{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017932489451476793, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004219409282700422, 'mean_word_length': 5.162337662337662, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Liberty and Welfare: Comment on Griggs

In a short paper Edwin Griggs (1991) has managed to provide a sophisticated and powerful critique of F. A Hayek’s central ideas on the relationship between freedom and the welfare state, and the connection between social justice and some fairly typical social democratic institutions and policies. In his claim that welfare policies do not necessarily restrict liberty in Hayek’s sense and that redhtxibution does not have to depend on a contestable notion of desert, Griggs has capitalised on a certain looseness of expression and conceptual fuzziness that Hay& displays. Curiously, the approach is not dissimilar from libertarian and individualistic critics of Hayek who maintain that his refusal to endorse the notion of natural rights and his purely procedural limitations on the state, i.e. those that emanate from the rule of law doctrine, could actually license a wide ambit of governmental authority.