1) Rawls argues that inequalities are only just if they benefit the least advantaged, while Nozick defends individuals’ right to keep what they earn. In today’s economy — shaped by billionaires, automation, and wage gaps—which view seems more justifiable, and why?
************************************************************************************
2) Nozick believes the state should only protect basic rights (life, liberty, property), while Rawls supports redistributive policies. Considering issues like healthcare access or student debt, what level of government involvement in economic justice feels morally right to you?
*******************************************************************************
3) Rawls asks us to imagine making social rules from behind a “veil of ignorance,” not knowing our class, gender, or race. If you had to design society that way today, what major change—economic, political, or social—would you prioritize first, and why?
________________________________________________________________________
1. Please make your initial post substantive (10 or more sentences).
