Although it may sound trite, it is like a business that runs itself, a program. Although Rawls' position lies close to mine, there are some concepts that I believe to be unrealistic. I question their value in trying to formualte a code of justice. For example the veil of ignorance says that being ignorant about one's position in society helps remove the probability of creating a guideline that might give themselves special benefits. But achieving the ignorance is complicated and vague.
Natural assets are a touch subject too.
It is unfair to take away someone's values when their ancestors earned them. This is different from winning a lottery. There are a few kinks, but overall I have to agree with Rawls that utilitarianism completely overlooks an individual's happiness if the overall picture looks happy. Individual liberties are extremely important because everyone has them. This is idealistic, but worth striving for.