Abstract
Justifications of market inequalities can appeal to several values. The main ones include efficiency, freedom, and meritocracy. This article focuses on meritocracy and highlights three limits of the meritocratic justification of market inequalities. First, markets cannot be meritocratic: if we abandon the simple economies of independent producers and homogeneous goods, market competition is inevitably lacking, giving rise to non-meritocratic rents. Second, market evaluations of merit present some ethical shortcomings, even if competition could unleash. Third, rewarding merit, no matter where this principle is applied, underrates the element of luck that is present in the individual merit as well as some undesirable consequences of meritocratic rewards. Acknowledging these limits does not deny that merit may have some role in justifying market inequalities. It means, however, to abandon the meritocratic justification.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
