Are the rich more virtuous than the poor?

[Bubba_Switzler]

Sweatshop workers know how to hold down a job. Mexicans farm laborors have steady job histories. What precise virtues are unique to the rich?

They do indeed. Unfortunately there are many who do not.

But what Charles Murry has uncovered is a much more general problem of declining morals among the American poor from roughly 1960 on (or at least that is the period of his research). One of Murray’s claims is that during this period the rich rediscovered such virtues as marriage while abstaining from trying to influence the poor towards the same.

Read some of the linked articles in this thread for more information.

 

[bri89]

They do indeed. Unfortunately there are many who do not.

But what Charles Murry has uncovered is a much more general problem of declining morals among the American poor from roughly 1960 on (or at least that is the period of his research). One of Murray’s claims is that during this period the rich rediscovered such virtues as marriage while abstaining from trying to influence the poor towards the same.

Read some of the linked articles in this thread for more information.

you might say the decline is characteristic of society in general. Many poor already know the value of marriage, but I will read some of the articles.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

you might say the decline is characteristic of society in general. Many poor already know the value of marriage, but I will read some of the articles.

The divergence in the practice of marriage since 1960 is perhaps one of the clearest indicators of this social bifurcation. I urge you to investigate it more closely.

 

[graciew]

QUOTE=Bubba Switzler;9185962]Let us assume that these observations are correct. The question becomes, what changed? Too much has changed for a simple and reliable answer but I would answer, and I think Murray would concur, that one of the biggest and most consequential changes to social structure has been the nationalization of welfare. We have all, to one extent or another, outsourced our love of neighbor to government bureaucracy. “Don’t ask me, I gave at the IRS.”

In the good ol’ days you knew that if you didn’t help then there was a good chance that this person wouldn’t be helped.

The other thing that happened with nationalization of welfare is that it became bureaucractized: demoralized and dehumanized. The prudential judgement of neighbors is replaced with the regulation of law and the human touch is replaced by an ATM card or a check in the mail.

Historically speaking,did the nationalization of welfare take place once we had already left the neighbourhood,to say it somehow?I-m asking casue I do not know. Cause at some point we must have walked away,left the old neighbourhood,and somehow forgotten we had belonged there.
Here is an example that made it very clear to me the distance was huge.We took many children from a severely poor neighbourhood to celebrate their birthdays in a private school.At some point,the kids invited our kids to go to the terrace(2nd floor) to play.One of our kids(about 10 years old) refused to go up the outside stairs.He was in panic.He had never,never been upstairs,anywhere.When we finally lovingly helped him up,he said" This is what it must feel like to be on an airplane".
It had never crossed my mind,that a child had simply never gone up the stairs.
Unless we return to personal encounters,and learn from them what it feels like,we will never know.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

Historically speaking,did the nationalization of welfare take place once we had already left the neighbourhood,to say it somehow?I-m asking casue I do not know. Cause at some point we must have walked away,left the old neighbourhood,and somehow forgotten we had belonged there.

Every now and then I come across studies that probe this sort of question. My impression is that nothing is well settled.

Here is an example that made it very clear to me the distance was huge.We took many children from a severely poor neighbourhood to celebrate their birthdays in a private school.At some point,the kids invited our kids to go to the terrace(2nd floor) to play.One of our kids(about 10 years old) refused to go up the outside stairs.He was in panic.He had never,never been upstairs,anywhere.When we finally lovingly helped him up,he said" This is what it must feel like to be on an airplane". It had never crossed my mind,that a child had simply never gone up the stairs. Unless we return to personal encounters,and learn from them what it feels like,we will never know.

Here is an interesting story about differences: In the movie “Planet of the Apes”, set in the far future, apes are intelligent and men are animals. Among the apes there are three classes: chimpanzees, orangutans, and gorillas. When the original movie was being made the actors, who had to wear their costumes all day, without any direction or purpose, sorted themselves out into social groups at lunch and otherwise into these three groups! In other words, people who had nothing else in common but that they were playing, say, a gorilla, socialized with others who were playing gorillas.

One can find many social science experiments that more methodically confirm this natural human tendency.

 

[graciew]

I still see it happening - every time there is a local tragedy: a housefire, a car accident or the death of a parent, we see people coming together to help and offer support. Because of the internet and instant news, we are also touched by distant disasters, so there is a constant pull on our hearts and our finances. It is sometimes hard to choose, we can’t help everyone, but it seems to me that many people are doing all they can.

Yes,what they can and beyond also.

 

[graciew]

Every now and then I come across studies that probe this sort of question. My impression is that nothing is well settled.

Thanks.

Here is an interesting story about differences: In the movie “Planet of the Apes”, set in the far future, apes are intelligent and men are animals. Among the apes there are three classes: chimpanzees, orangutans, and gorillas. When the original movie was being made the actors, who had to wear their costumes all day, without any direction or purpose, sorted themselves out into social groups at lunch and otherwise into these three groups! In other words, people who had nothing else in common but that they were playing, say, a gorilla, socialized with others who were playing gorillas

 

[LemonAndLime]

The rich are not more virtuous than the poor.

They can just afford better lawyers.

 

[Lochias]

The purpose is to determine if the poor need only material aid or something more that the rich have to offer.

Does needing more besides material aid still remove the obligations that God set forth in terms of rendering material aid? Just because SOME poor might need more, does that remove your own obligations to help with what money and time you can?

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

Does needing more besides material aid still remove the obligations that God set forth in terms of rendering material aid? Just because SOME poor might need more, does that remove your own obligations to help with what money and time you can?

Our obligation is to help those in need (not just the poor, of course). How we help is a matter of prudential judgement about what will help and what is needed as well as who we can best help and how we might, ourselves, be gifted in helping and moved to help.

