The 'difference' principle is not sufficient either, since it gives no specifi-cation of the size of the inequality allowed in comparison with the amount ofthe advantage provided. Any inequality, no matter how great, would be justi-fied by any advantage, no matter how slight, to the badly off. Rawls does notcall this perfectly just, but he considers it 'just' all the sam

The second, or 'difference' principle is much too strong. It specifies thatinequalities are arbitrary unless they will work out to the advantage of therepresentative man. But this Pareto-inclusive rule prevents any redistributionwhich lowers the wealth of the rich from being considered just.