Feare are Valide") have regarded as presumptively binding. She also claims that luck egalitarianism expresses a demeaning pity towards the disadvantaged, basing their claims to compensation not on equality but inferiority, and excludes many individuals from the social conditions of their freedom simply on the basis that it is judged to be their fault for losing them. Further, it involves the state making highly moralistic and intrusive judgements about the choices that individuals make, and seems to lead to very counter-intuitive conclusions: those who voluntarily enter jobs with higher-than-average risks, or who 'choose' to live in geographical locations prone to natural disasters may make no claim on others if they suffer as a result of it. Susan Hurley has argued that any attempt to ground egalitarianism in issues concerning luck and responsibility must fail, because there is no non-circular way of specifying an egalitarian baseline rather than any other baseline. For instance, a luck inegalitarian could believe that the baseline from which we should correct luck is one where huge inequalities exist. Without merely assuming equality, there seems to be no way of coming to prefer one approach over the other. Global luck egalitarianism Global luck egalitarianism is a view about distributive justice at the global level associated with cosmopolitan moral theory. It starts from the premise that it is a bad thing for some people to be worse off than others through no fault of their own and applies this intuition across borders. Global luck egalitarians characteristically believe that moral agents may have duties to mitigate the brute luck of distant others. Proponents of this school of thought are amongst others Simon Caney and arguably Charles Beitz; opponents, most of whom reject the above premise either in its entirety or with respect to inequalities in which one party's welfare is at least above some minimum level, include Robert Nozick. Advocates Prominent advocates of luck egalitarianism have included Ronald Dworkin, Richard Arneson, Gerald Cohen, John Roemer, Eric Rakowski, and Kok-Chor Tan. References Bibliography Further reading G. A. Cohen, 'On the Currency of Egalitarian Justice', Ethics (1989), pp. 906–944. Richard Arneson, 'Equality and Equal Opportunity for Welfare', Philosophical Studies (1989), pp. 77–93. Ronald Dworkin, Sovereign Virtue (2000). Elizabeth S. Anderson, 'What is the Point of Equality?' Ethics (1999), pp. 287–337. Susan L. Hurley, Justice, Luck and Knowledge (2003). Alexander Kaufman, ‘Choice, Responsibility and Equality’, Political Studies 52 (2004): 819–836. Alexander Brown,