Fairness that concept that compels, but what does it mean exactly?

Does "fairness' mean uniformity of application of law or policy, as it might in more literal terms?

No actually it is most commonly used to refer to something more equal in outcomes, not requiring equal in opportunities.

“Fairness” is a central theme of this administration and in fact in this ideology.   Since we are seeing an increase of the percentage poor with the current policies so driven, the concept at least needs some examination.   

We must examine holistically this concept and its meaning, and as well be aware of the effects, both good and bad.   Where is the ethical boundary here?

Such concepts as the “greater good” help drive folks to accept the central-control mgmt of “fairness.”   Can we really live with that notion? 

Let’s examine truly what this concept should mean today, and if we can achieve it.


Does not fairness mean being fair to all parties in the form of equal justice and application of the Law? It should not mean more equal outcomes.




Fairness Test: a modern day test of what is being done now.   And What is Fair?

SOTU Address:  fairness used extensively

Williams on Inequality: in professions

Critique of the Liberal View: answer to Krugman

Principles Involved:  free enterprise at risk

Moral Basis for Fairness: a statement of ethics

Generosity Index:  how generous is the USA



Consider a dictionary definition:


And is fairness a good goal or should it be compromised against our freedom? A very essential question in our times. Milton Friedman had some thoughts quite a few years ago.


"Fairness" means uniformity of judgment.  The law, in a republic, should to be applied to every member uniformly. The issue has been how do you overcome issues of arbitrary interpretation and enforcement of the law or the creation of nonuniform laws. Unfair laws are central planning also known as socialism. Mr. Moore keenly illustrated just how socialistic government has always been.  "All men are created equal" means that every human is judged the same by an entity that recognizes us all as basically identical (or very similar) biological creatures with the same requirements for well-being and the same propensity to feel negative emotions when not understood. 


Main Entry: 1uni·form    Pronunciation Guide Pronunciation: yünfrm Function: adjective Inflected Form(s): sometimes -er/-est Etymology: Middle French uniforme, from Latin uniformis, from uni- + -formis -form 1 : marked by lack of variation, diversity, change in form, manner, worth, or degree : showing a single form, degree, or character in all occurrences or manifestations the Shasta dam ... will keep the flow of the Sacramento relatively uniform throughout the year -- American Guide Series: California Great Russian itself has dialects, though generally speaking for so widespread a language it is remarkably uniform -- W.J.Entwhistle W.A.Morison 2 : marked by complete conformity to a rule or pattern or by similarity in salient detail or practice : CONSONANT, ALIKE how far churches are bound to be uniform in their ceremonies -- Richard Hooker 3 : marked by unvaried and changeless appearance (as of surface, color, or pattern) so many uniform red hills -- Willa Cather 4 : consistent in conduct, character, or effect : lacking in variation, deviation, or unequal or dissimilar operation the constitution has conferred on Congress the right to establish a uniform rule of naturalization -- R.B.Taney synonym seeLIKE, STEADY Citation format for this entry: "uniform." Webster's Third New International Dictionary, Unabridged. Merriam-Webster, 2002. http://unabridged.merriam-webster.com (7 Feb. 2012).
At no other time has there been a bigger need for each citizen to define what a word means.   “Fairness” permeates so many political discussions in so many ways, but alas it is also the definition that is never agreed to.   Perhaps because this is meant by some to be an emotional parameter, a building up of all that feels unfair into directed political motion.   It is however a word that now needs to be defined for the simple reason it has stayed in the emotional space too long.   The damage is mounting.   At no other time has the political forces used this emotion to create such a large “fairness” machine of government.    


Webster:  closest is fair-minded which means without prejudice.


The video at right also delves into what is a fair share.


From Wikipedia, there is a wide range of applications:
Fairness or being fair may refer to:
  • Equity (law), a legal principle allowing for the use of discretion and fairness when applying justice
  • Social justice, equality and solidarity in a society
  • Distributive justice, equal allocation of goods in a society
  • Fairness, absence of bias in specific realms

Certainly there must be some ethical portion of the equation.  There should obviously be a heavy emphasis on fairly acquired, if it has to do with income or wealth.    If gains were gotten through a free and not forcibly controlled process such as the result of government intervention, then the process can be considered fair.   If however there is one group that takes from another, either rich from poor or even poor from rich, then it should be seen as equally unfair.


Interests of some over others in the pursuit  of fairness?

A case of street vendors being limited in order to favor some others.   Link   The arguments are being made in the use of immenient domain as well, to hand over some land to private interests that are connected.   How does this crash the concept of fairness if some are being given special favors?  This must be considered along side the special favors being given those defined as poor.


So the major in the interest of an even playing field, punishes some to defer to others. 
"It's not legitimate for government to use its incredible power to make one business model have an unfair advantage over another."
As a libertarian, I'd say that the store owners' beef is with the local government that imposes the property tax, not the street vendor struggling to make a better life.
If government destroys all the paths out of poverty, the welfare state will look like the only way to help the poor.
Maybe, in addition to helping entrenched interests, that's the bureaucrats' goal.



"It's not legitimate for government to use its incredible power to make one business model
have an unfair advantage over another."