Clarity: To be anti-capitalist does not mean you hate rich people

[Jonatello]

Let’s just get that out of the way.

Whether someone’s a proponent of communism or distributism or anything else other than capitalism, or maybe just critical of our current brand of capitalism

Whatever it may be

It does not mean that rich people are to be hated or stripped of everything, dragged out to the public square (as if we even had real public squares in america) and beheaded.

Even if it’s based on hatred of greed, and criticisms of the behaviors of the dominant few at the top in general, it does not mean we harbor an ideal of injuring or impoverishing someone who is fortunate.

Many anti-capitalists have loved ones who are rich, or may be rich themselves.

Please do not take this mentality with you into discussion/deliberation over economic systems, because you will never be able to see or hear clearly.

 

[Bohm_Bawerk]

Please do not take this mentality with you into discussion/deliberation over economic systems, because you will never be able to see or hear clearly.

Serious economists don’t discuss “economic systems” anymore (i.e. Capitalism vs Socialism). It’s generally a given throughout the entire subject that a good economy requires an effective private sector and an effective government/public sector. Funnily enough, this is also the contemporary social teaching of the Church.

If I were you, I wouldn’t take too many claims on the internet seriously. There’s a lot of waffle, but little substance:

“It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a ‘dismal science.’ But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance” - Murray Rothbard (economist, historian, political author).

 

[babylonsfalling]

Let’s just get that out of the way.

Whether someone’s a proponent of communism or distributism or anything else other than capitalism, or maybe just critical of our current brand of capitalism

Whatever it may be

It does not mean that rich people are to be hated or stripped of everything, dragged out to the public square (as if we even had real public squares in america) and beheaded.

Even if it’s based on hatred of greed, and criticisms of the behaviors of the dominant few at the top in general, it does not mean we harbor an ideal of injuring or impoverishing someone who is fortunate.

Many anti-capitalists have loved ones who are rich, or may be rich themselves.

Please do not take this mentality with you into discussion/deliberation over economic systems, because you will never be able to see or hear clearly.

No, not NECESSARILY do they hate the rich, but their arguments often focus on the wealth of other people, and reflect a covetous type of envy…and they conveniently always seem to forget that it’s a sin to covet other peoples money.

The fact is that capitalism is the best economic system we have thus far, and without capitalists making LOTS of money, there would be less taxes paid for social systems. If you’re anti capitalist WITHOUT having another proven economic system that has shown it self to work better, then you’re just complaining for the sake of complaining, and NOT offering a solution.

Capitalism in America can certainly be improved upon, but that’s already been happening anyway as social programs have increased hugely in the last hundred years and have ALL been paid for by taxes that in one way or another originate or stem from capitalist activity. Capitalism has created a society in America that people risk their lives to get to, rather than risk their lives to escape from as in other countries.

 

[Nate13]

Let’s just get that out of the way.

Whether someone’s a proponent of communism or distributism or anything else other than capitalism, or maybe just critical of our current brand of capitalism

Whatever it may be

It does not mean that rich people are to be hated or stripped of everything, dragged out to the public square (as if we even had real public squares in america) and beheaded.

Even if it’s based on hatred of greed, and criticisms of the behaviors of the dominant few at the top in general, it does not mean we harbor an ideal of injuring or impoverishing someone who is fortunate.

Many anti-capitalists have loved ones who are rich, or may be rich themselves.

Please do not take this mentality with you into discussion/deliberation over economic systems, because you will never be able to see or hear clearly.

Please explain how you transition from the current system to a communist system then? I’m sure you could probably steal their money/land without killing them if you were sneaky about it. Usually the way it works is the state says “this is mine” and then divies it out as it sees fit. Then the army goes around and handles anyone who has a problem with that. Then the government acts like its on the defensive and the crazy rich people that are trying to stop their money/land from being taken are the ones attacking except of course for the rich people who were in bed with the communist leaders who are then taken care of.

 

[babylonsfalling]

Please explain how you transition from the current system to a communist system then? I’m sure you could probably steal their money/land without killing them if you were sneaky about it. Usually the way it works is the state says “this is mine” and then divies it out as it sees fit. Then the army goes around and handles anyone who has a problem with that. Then the government acts like its on the defensive and the crazy rich people that are trying to stop their money/land from being taken are the ones attacking except of course for the rich people who were in bed with the communist leaders who are then taken care of.

