Question 3
Are global taxes such as Thomas Pogge’s proposed Global Resource Dividend defensible? Critically discuss. If you do favour global taxes explain what form they should take and defend your view. If you do not favour global taxes explain why no taxes can be justified.
This question is important because of the severity of global poverty today. If global taxes such as Pogge’s Global Resource Dividend (GRD) were defensible, then it would be a significant step the world can take in its fight to eliminate global poverty. In “A Global Resource Dividend” Pogge indicates an obligation to the global poor that it is stronger than charity. In his view, we do not only have a positive responsibility to assist the poor, we also have a negative responsibility to end our participation in a global order, which assists global poverty. As a practical solution to the problem of global poverty, he proposes the GRD. In this paper, I examine the strengths and weaknesses of Pogge’s proposal. Firstly I look at Pogge’s motivation behind the proposal, secondly I look at the proposal itself, and thirdly I look at the criticisms. Finally I come to the conclusion that although global poverty is severe and the developed world should do more, the GRD and taxes like it are not a feasible solution to the problem.
In ‘Priorities of Global Justice’ Pogge expresses his confusion to the fact that, developed states have been more willing to appeal moral values and use such appeals in justification of initiatives such as the Nato bombings of Yugoslavia, but are not prepared to do so in its fight against global poverty. He thinks it is odd that they are prepared to spend billions of dollars and endanger thousands of lives to rescue a million Serbs but are not prepared ...