ABSTRACT
Many recent contributions on the definition of an equitable income distribution have suggested that people should only be compensated for these characteristics for which they cannot be held responsible. We present empirical results concerning the acceptance among Belgian undergraduates of some of the axioms proposed in this literature. When applied to a problem of distribution of subsidies for medical expenditures, the axioms ‘full compensation’ and ‘strict compensation’ are accepted by a majority of the respondents. However, this is not the case within a setting of income redistribution. We suggest that our respondents do not distinguish sufficiently between incentive and justice considerations.
