Catholic social teaching supports basic income’s aim

  • Thread starter Thread starter TK421
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
YourNameHere said:
Minimum wage needs to be increased to at least $15 per hour. This would allow for those who make the least in the USA to be able to live without resorting to welfare.
Click to expand...
No, actually it wouldn’t. It would help some of those who keep their jobs, but it completely ignores the unintended consequences such policies have. It is wishful thinking. It is belief in butterflies and pixie dust.


 
Say what you will, because the rich have to justify the wealth that they have. But those who are rich at the expense of others in this world, have a hot fate awaiting them at the end of this life on earth. Those who have made money here have an obligation to help those who have not.
 
JoeShlabotnik said:
…those who are rich at the expense of others in this world, have a hot fate awaiting them at the end of this life on earth.
Click to expand...
Yes they do. The fact is, however, that most wealth these days (at least in first world countries) is not accumulated at the expense of others. In fact it is typically just the opposite. Wealth is created by providing a product or service that others find valuable and are willing to pay for. Who is harmed by these transactions?
Those who have made money here have an obligation to help those who have not.
Click to expand...
Again, this is true, but utterly irrelevant to the question of how their money was made in the first place.
 
JoeShlabotnik said:
No, it about how much a person should be paid.
Click to expand...
It says that they shouldn’t be oppressed and that you shouldn’t withhold their wages. I still don’t see how it supports your argument that doubling the minimum wage will lift them out of poverty.
 
I support testing the Universal Basic Income in the United States. Put it in place in a dozen cities and see what happens over 2-3 years. The country can absolutely afford it and if it fails no harm, no foul. I have seen a convincing argument against an approach like that.
 
But the point to the story at the top is that people are owed a living wage. That is a moral issue, not an economic issue.
Those who gouge the poor 😧 now will get their just reward in the next life.
 
JoeShlabotnik said:
But the point to the story at the top is that people are owed a living wage. That is a moral issue, not an economic issue.
Those who gouge the poor 😧 now will get their just reward in the next life.
Click to expand...
You seem to have a preconceived notion that everybody who hires employees is trying to “gouge” them, if they don’t pay a living wage (whatever that is).

Most businesses are not large multi-national companies. Today I visited a donut shop. The owner works there. Imagine if they needed some additional help because their business was growing. They could afford minimum wage, but not a “living wage”, because many times new businesses don’t generate enough profit in the first few years for the owner to have a living wage themselves (they are living off of a bank loan, savings, or family help). Should we quote Scripture to them to guilt them into taking home nothing in order to pay their new employee a living wage? Should we just say its better for them to not hire anyone, lest they run afoul of your Scriptural interpretation?

My point is simple: Paying someone a living wage is not as simple as you seem to indicate it is. Sometimes its not possible.

Go read CCC 2434
 
Yes I know, folks in the pre-Civil War period did not pay a living wage. Of course, that was called slavery. 😝
 
JoeShlabotnik said:
Yes I know, folks in the pre-Civil War period did not pay a living wage. Of course, that was called slavery. 😝
Click to expand...
Saying that your $15 per hour minimum wage is unfeasible because of the costs it would require is the same as advocating slavery? You’re equating this to slavery?

Wow. You really have no idea what you’re talking about. All you got is your point and no logic to back it up. You just seem to assume the money will be there.
 
JoeShlabotnik said:
Yes I know, folks in the pre-Civil War period did not pay a living wage. Of course, that was called slavery. 😝
Click to expand...
Wow…
Its a serious issue, and I don’t know if you actually acknowledge my point, or you’re ignoring it, or you’re making an attempt at a tongue-in-cheek reply.

Anyway, Its plain to see that you either don’t want to, or can’t, engage in a reasoned conversation on this topic.

Blessings
 
JoeShlabotnik said:
A rising tide lifts all boats. Minimum wage in the United States should be raised to $15 per hour.
Click to expand...
The rising tide which really helps the poor is having low unemployment.
  • It allows the willing to work
  • It increases wages through competition
  • It increases opportunities for advancement
We need several years of low unemployment. Our teens and minorities are employed at record setting levels.
 
Well it has been tested in lots of places but the problem is it works so well it scares people.

While I journey into the fantastical for a moment I ask you to bare with me:


Now the Star trek federation doesn’t use money internally. Frankly its mostly a very socialist state. While I’m not advocating for one the technology that allows it to work (replicators for instance) doesn’t exist yet if ever.

And while there are many other societies in Startrek who range from militaristic and authoritarian to spiritual and egalitarian poverty isn’t normally an issue. The idea being that somewhere along the technological advancements the species reached a plateau of sorts. This permitted the average person the opportunities to live as they saw fit.

The unanswered question is how do we bridge the gap between that world and our in practice.
Geek speaking the world of star trek is 200 years ahead of us. If you are familiar with the universe there were many crisis and wars that happened before people said enough was enough.

That transition period is not known in that universe (for lack a better term) but the logic (hehe) behind it remains the same in ours. Technology has allowed us to grow the pie so we don’t have to plunder our neighbors. Trading has become preferential to conquest.

While the world can be bleak we live in a era when conquest has all but ended. Power struggles are normally civil affairs and any wars that break out are nations that are mostly fighting to stabilize.

To many of you it may seem childish but I look at science fiction and I can see if but a little blurry the path forward.

It begins and ends with co-operation and lifting each other up. making sure everyone has the same opportunities as everyone else. More students equals more doctors, more cancer treatments and longer healthier happier lives. We have a honest vested interest in turning everyone from poor and homeless to middle class and frankly shattering the concept of class all together.

Maybe UBI isn’t the full answer but I haven’t seen to date how we will get to a world like the above more clearer and I hope everyone here can too.
 
Last edited:
There is low employment now, but many work at low minimum wage jobs. There is no way to make a decent living on the current minimum wage.
They way to go would be to raise the current minimum wage to $15 per hour or maybe more.
 
I totally agree. $15 per hour sounds like a good start. It would lift many workers out of poverty.
 
The reason it seems childish is that it’s predicated on a notion that human nature can and will change. It does not and cannot change unless oriented to Christ. Conquest has not ended, you just don’t see it in the safe little corner of the world you live in. Greed, corruption, and war are immutable factors in a fallen world. UBI is indicative of an immature intellect that longs for a human paradise. It is inherent laziness, and by that I mean it is an attempt to outsource charity to the state and absolve the individual from responsibility.

Eliminating class is not an imperative for anyone. It is in fact an impossibility. Human existence is and always will be stratified. It may take different forms, but the essence of it is immutable. Unless oriented to Christ, humankind will always be inequal.
 
So I disagree with your assessment of things and that means I cannot be engaged in a conversation with you.
I love to discuss things with people who believe they know it all.
The one thing they always do is complain, if I do not agree with them, that I am not willing to engage in a reasonable conversation.
 
AlmaRedemptorisMater said:
it is an attempt to outsource charity to the state and absolve the individual from responsibility.
Click to expand...
Exactly. UBI would lead to a bloated bureaucracy, much like communism. On a local level, it could work, if it’s a collaborative effort in a community with multiple voluntary contributors from surplus wealth — essentially how a charity fund operates. Trying to extend that to mass populations will create the distribution and social control issues we already saw abused in the 20th century.
 
Let’s get all the people who think this is a good idea to join together and provide each other a UBI. I’ll stick with supporting myself.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top