Question

The question is from the textbook Inequality, Discrimination, Poverty, and Mobility Question 2 from chapter 11:

"As a matter of law and a matter of economics are the anti-discrimination laws interpreted correctly by the courts?"

Answer 1

Anti discrimination laws are meant to ensure that the citizens of the country face no discrimination in terms of gender, religion, caste, class, income level or national origin. Anti discrimination laws promote that every individual the basic Human Rights. These basic rights include medical facilities, nutrition and education upto a certain age. These facilities must be provided to every citizen free of cost. In addition to this , the anti discriminatory laws grants mobility to the citizens. Further, anti discriminationary laws support to provide equal wages or salaries to the individuals working at the same level and doing same job. Courts consider these rights as important because it helps in promoting social welfare.
But, the branch of economics focuses upon economic growth of the country. Though equality in terms of gender, religion and caste is equally supported by the economists. However, the economists hold different views in regard to the anti discriminatory laws in terms of poverty, free education, health, equality of wages and mobility. Primarily, this is due to the different poverty line that are set up by the courts and the economists. In addition to this, many economists support the view that there must not be any ' Free lunch' for the citizens. This means that the citizens must not be provided with the basic facilities free of cost. They must work hard to earn a level of income to purchase even the basic services like education and medical facility. Further,  the right of equal wages is not interpreted by the court correctly. This is because individuals differ in terms of productivity and skills. These individuals must be provided wages or salaries according to their skills and productivity. Lastly  in terms of mobility, economists are of the view that if the individuals are provided with the right to mobility then, they would leave their home country in search of better wages or salaries. This leads to loss of skills and brain drain. Therefore, as a matter of economics the courts interpret many anti discriminatory laws incorrectly.