If a person gets something fairly, the government should not take it away from them. The government would be stealing if it took from people when goods are obtained fairly. If the person stole something, then it would be right for the government to take it back and return it to the original owner. Nozick believes that inequality is fine as long as inequality is fair. If one person works to become rich and another person does not work, Nozick sees that only for one is rich and for the other is poor. This can be shown on the example of the family. In the family example there is a family with two children, one of whom is eighteen and the other eight. A child is ten years older and has a job, unlike the younger child. According to Nozick, it is okay for the older child to have more than the other because the younger child has no source of income. The older child should be able to have more and make choices that benefit them without considering the younger child. The older child's choices do not need to reflect the younger child's interests. The parents representing the government in this example do not have the right to tell the older child to consider the younger child in all of the older child's choices. The older child is creating a fair inequality between himself and his brother. If the older child stole from the younger child to create inequality, then parents would have a duty to intervene to correct the inequality because that would be unfair. Nozick has another aspect of his theory called the Lockean Proviso. The clause originally concerned land and property rights. One person could not rightfully take over all the fertile land in an area. They could only take a portion of the lan…half of the paper…the individual who receives the things more than it benefits the individual who has his or her things taken away. Rawls justifies this in his book by calling it redistribution and saying it is done to create a more equal society. Unfortunately, giving theft a different name doesn't change what it is. Returning to the family example, if the eldest child were told that his money would be redistributed, the end result would not change. If an inequality is fair, it is fair. If one person has something that does not entitle another person to a part of it because the second person has less. The government should not take from one group and give to another because one has more. Bibliography Rawls, John. Justice as fairness: politics, not metaphysics. 1985. Print.Nozick, Robert. Anarchy, State and utopia. New York: Basic Books, 1974. Print.