The principle of redress is “the principle that undeserved inequalities call for redress” (TJ 86). Consider the case of people who are born with debilitating handicaps or with a melancholy disposition. Since these people do not deserve to be less well off than others, they are entitled to compensation for their handicaps or dispositions under the principle of redress. Consider next the case of people who are born with great intelligence or beauty. Since these people do not deserve to be better off than others, it is appropriate to penalize them for their natural good fortune under the principle of redress. In one formulation or another, the principle of redress is accepted by all those who are identified as luck egalitarians. Rawls does not accept the principle of redress, but he does claim that the difference principle gives some weight to it. He does not accept the principle of redress because he does not think that justice applies to the distribution of natural primary goods, such as intelligence or beauty. The fact that some have more and others have less of these goods is neither just nor unjust. For Rawls, justice is a matter of how the basic structure of a society determines distributions of social primary goods, not natural primary goods. Yet, as mentioned, Rawls does claim that the difference principle gives some weight to the principle of redress. Like this latter principle, it holds that people do not deserve their good fortune in the distribution of natural talents and so they cannot make a desert-based claim that they are entitled to the social primary goods that low from the exercise of these talents.