:thumbsup:Well said!

 

[estesbob]

Let’s just get that out of the way.

Whether someone’s a proponent of communism or distributism or anything else other than capitalism, or maybe just critical of our current brand of capitalism

Whatever it may be

It does not mean that rich people are to be hated or stripped of everything, dragged out to the public square (as if we even had real public squares in america) and beheaded.

Even if it’s based on hatred of greed, and criticisms of the behaviors of the dominant few at the top in general, it does not mean we harbor an ideal of injuring or impoverishing someone who is fortunate.

Many anti-capitalists have loved ones who are rich, or may be rich themselves.

Please do not take this mentality with you into discussion/deliberation over economic systems, because you will never be able to see or hear clearly.

So they dont hate them-they just want to take all their money. Well now that we’ve cleared that up…

 

[Swiss_Guy]

No, not NECESSARILY do they hate the rich, but their arguments often focus on the wealth of other people, and reflect a covetous type of envy…and they conveniently always seem to forget that it’s a sin to covet other peoples money.

The fact is that capitalism is the best economic system we have thus far, and without capitalists making LOTS of money, there would be less taxes paid for social systems. If you’re anti capitalist WITHOUT having another proven economic system that has shown it self to work better, then you’re just complaining for the sake of complaining, and NOT offering a solution.

Capitalism in America can certainly be improved upon, but that’s already been happening anyway as social programs have increased hugely in the last hundred years and have ALL been paid for by taxes that in one way or another originate or stem from capitalist activity. Capitalism has created a society in America that people risk their lives to get to, rather than risk their lives to escape from as in other countries.

Would you consider the social market economy to be capitalist? I consider it a mixed economy, but it does lean more towards the capitalist side than the socialist side.

 

[Swiss_Guy]

I think that many people think that if you are against capitalism, you are automatically socialist, and vice versa. There’s a thing called a mixed economy.

 

[Nate13]

I think that many people think that if you are against capitalism, you are automatically socialist, and vice versa. There’s a thing called a mixed economy.

haha I agree with that statement and we currently have a mixed economy in America. We only appear so far to the right capitalist because we are compared to Europe who’s economy’s are probably more socialist than they are capitalist at this point.

 

[Abu]

Swiss Guy
Would you consider the social market economy to be capitalist? I consider it a mixed economy, but it does lean more towards the capitalist side than the socialist side.

Socialism has been roundly condemned by Papal social teaching, while free enterprise has been clearly affirmed.

There are the supposedly free market economies such as Europe’s which have been decimated by the Welfare States condemned by Bl John Paul II in Centesimus Annus.

U.S. governments and the Federal Reserve have severely distorted free enterprise from the 1930’s.

 

[carn]

There are the supposedly free market economies such as Europe’s which have been decimated by the Welfare States condemned by Bl John Paul II in Centesimus Annus.

Do you happen to know the exact part where some versions of welfare state are condemned?

 

[Abu]

Carn #10
Do you happen to know the exact part where some versions of welfare state are condemned?

From Bl John Paul II in Centesimus Annus, 1991:
#48. “Another task of the State is that of overseeing and directing the exercise of human rights in the economic sector. However, primary responsibility in this area belongs not to the State but to individuals and to the various groups and associations which make up society. The State could not directly ensure the right to work for all its citizens unless it controlled every aspect of economic life and restricted the free initiative of individuals. This does not mean, however, that the State has no competence in this domain, as was claimed by those who argued against any rules in the economic sphere. Rather, the State has a duty to sustain business activities by creating conditions which will ensure job opportunities, by stimulating those activities where they are lacking or by supporting them in moments of crisis.

“In recent years the range of such intervention has vastly expanded, to the point of creating a new type of State, the so-called “Welfare State”. This has happened in some countries in order to respond better to many needs and demands, by remedying forms of poverty and deprivation unworthy of the human person. However, excesses and abuses, especially in recent years, have provoked very harsh criticisms of the Welfare State, dubbed the “Social Assistance State”. Malfunctions and defects in the Social Assistance State are the result of an inadequate understanding of the tasks proper to the State. Here again the principle of subsidiarity must be respected: a community of a higher order should not interfere in the internal life of a community of a lower order, depriving the latter of its functions, but rather should support it in case of need and help to coordinate its activity with the activities of the rest of society, always with a view to the common good.”

