When we invoked the example of the US National Basketball Association’s (NBA’s) scheme for redistribution of new talent as a model offering lessons for a possible future global social support system we hoped that we would stimulate debate. Consequently, we are very grateful to Goldblatt1 and Labonté2 for their insightful commentaries that explore some of the issues that arise from our suggestion. As Goldblatt notes, we did not propose that the NBA scheme be used as a blueprint for a global system, but rather as an illustration of a principle that could be applied more widely. We agree fully about the importance of incorporating proportionate universalism, establishing appropriate and effective governance structures, and taking action that is of adequate scale and intensity. Goldblatt correctly makes the point that a global system should not simply rob from the rich to give to the poor but instead should draw resources from countries all levels of development, including the very poorest, on the basis of ability to pay and should redistribute those resources, again to all countries, on the basis of need. We have described in detail how this might work elsewhere.3 The concept of solidarity that underpins this idea is entirely different from that of charity. Crucially, it is designed to avoid a “them and us” mentality but rather to encourage those who contribute most to realise that it is in their best long term interests to do so.
Towards a global social support system: a response to the recent commentaries
Stuckler, David;
2016
Abstract
When we invoked the example of the US National Basketball Association’s (NBA’s) scheme for redistribution of new talent as a model offering lessons for a possible future global social support system we hoped that we would stimulate debate. Consequently, we are very grateful to Goldblatt1 and Labonté2 for their insightful commentaries that explore some of the issues that arise from our suggestion. As Goldblatt notes, we did not propose that the NBA scheme be used as a blueprint for a global system, but rather as an illustration of a principle that could be applied more widely. We agree fully about the importance of incorporating proportionate universalism, establishing appropriate and effective governance structures, and taking action that is of adequate scale and intensity. Goldblatt correctly makes the point that a global system should not simply rob from the rich to give to the poor but instead should draw resources from countries all levels of development, including the very poorest, on the basis of ability to pay and should redistribute those resources, again to all countries, on the basis of need. We have described in detail how this might work elsewhere.3 The concept of solidarity that underpins this idea is entirely different from that of charity. Crucially, it is designed to avoid a “them and us” mentality but rather to encourage those who contribute most to realise that it is in their best long term interests to do so.
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
