1. The Entitlement Theory of distributive justice
Robert Nozick

2. Entitlement Theory:
Justice in Acquisition (Legitimately moving something from an unheld state into a held state)
Justice in Transfer (moving from one holder to another, or divesting)
No one is entitled to anything except by applications of 1) and 2).

3. Is an historical rather than patterned view:
Patterned (end-state, time-slice)
Justice is determined by how a distribution came about, not by how it looks at any given time.
Justice is a process
Justice is an outcome 
You can tell if a society is Just by looking at the way that wealth is distributed at some given time and seeing if it fits or does not fit some pattern.
Equality
Education
Punitive
Merit (social utility)
Work (Marx)
Rawls (choices behind veil of ignorance)

4. Why is an historical view preferable?
Because Liberty upsets patterns. Consider: D1 D2
Wilt signs deal for $.25 per ticket
Wilt has $250,000, more than anyone else
Your favorite pattern

5. Conflicting values Rawls Nozick Outcome Equality Low reward Low risk
Safety
Process
Liberty
High reward
High risk
Efficiency

6. Troubles?
(from Julian Sanchez) Nozick’s view may commit the fallacy of composition (assuming that features of parts become features of the whole)
Might be similar to environmental damage: one person washing clothes in a river does not harm, so is environmentally just. A million doing the same thing is not environmentally just.