Q.Which of the following arguments could be used to justify state action to provide basic minimum conditions of life to all citizens?

The chapter treats a basic minimum standard of living as something citizens can rightfully claim as a matter of justice, not as charity extended to them out of kindness. …

The chapter's discussion, and the J.S. Mill quote it ends with — "Justice implies something which it is not only right to do and wrong not to do; but which some individual person can claim from us as his moral right" — makes clear that justice-based provision of a basic minimum must be something citizens can rightfully claim, not something extended to them as an act of charity or generosity by the well-off.

(a) frames free services to the poor as "charity." This misdescribes what is actually a matter of justice — it makes the basic minimum optional and dependent on the goodwill of others, rather than a right. This is not the argument the chapter would endorse.

(b) fits the chapter's own reasoning directly: a just society should provide the basic minimum so that people have genuine, not merely formal, equal opportunity to pursue their goals — someone lacking nourishment, housing, clean water, education, or a living wage cannot compete for opportunities on anything like equal terms with someone who has all of these. Securing the basic minimum is what actually makes "equality of opportunity" real. This is a sound justice-based argument. …