In Caritas in Veritate, Pope Benedict XVI stipulates that true world political authority not only “would need to be regulated by law, [but also] to observe consistently the principles of subsidiarity” (67). Subsidiarity “is the most effective antidote against any form of all-encompassing welfare state” (57).

 

[Swiss_Guy]

Socialism has been roundly condemned by Papal social teaching, while free enterprise has been clearly affirmed.

There are the supposedly free market economies such as Europe’s which have been decimated by the Welfare States condemned by Bl John Paul II in Centesimus Annus.

U.S. governments and the Federal Reserve have severely distorted free enterprise from the 1930’s.

The social market economy is not socialist. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_market_economy

 

[Swiss_Guy]

haha I agree with that statement and we currently have a mixed economy in America. We only appear so far to the right capitalist because we are compared to Europe who’s economy’s are probably more socialist than they are capitalist at this point.

I’d say it depends on what country in Europe. (E.g France would be more socialist, Switzerland probably not as much).

 

[Swiss_Guy]

Socialism has been roundly condemned by Papal social teaching, while free enterprise has been clearly affirmed.

There are the supposedly free market economies such as Europe’s which have been decimated by the Welfare States condemned by Bl John Paul II in Centesimus Annus.

U.S. governments and the Federal Reserve have severely distorted free enterprise from the 1930’s.

I disagree with the last sentence as well.

 

[Swiss_Guy]

Socialism has been roundly condemned by Papal social teaching, while free enterprise has been clearly affirmed.

There are the supposedly free market economies such as Europe’s which have been decimated by the Welfare States condemned by Bl John Paul II in Centesimus Annus.

U.S. governments and the Federal Reserve have severely distorted free enterprise from the 1930’s.

As a side question, What countries in Europe are you thinking of?

 

[Abu]

Swiss Guy
What countries in Europe are you thinking of?

These are the sorts of problems which Welfare States harbour. The crisis is now more evident than ever. Germany has not tended to encourage the welfare mentality such as the rest.

thepublicdiscourse.com/2010/06/1388
Fatal Attraction: Democracy and the Welfare State
by Samuel Gregg, June 18, 2010
Expansive and expensive welfare programs have brought European social democracies to the verge of catastrophe. Now the dynamics of democracy may be an impediment to economic reform.
A week, it is often said, is a long time in politics. Much, however, can change in a year. Only a short while ago some European politicians were touting the European social model’s superiority over what many continental Europeans deride as “Anglo-Saxon capitalism.” Now, however, governments across Europe are scrambling to avoid the fate of Greece. Moreover, they are doing so by contemplating—and, in some cases, implementing—the hitherto unthinkable: reducing their budget deficits by diminishing the expansive welfare states to which many Europeans have long been accustomed.

In doing so, these governments are finally acknowledging a truth initially obscured by the crisis of the euro: that for all the disarray generated by the euro’s recent tribulations, Europe’s economic woes have more systematic causes.
One cause is several decades of low economic growth. As the Czech president Václav Klaus recently observed, “average annual economic growth in the eurozone countries was 3.4 percent in the 1970s, 2.4 percent in the 1980s, 2.2 percent in the 1990s and only 1.1 percent from 2001 to 2009.” “A similar slowdown,” Klaus added, “has not occurred anywhere else in the world.”