 

[Lochias]

Our obligation is to help those in need (not just the poor, of course). How we help is a matter of prudential judgement about what will help and what is needed as well as who we can best help and how we might, ourselves, be gifted in helping and moved to help.

And what makes you qualified to judge each person, and/or their circumstances? What makes all poor people in the world able to fit under the hypothesis and view that you espouse?

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

And what makes you qualified to judge each person, and/or their circumstances? What makes all poor people in the world able to fit under the hypothesis and view that you espouse?

I am a human being, created in the image of God. That is my qualification to use my intellect to make prudenial judgements. The Church teaches that we are each to exericse prudence in how we go about living out our Christian lives. Imprudence leads to sin, as we saw with charity to Planned Parenthood.

I make no claims about “all poor people”. I am no more concerned with “all poor people” than Mother Theresa. But perhaps you are?

 

[Lochias]

I am a human being, created in the image of God. That is my qualification to use my intellect to make prudenial judgements. The Church teaches that we are each to exericse prudence in how we go about living out our Christian lives. Imprudence leads to sin, as we saw with charity to Planned Parenthood.

I make no claims about “all poor people”. I am no more concerned with “all poor people” than Mother Theresa. But perhaps you are?

Except that Jesus has been very clear on the subject already, and so your “prudential judgements” are not required. Planned Parenthood is not the poor. Giving directly to the women in need would be a more apt comparison. Planned Parenthood is a business with plenty of money. I saw nothing in regards to your silly appeal to Planned Parenthood. They have no bearing in this conversation.

No Planned Parenthood. Silly at it’s utmost. Got it? Good.

And, Jesus himself was concerned with all poor people, and we are to strive to live like him. Jesus didn’t judge the woman who gave her last few coins away, and we KNOW she’s poor. Why are you? Fact is, it doesn’t matter who’s image you’re made in, you didn’t make those poor people in God’s image, He did. So you, sir, have no room to judge. No room at all. Zip. Zero. We’re here to help them and pray for them, and the Bible talks at great lengths about the beauties of alms-giving.

Your idea of “help” is no help at all. You’re just another bureaucrat, making sure that no other person other than himself can lay claim to his precious, precious money.

Good luck. I deeply suspect you’ll need it.

 

[graciew]

Let´s try this.Cause trust plays a major role to ease conflict.
Suppose we now trust each each other,we are no longer strangers,and I am ready to tell you what I honestly think trusting that whatever decision you make you are not leaving me helpless.
Suppose I have worked hard,have kids,have lost my job cause they´ve closed the factory,been on welfare, found another temporary job,and have a trade.And thus many of my friends from the factory who were also dismissed.
Suppose I tell you that I am tired,and frustrated,cause I am paying taxes,have hardly enough left to feed the family and can see many guys in our own neighbourhood living without doing a thing,tricking the system which has flaws. We feel it is unfair,we are tired too but doing away with all help leaves me and others honestly abandoned cause I know things are getting worse due to recession and I am not sure if I will be able to get a job next time if I loose this one.And I can tell you this cause I trust you,know you have some influence and can help and I am scared.
How can we better help each other ?

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

Except that Jesus has been very clear on the subject already, and so your “prudential judgements” are not required. Planned Parenthood is not the poor. Giving directly to the women in need would be a more apt comparison. Planned Parenthood is a business with plenty of money. I saw nothing in regards to your silly appeal to Planned Parenthood. They have no bearing in this conversation. No Planned Parenthood. Silly at it’s utmost. Got it? Good.

So you would give directly to a woman who asked help to get an abortion?

 

[Lochias]

So you would give directly to a woman who asked help to get an abortion?

No. I’d direct her to a priest or someone else whom I was certain could help her with her own problem, though.

However, that doesn’t mean I shouldn’t give alms to others who are asking for food, or gas. At that point, I give in good faith, and pray that God bless them and enable to receive and use such graces as they never thought possible.

Perhaps you simply don’t give God enough credit? I am, after all, only doing what He asked all of us to do.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

No. I’d direct her to a priest or someone else whom I was certain could help her with her own problem, though.

Good for you! That’s exercisig prudential judgement. You wouldn’t just give her what she asked for, you would try to give her what she needs.

 

[Lochias]

Good for you! That’s exercisig prudential judgement. You wouldn’t just give her what she asked for, you would try to give her what she needs.

Yeah, thing is, God tells us she doesn’t need an abortion, but He does tell us to give money to those who are hungry, clothes to the naked, etc.

Also, way to totally glom over the rest of my post.

Edit: Are you really, truthfully trying to say that telling someone “no” to an abortion and getting them the help they need to NOT COMMIT MURDER is the exact same thing as telling someone who’s starving and asking for food “no”, and directing them down the street to Agency#437?

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

Yeah, thing is, God tells us she doesn’t need an abortion, but He does tell us to give money to those who are hungry, clothes to the naked, etc. Also, way to totally glom over the rest of my post.

Well, I’m glad to know that God talks to you. That must make moral choices a lot easier.

Edit: Are you really, truthfully trying to say that telling someone “no” to an abortion and getting them the help they need to NOT COMMIT MURDER is the exact same thing as telling someone who’s starving and asking for food “no”, and directing them down the street to Agency#437?

Yes, some decisions are more difficult than others. That’s why God gave you that gray matter between your ears.

 

[graciew]

Guys,bless the checks,bless the hands,bless the coins,bless agency 457,the learned and the ignorant,as long as they keep giving,praying and caring,for God´s sake!!
We all exercise prudential judgement,only that some of us are less prudent than others but however imprudent,and harsh as we may sound,WE CARE.and God is so patient…
PEACE.