Thesis: The only time for distributing according to need is when distributing according to need passes the test of self-inspection.

PASSING SELF-INSPECTION

Distributing according to need is not guaranteed to meet needs. So far as I can see, there is exactly one reason to distribute according to need. Here is the reason: Distributing according to need solves the problem. The point of distributing according to need is not to prove our hearts are in the right place, but to meet the need.

The idea that people ought to get what they need stops calling for distribution according to need when distribution according to need stops being what people need. Need-based distribution must, under the circumstances, pass self-inspection.

If parents ought to meet their children's needs as well as they reasonably can – if children are due that much – then that may be a case where justice is about distributing according to need. But need-based distribution is not always what justice requires. The “Lawnmower” case (Chapter 25) is on its face a case where need-based distribution fails self-inspection. In “Lawnmower,” what Billy needs from his father is recognition that the context calls for distribution according to entitlement, where the entitlement is more directly grounded in something like reciprocity than in any principle of need. Need-based distribution can fail the test of self-inspection because alternative principles frequently are more conducive to people meeting their needs.