Ethics and the Environment Essay Example

as the requirement for individuals to be treated in a way that acknowledges their inherent moral equality. Human rights have several important characteristics and are not derived from specific roles, relationships or circumstances. Firstly, they are universally applicable to all individuals. Secondly, every person possesses these rights equally. Lastly, human rights cannot be transferred or given up.

Human rights, in contrast to legal rights, are innate and not contingent upon human establishments. There exist two categories of rights: negative rights and positive rights. Negative rights center on the fundamental prerogative of individuals to be exempt from interference by others. Conversely, positive rights stem from the vital concern individuals have in acquiring particular advantages. Such advantages encompass the entitlement to obtain goods, services, or opportunities from others. Our Constitution guarantees our right to pursue life, liberty, and further endeavors.

Liberty, or freedom, is a crucial ideal in capitalism. According to Friedman, this ideal manifests in the ability to participate in economic transactions without any form of coercion from governments or other individuals. Hence, I believe that Haslett's proposal to eliminate inheritance would go against capitalism's dedication to freedom in a narrow sense. Consequently, I disagree that inheritance violates equal opportunity and that its abolition would enhance productivity and income distribution, even from a capitalist perspective.

From an ethical perspective, the elimination of inheritance would infringe on an individual's rights, specifically their freedom. From a utilitarian standpoint, inheritance is deemed unfavorable as the value of money decreases over time. This would lead to a more equitable distribution of wealth, enhancing the earnings of those with lower incomes and ultimately improving overall happiness and societal well-being. Conversely, libertarians contend

that individuals possess the right to retain their possessions if obtained fairly.

The entitlement theory, as described by libertarian philosopher Robert Nozick, states that individuals have the right to retain something if they acquire it justly and fairly. This principle applies even when one obtains something from another individual who is also entitled to it. In contrast, Rawls' theory argues that inequalities can only be justified if they serve to benefit the most disadvantaged group within society.

According to Rawls, social justice pertains to the fundamental organization of society, rather than individual transactions. He believes that individuals do not deserve the attributes they possess by birth or influenced by their surroundings. Rawls argues that society is a collaborative endeavor for mutual advantage and justice demands the mitigation of social and economic disparities arising from arbitrary natural variations among individuals. He would suggest the elimination of inheritance. However, Haslett's suggestion to abolish inheritance is impractical and lacks fairness.

An individual possesses the authority to decide how their private property, including any inheritance they bestow upon someone else, should be handled, as long as it aligns with their fundamental and legal rights. The concept of inheritance does not breach the principle of equal opportunity nor would its elimination result in heightened productivity or a fairer income distribution. While not all individuals enjoy identical life opportunities, those who have achieved success and wealth without relying on inheritance have accomplished so through diligent effort.

Denying individuals the right to pass on their hard-earned possessions or family heirlooms to future generations violates their freedom, life, and pursuit of happiness. Moreover, merely granting governmental control over people's property does not ensure enhanced productivity or equitable

distribution of funds among all citizens. Haslett proposes wealth redistribution through elimination of inheritance; however, this approach may impede productivity by dampening motivation and reducing incentives for savings and investment.

The flaw in Haslett's argument against inheritance as contradictory to capitalist ideals is evident. Capitalism supports the notion of equal opportunities for success. Simply confiscating wealth from individuals does not address the issue or promote fairness and justice, contrary to what Haslett believes. It is true that those who inherit wealth have an advantage over those born into poverty. However, it is within the government's power and duty to intervene and establish a balanced environment without unjustly burdening others.

Increasing funding in education and the country's economy is crucial for reducing poverty in society. Additionally, implementing Halsett's proposal would be advantageous for all. For example, if the government inherits wealthy individuals' personal assets and funds upon their death, it should also assume the responsibility of paying off debts and providing assistance to those who are less fortunate or lack a plan. It is important to acknowledge that people's earnings have already been taxed by state and federal authorities.

While there is currently a deduction for taxes paid to the government on inheritance, an additional inheritance tax must be paid if the amount surpasses a certain threshold. Although eliminating federal and state taxes may appear advantageous, we should not do so at the cost of accepting Haslett's proposal. Instead of adopting Haslett's system, what we need is a fairer tax system. It is crucial to recognize that Haslett might have a valid argument about wealth equalization. Nevertheless, we cannot ignore the fact that some individuals lack responsibility, which

could lead many Americans back to their previous circumstances due to such behavior.

To summarize, the text argues against eliminating inheritance as it would hinder equitable wealth distribution. Instead, the government should prioritize enhancing educational opportunities for individuals to enhance their chances of success. The focus should be on personal choice in determining the allocation of belongings after death, and not letting the government control this matter. Despite taxpayers' contributions over time, it is claimed that there has been no substantial impact on the economy. Hence, Haslett's proposal to abolish inheritance is seen as unjust.