 〔H. Widdows, N. Smith (2011) ''Global Social Justice'', Routlege: New York, p 74〕 resulting in a sort of "tax on consumption"〔 Pogge's scheme is motivated by the positive duty to alleviate poverty, but also on the negative responsibility of the rich not to use institutions that perpetuate economic inequality. Pogge estimates that a dividend of just 1% could raise $300 billion each year; this would equal $250 for each individual in the worlds poorest quintile. Implementing some version of the GRD entails not only discussions about practicality, but presumably, an affirmation of what is right. As Pogge puts it "Our task as philosophers requires that we try to imagine new, better political structures and different, better moral sentiments. We must be realistic, but not to the point of presenting to the parties in the original position the essentials of the status quo as unalterable facts."〔 ==Rights of the disadvantaged== Pogge's main justification is that, even if the idea of GRD would be refined over time, and would be difficult to implement, it is nevertheless the right of those who are the worst off. The 1% dividend tax is not seen as a donation, but a responsibility.〔 Pogge believes that the idea of the GRD may be a natural extension of John Rawls' theory of justice, although Rawls himself has express disagreement with this. To Pogge, the world order currently violates the first principle of justice (equal opportunity), as well as the second principle (equal access to offices, but also the idea that inequalities should favour the poorest individuals).〔 Rawls thought that certain individuals may be permitted to various non-liberal views, provided they harmonize with a liberal government. Similarly, Pogge says that we may permit certain nations to operate according to hierarchical, non-liberal systems; but on a global scale, only systems that harmonize with a grander liberal philosophy can be tolerated. Liberals cannot avoid taking sides completely; they must reject totalitarianism, for instance.〔 This has implications for the validity of actions that might be taken to promote a GRD. Under the scheme of a GRD, states do not have full property rights in the resources within their sovereign territory. Although the GRD allows states to use resources as they see fit, the scheme implies that the global poor have an 'inalienable stake in all scarce resources' (see implementation, below).〔Haubrich. Dirk (2004) Global Distributive Justice and the Taxation of Natural Resources – Who Should Pick Up the Tab?,''Contemporary Political Theory'', 3: 52〕 Pogge argues that national borders are morally arbitrary in the first place, and are born from a history of coercion and violence. He sets these issues aside, however, and focuses on the following claim: any conception of global justice (even if we accept existing national borders as they are) must acknowledge international inequalities.〔 Pogge thinks it becomes difficult to justify why a person born to rich parents in Canada should be entitled to so much more than one who is born to poor family in Sierra Leone. Equally difficult to justify might be the assumption that every person has a right to absolute control over the resources they happen to have within their borders.〔 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Global resources dividend」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|