Markets and the Needy: Organ Sales or Aid? T. L. ZUTLEVICS, PhD

Keyword(s):  
2001 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 297-302 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. L. Zutlevics
Keyword(s):  

2014 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-101 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daphna Hacker

Abstract This article suggests enacting an accession tax instead of the estate duty – which was repealed in Israel in 1981. This suggestion evolves from historical and normative explorations of the tension between perceptions of familial intergenerational property rights and justifications for the “death tax,” as termed by its opponents, i.e., estate and inheritance tax. First, the Article explores this tension as expressed in the history of the Israeli Estate Duty Law. This chronological survey reveals a move from the State’s taken-for-granted interest in revenue justifying the Law’s enactment in 1949; moving on to the “needy widow” and “poor orphan” in whose name the tax was attacked during the years 1959–1964, continuing to the abolition of the tax in 1981 in the name of efficiency and the right of the testator to transfer his wealth to his family, and finally cumulating with the targeting of tycoon dynasties that characterizes the recent calls for reintroducing the tax. Next, based on the rich literature on the subject, the Article maps the arguments for and against intergenerational wealth transfer taxation, placing the Israeli case in larger philosophical, political, and pragmatic contexts. Lastly, it associates the ideas of accession tax and “social inheritance” with inspirational sources for rethinking a realistic wealth transfer taxation to bridge the gap between notions of intergenerational familial rights and intergenerational social justice.


2002 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 447-473 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elaine Clark

A great many factors other than philanthrophy influenced social policy in England during the Middle Ages. Although political thinkers steadfastly acknowledged the importance of received tradition, especially the religious command to help the poor, many lawmakers were profoundly ambivalent about begging. It is true that the opinion of the nineteenth century implied that medieval almsgiving was so “reckless” that English “beggars had an easy life,” but more recent research has challenged this perspective, bringing the parameters of medieval mendicancy into sharper focus. Seen individually, beggars were pathetic and vulnerable, but if viewed collectively they were thought to be dangerous and willfully idle. Parliament's decision to regulate begging in the years after the first appearance of the Black Death (1349–50) compelled the king's subjects to rethink the claims of the needy, even though almsgiving had long seemed a positive aspect of community life. Obviously by the close of the fourteenth century something had happened to broaden the story of casual relief, extending its boundaries beyond religious impulse to include the frustrations and passions that animated the political arena. Here contentious voices sounded, although parliamentary argument and debate were often tempered by the conviction that men of affairs could legislate a more orderly realm. Even so, efforts at social planning were by no means limited to statutory decree or confined to the late medieval world.


Author(s):  
Abdul Mutalib Embong ◽  
Azelin Mohamed Noor ◽  
Hezlina Mohd Hashim ◽  
Syahrul Alim Baharuddin ◽  
Norasyikin Binti Abdul Malik

This study reveals the currents social welfare which includes the uprising practice of Islamic charity, namely Infaq (voluntary alms giving), an instrument to help the unfortunate people (asnaf). It used qualitative approach involving semi-structured interviews focusing on six themes with six respondents. They engage in Infaq during the MCO or Movement Control Order. The results showed that there was a rise of contemporary fame of Infaq among Malaysian middle-class Muslims and charity body or organisation that specialise in sedekah/Infaq programmes . These parties make use of the platform of social media to record their activities and raise funds activity to help the needy who demand immediate and non-bureaucratic donations especially in a form of material help like food and daily necessities. This indeed has changed the course of how sedekah or Infaq used to be done back then. More Muslims who perform these Islamic charities display their efficiency and transparency in their donations as in Islam, sedekah is as a spiritual ‘investment’ to the donors despite the hard time people face during pandemic. 


1986 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 48
Author(s):  
Stanley R. Mandel
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Victor D. Carlson

The creation of the state of Pakistan, following in the wake of the bloody partition, the mass migrations, as well as the resultant concentration of people, culminated in a situation where the human needs could only be fulfilled through organ ized and planned social welfare. Industrialization was the apparent need for a largely agricultural country. But the Muslim population with its inbred tradition of social justice and equality reinforced the stress on social welfare. There emerged, therefore, a policy that demanded a balance between economic and social planning. Social work begun by volunteers was shaped by government efforts. International assistance was requested and personnel was secured to institute the needy training of local persons. Among the varied projects which developed, perhaps the most noteworthy was the emergence of the Village-Aid Programs and the Urban Community Develop ment Programs. The simultaneous activity of the government and the voluntary agencies facilitated rapid and dramatic prog ress in the planning and organization of welfare services.—Ed.


2015 ◽  
Vol 109 (4) ◽  
pp. 735-749 ◽  
Author(s):  
LAURA VALENTINI

In late 2012, Hurricane Sandy hit the East Coast of the U.S., causing much suffering and devastation. Those who could have easily helped Sandy's victims had a duty to do so. But was this a rightfully enforceable duty of justice, or a nonenforceable duty of beneficence? The answer to this question is often thought to depend on the kind of help offered: the provision of immediate bodily services is not enforceable; the transfer of material resources is. I argue that this double standard is unjustified, and defend a version of what I call “social samaritanism.” On this view, within political communities, the duty to help the needy—whether via bodily services or resource transfers—is always an enforceable demand of justice, except when the needy are reckless; across independent political communities, it is always a matter of beneficence. I defend this alternative double standard, and consider its implications for the case of Sandy.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document