Desert, democracy, and consumer surplus a review

Dekker’s article “Desert, democracy, and consumer surplus” wants to show how a society that wishes to give people their just desert, there must be some way to determine what would be considered “just” for the contribution of an individual. Dekker argues against the notion that because the market cannot fairly determine what an individual deserves for their actions, doesn’t mean it is impossible to determine it through democratic process. Dekker’s article starts with him defining the concept of desert as giving a person what they deserve for the goods they produce. Dekker argues that the concept of desert could be the basis of distributive justice, because people are fairly rewarded for the goods they produce. Dekker then goes on to argue that democratic appraisal is the best way to determine what a good is worth, because it takes every person’s say into account. The process of democratic appraisal takes the value every person places on a good, then averages these values to determine the just desert for said good. Dekker also addresses the problem associated with democratic appraisal, which is not everyone has the same income so richer individuals would skew the results, by determining that the appraisal process would ask people to put forth a value for the good from several different income brackets. Dekker admits that the math and procedure for doing this democratic appraisal are to difficult, but he is confident that in the future this process will be possible. Dekker also addresses the issue of why the market is inadequate at determining just desert. The market is unable to determine a fair value of a good because in many cases an artificial value is placed on a good, because an individual, or small group, under or overvalue a good. Dekker gives an example of a painting, where most people looking to buy the painting value it at 10 million, where one individual values it at 20 million, and another at 25 million. Ultimately, the painting will