Social Justice in an Open World: The Role of the United Nations
inequalities and inequities to follow their course. Countries with the highest and steadiest rates of economic growth, notably the United States, have experienced some of the greatest increases in inequalities in areas such as income distribution; a number of countries with very low rates of economic growth have actually managed to reduce or at least maintain inequalities in the distribution of income. It might be argued that one of the reasons why certain countries have experienced high rates of economic growth is precisely because their Governments have been determined not to meddle with the "natural" distribution of income and assets deriving from the "normal" interplay of market forces. From this perspective, economic justice (ensuring opportunities for meaningful work and employment on a level playing field and fair remuneration or compensation for productive activity) promotes economic growth, whereas social justice constitutes an impediment to such growth. This point is far from irrelevant. Suffice it to note here that there are counter-examples of countries with both dynamic economies and high levels of social justice. Trade-offs are rarely as straightforward as those anxious to prove their point or promote their interests would like to suggest. It cannot be denied that most countries, including developing countries, were relatively wealthier in the 1990s than they were in the 1970s and, a fortiori, in the 1950s and 1960s, when comprehensive welfare schemes were implemented or at least seen as an immediate objective. Decisions on the proportion of the national income allocated for public use and on the relative priority of various items of public expenditure and public transfers reflect political choices. Any modifications deriving from these choices are generally incremental, as few Governments are ever able to start with a tabula rasa. However, even incremental changes, such as a 0.5 per cent increase in defence spending repeated over several budget cycles or modifications in the tax system that reduce levels of taxation for high-income groups, result in very significant resource shifts. Once these decisions are made, their effects are presented as the results of constraints nobody has the capacity to overcome. In recent years there has been a global shift in resource distribution in favour of the private sector, and a number of Governments have started to earmark a higher proportion of their resources for military and security purposes. Such choices might be analysed, and the ease with which they have been accepted, notably in affluent countries, is certainly intriguing, but the point to made here is that the decline in internationaljustice and social justice cannot be attributed to an overall dwindling of resources during these recent decades.
6.2 The effect of different policies on patterns of distribution Policies do matter. It is useful to state this truism because it is sometimes forgotten that laissez-faire is a policy. Provided it is not the unintended result of governmental and administrative incapacity, the non-interventionof a Government in the economy