When low economic growth and declining demography are combined with European welfare states—generous state-provided health and unemployment insurance; early retirement and liberal state pensions; large public sector employment; legislation that emphasizes job security over labor market flexibility—something eventually has to give. Greece has reached that point. The rest of Europe is struggling to avoid following Greece into the abyss

RETHINKING WELFARE, REVIVING CHARITY: A CATHOLIC ALTERNATIVE
Fr Robert A. Sirico
“Many have come to believe that the only way to ensure a flourishing of such support is through an elaborate state apparatus. Throughout the West and especially in Western Europe, we have created massive systems of social support for the aged, children, the disabled and many other groups perceived to be victims of society. The public is taxed heavily, bureaucracies are created, and political elections often turn on the management of these large systems of social insurance. Almost all economically advanced countries are in the throes of reforming these systems to make them less expensive and less easy to manipulate through electoral politics. But the question as to whether these systems ought to be rethought entirely is hardly ever raised.”
[From the the pdf book, *Catholic Social Teaching and the Market Economy which may be downloaded free at:
iea.org.uk/publications/r…market-economy.

spectator.org/archives/2011/04/13/christians-in-a-post-welfare-s
**Christians in a Post-Welfare State World
By Samuel Gregg on April.13.11 **
For the past 80 years, many Christians have simply assumed they should support large welfare states. In Europe, Christian Democrats played a significant role in designing the social security systems that have helped bankrupt countries like Portugal and Greece. Some Christians have also proved remarkably unwilling to acknowledge welfarism’s well-documented social and economic dysfunctionalities.

 

[Swiss_Guy]

These are the sorts of problems which Welfare States harbour. The crisis is now more evident than ever. Germany has not tended to encourage the welfare mentality such as the rest.

thepublicdiscourse.com/2010/06/1388
Fatal Attraction: Democracy and the Welfare State
by Samuel Gregg, June 18, 2010
Expansive and expensive welfare programs have brought European social democracies to the verge of catastrophe. Now the dynamics of democracy may be an impediment to economic reform.
A week, it is often said, is a long time in politics. Much, however, can change in a year. Only a short while ago some European politicians were touting the European social model’s superiority over what many continental Europeans deride as “Anglo-Saxon capitalism.” Now, however, governments across Europe are scrambling to avoid the fate of Greece. Moreover, they are doing so by contemplating—and, in some cases, implementing—the hitherto unthinkable: reducing their budget deficits by diminishing the expansive welfare states to which many Europeans have long been accustomed.

In doing so, these governments are finally acknowledging a truth initially obscured by the crisis of the euro: that for all the disarray generated by the euro’s recent tribulations, Europe’s economic woes have more systematic causes.
One cause is several decades of low economic growth. As the Czech president Václav Klaus recently observed, “average annual economic growth in the eurozone countries was 3.4 percent in the 1970s, 2.4 percent in the 1980s, 2.2 percent in the 1990s and only 1.1 percent from 2001 to 2009.” “A similar slowdown,” Klaus added, “has not occurred anywhere else in the world.”

When low economic growth and declining demography are combined with European welfare states—generous state-provided health and unemployment insurance; early retirement and liberal state pensions; large public sector employment; legislation that emphasizes job security over labor market flexibility—something eventually has to give. Greece has reached that point. The rest of Europe is struggling to avoid following Greece into the abyss

RETHINKING WELFARE, REVIVING CHARITY: A CATHOLIC ALTERNATIVE
Fr Robert A. Sirico
“Many have come to believe that the only way to ensure a flourishing of such support is through an elaborate state apparatus. Throughout the West and especially in Western Europe, we have created massive systems of social support for the aged, children, the disabled and many other groups perceived to be victims of society. The public is taxed heavily, bureaucracies are created, and political elections often turn on the management of these large systems of social insurance. Almost all economically advanced countries are in the throes of reforming these systems to make them less expensive and less easy to manipulate through electoral politics. But the question as to whether these systems ought to be rethought entirely is hardly ever raised.”
[From the the pdf book, *Catholic Social Teaching and the Market Economy

which may be downloaded free at:
iea.org.uk/publications/r…market-economy.

spectator.org/archives/2011/04/13/christians-in-a-post-welfare-s
**Christians in a Post-Welfare State World
By Samuel Gregg on April.13.11 **
For the past 80 years, many Christians have simply assumed they should support large welfare states. In Europe, Christian Democrats played a significant role in designing the social security systems that have helped bankrupt countries like Portugal and Greece. Some Christians have also proved remarkably unwilling to acknowledge welfarism’s well-documented social and economic dysfunctionalities.

I’m not saying the welfare state is good–it’s not. But welfare to some extent can be good, and it is to be encouraged–to some extent. So I think we’re in a pretty pointless dialogue.