It is true that for anyone who has evolved in a free democratic state it is really hard to see the conflict between the notion of justice and the notion of wealth.
The conflict between the two notions becomes clear when we start analyzing the difference between the rich and the poor that implies that they benefit from the laws that protect them. The idea is to make laws to guarantee the safety of everyone but also the safety of their goods and property. But, as Rousseau said, were not such laws created by the rich in the first place ?! When it comes to the poor, however, they cannot obey these laws without harming themselves. It seems then legitimate that justice establishes a real equality, which can be called social justice. It consists in considering equal equality as a principal goal to achieve. So, a law may contain a form of injustice that gives more to those who have less. A justice or political decision may not have the established law to concretize equity.
It is true that not all laws are automatically just, but sometimes unfair laws can help restore the balance in a society and avoid disorder or anarchy. A law is made in order to simply realize the principles of justice, especially in particular cases. It does not forbid nor bind only when it is necessary and favors always freedom if it is possible. That way, a State may guaranty a healthy social environment while preserving freedoms.
These websites helped us draft this article :