Capitalism and Catholicism: Consistently Incompatible

[RWMorris]

You remarks here border on racism-you seem to think you can clearly define the conceptual/values framework of the entire african-american community. Crime and inequality seem to go hand in hand. The literature supports a strong correlation between crime and poverty/economic inequality (however your want to define the two).

For you to assert something as strong as causation between crime and values among groups of people due to the “war on poverty” or welfare is just plain silly and that is being charitable-something you are apparently against…lol.

I based my racist, classist, and uncharitable post of the following data:

• Out-of-Wedlock births for African-Americans has grown from around 20% in the early '60s to nearly 70% in the '90s.
• The total state and federal annual spending for welfare programs has grown from approximately $40 billion in 1960 to $450 billion in 2000 and continues to increase.
• Between 1965 and 2000, welfare spending cost taxpayers over $8 trillion (in constant 1999 dollars)
• From 1960 to 2000, the crime rate has tripled and the incarceration rate has increased by nearly 400 percent amongst welfare recipients
• At the start of the National School Lunch Program in 1946, there were approximately 7.1 million students that participated. By 1997 there were nearly 27 million participants in spite on an enormous increase in the economic well being of the country during that time; Sadly, grades, nevertheless, went down.
  Sources for the above data:

• U.S. Census Bureau’s “Statistical Abstract”
• USDA "School Lunch Program - Fact Sheets
• Robert Rector, Senior Policy Analyst, The Heritage Foundation

Your assertion hinges upon the assumption that technological solutions exist for pollution and waste. Also, no amount of the right’s golden idol “efficiency” will prevent finite resources from being exhausted. The resultant inequalites will produce more crime and poverty.

Your opinion is nothing more than mine, a simple assertion.

However, can you cite for me a single resource that has been exhausted? With 6 billion mouths clamoring for a Big Mac, according to you we would’ve ran out of’em by now.

Most estimates that I’ve read have stated that the earth’s carrying capacity for human life based on a stone age culture is about 300 million. Pre-industrial culture could support roughly 1 billion souls. Current economic activity supports about 6 billion. My assertions are based on historical observations. Your assertions are based on what, your ability to hit me with rotten tomato?

 

[RWMorris]

The political right always stresses the rather nebulous term “efficiency.” Do you have any evidence that more people yields less pollution that isn’t plagiarized rhetoric from Milton Friedman? I suppose such a scenario would be correct if people in the developed world adopt the lifestyles of people of the undeveloped world as they have a smaller ecological footprint per capita.

The is nothing nebulous about the term efficiency.

Economic efficiency is a general term in economics describing how well a system is performing, in generating the maximum desired output for given (name removed by moderator)uts with available technology. Efficiency is improved if more output is generated without changing (name removed by moderator)uts, or in other words, the amount of “friction” or “waste” is reduced … An economic system is more efficient if it can provide more goods and services for society without using more resources.

I didn’t say that “more people yields less pollution.” I said, “more people increase the incentive for solutions and increase the scientific and engineering skills necessary to develop and deploy those solutions. The more need for finite resources increases the efficiency of their use and reduces pollution and waste”. Are you saying that more competition for less resources results is less efficiency? That doesn’t make sense.

By the way, you haven’t answered my question, yet.

Originally Posted by RWMorris forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif
But what do we do with those blasted megalomaniacs?

 

[ribozyme]

The is nothing nebulous about the term efficiency.

I didn’t say that “more people yields less pollution.” I said, “more people increase the incentive for solutions and increase the scientific and engineering skills necessary to develop and deploy those solutions. The more need for finite resources increases the efficiency of their use and reduces pollution and waste”. Are you saying that more competition for less resources results is less efficiency? That doesn’t make sense.

By the way, you haven’t answered my question, yet.

Jevons’ paradox shows efficiency will still lead to the depletion of a resource.

And regarding megalomanaics, the beauty of a democratic system is that people in power can be removed without the use of force. This is its answer to the question: "quis custodiet ipsos custodes " (who will guard the guards).

I am also interested in what type of crimes do people on welfare commit.

 

[RWMorris]

Jevons’ paradox shows efficiency will still lead to the depletion of a resource.

And regarding megalomanaics, the beauty of a democratic system is that people in power can be removed without the use of force. This is its answer to the question: "quis custodiet ipsos custodes " (who will guard the guards).

I am also interested in what type of crimes do people on welfare commit.

Jevons’ Paradox certainly has demonstrated its validity, especially in isolated economic models, but in a complex economic model its effects are so diluted as to be almost meaningless. For example, energy, of all types, will ultimately run out. But that ultimate truth is so far in the future as to be meaningless to any current discussion.

But its application to oil is certainly meaningful. While I don’t share your view of the timing of a “peak oil” crisis, without alternatives and technological innovations, “peak oil” will become a crisis. But alternatives and technological innovation will lessen the impact of “peak oil”, probably to the point we as a consumers may not even notice.

Now to my question about those *blasted megalomaniacs. *You are correct about democracy to a point. But the people can still be tricked. It is less likely in the west because our democratic institutions are so embedded and systematic. But we must never forget that Adolf Hitler gained his initial power through the democratic process and cemented it with lies and distortions. And what about other political systems? Socialism has shown a weakness for dictatorial abuse, as has theocracies.

As to your question concerning “what type of crimes do people on welfare commit”. I do not know the answer and I’m not sure the answer is relevant to the discussion even if they are economically motivated. In other words, the increase is crime is documented, what caused or motivated the increase? The types of crimes are irrelevant, but it would be interesting to know and could possibly be the meat for a different thread.