Ritter (d? Little's triple welfare standard. Ritter thinks: "No matter whether it is Caldo-Hicks standard or Sitovski standard, whether it is alone or in the same place, it can be considered as welfare standard" because its compensation is fictitious. In response to Hicks' statement that "almost everyone will get better after a long time", Ritter pointed out: "If a long time is a long time, then most residents will die (although the situation will get better)." Ritter put forward three standards: (1) Does Caldo-Hicks standard meet? (Is the Sitovski standard met? (3) Is any redistribution appropriate? Ritter's triple standard is praised by many economists as "stable and rich in common sense". Or praised as "a real contribution to solving problems" [viii]. However, some economists say, "Ritter's trouble is that although he used enthusiastic words about distribution, he made his standards realize any adverse changes in distribution in his explanation." [ix] We can be sure that Ritter has brought the issue of income distribution back into the research scope of welfare economics. Later, the second theorem of welfare economics was summarized, that is, on the basis of any redistribution