On Social Justice

We live in a world with limited resources. Whenever we need to handle the problem of the allocation of resources, we cannot run away from the question of fairness. What is the fairest way to allocate the limited resources in the society, be they money, power, prestige etc.?
To divide up the resources equally by quantity may not be the best way. I am a diabetic. Say, if we share equally and eat on the spot three birthday cakes among a construction worker, a clerk in the school office and me, I will surely die.
If sharing equally by quantity is not good enough, would sharing according to each one's need better? One small slice of cake is enough to satisfy my needs. The clerk may need two slices and the construction worker half a cake. We can even leave the remaining two cakes in the freezer for tomorrow! It seems to be a better arrangement.
Indeed, some of these resources such as prestige, popularity etc. cannot be equally shared. Some movie stars are just more charismatic than the others. They attract more attention and become more popular. In fact, they need more popularity than the others to stay in the business. Therefore, sharing according to needs is apparently better. Of course, you can fight for equal opportunity of media coverage. But what about your personal charisma? We are not born equal.
And all who believed were together and had all things in common;
and they sold their possessions and goods and distributed them to all, as any had need (Acts 2:44-45).
This is an ideal advocated in the Bible. An ideal picture was painted by Luke in the Acts. But to be realistic, I am afraid there might not be enough resources to satisfy all our needs. There may not be enough birthday cakes, media coverage etc. to start with. In reality, scarcity of supply is a fact of life. Otherwise, Jesus would not have said the following.
For you always have the poor with you, and whenever you will, you can do good to them; but you will not always have me (Mark 14:7).
Nowadays, many people suffer poverty not because they are lazy or unlucky but because the structure of the society has so changed that these people are deprived of opportunities to make money, to move up the society etc. We are seeing this phenomenon more clearly these days. The recipients of Comprehensive Social Assistance cannot afford a decent enough education for their children and consequently, they continue to stay at the bottom of the social ladder. Fairness is difficult to achieve.
These few days, media attention is directed to the emotional opposition of Mui Wo residents to the relocation of a rehabilitation centre for young drug addicts there. Christian Zheng Sheng College 正生書院 in Ha Keng on the Lantau Island has been very successful in rehabilitating young drug addicts. Its present premises are overcrowded and need to expand to meet the increasing demand from the society. Indeed, more students are found to be abusing substances even in elite schools in Hong Kong. Therefore, the relocation of the College to a defunct secondary school in Mui Mo seems to be the best option in the eyes of the Educational Administrators in Hong Kong. The school was closed down in 2007 because there were not enough students in Mui Wo. These government officials have not anticipated the strong opposition from local residents! Meanwhile, the local residents demand the Educational Administrators to restore the secondary school for them so that their children do not have to travel all the way to school in the Central/Western District on Hong Kong Island. But they could not hide their discrimination against these young addicts from the eyes of all the people in this city.
Here, we cannot equally share the secondary school building. Here, both parties have legitimate needs. Here, discrimination, hypocrisy and short-sightedness are rampant. Here generosity and tolerance are missing. I find Paul's request on the Corinthians very meaningful here. Paul was urging the Corinthian believers to continue their donation to support the Jewish brethren who were suffering a famine.
I do not mean that others should be eased and you burdened,
but that as a matter of equality your abundance at the present time should supply their want, so that their abundance may supply your want, that there may be equality.
As it is written, "He who gathered much had nothing over, and he who gathered little had no lack." (2 Corinthians 8:13-15)
Paul was taking a long term view. The abundance of the Corinthians at the moment supplied the needs of the Jewish brethren. God is fair. In time of their needs, the Corinthians would rest assured that supply was on the way.
Over this relocation controversy, government officials know that the society is going to pay a huge price if the College fails to relocate and expand. Unfortunately, society is such a vague and distant idea that many people will not see that they are the ones to pay this price. Naturally enough, the local residents will only see to their immediate interests. They think that they are fighting for their natural rights. Government officials might not think that their children will abuse substances. Perhaps they have lost touch with the local reality for too long. It is high time they resumed their responsibility to allocate these resources in a fair manner.

Dear Lord, I am sure the College will find a perfect site because they call on Your Holy name. May the community learn a lesson in generosity and tolerance. Amen.

Appendix:
He who gathered much had nothing over, and he who gathered little had no lack.ὁ τὸ πολὺ οὐκ ἐπλεόνασεν, καὶ ὁ τὸ ὀλίγον οὐκ ἠλαττόνησεν. (2 Corinthians 8:15)
οὐκ ἐπλεόνασεν ὁ τὸ πολύ, καὶ ὁ τὸ ἔλαττον οὐκ ἠλαττόνησεν (Exodus 16:18b).