Distribution of Wealth

[lauranne]

From the beginnings of this country in the seventeenth century, we as Americans have been the most philanthropic people in history. We have voluntarily re-directed our abundance to others in our communities. We have done this on our own, without the government (the state) deciding what is “best”. In fact, many people have redirected resources and engaged in activities in the interest of charity and justice DESPITE the government (e.g., abolition of slavery, women’s sufferage, etc.) Hospitals, schools, immigrant services . . . all were begun by private individuals banding together to raise their neighbors and cause them to flourish. If anything, the US Government has been a ***follower ***. . .According to the Social Doctrine of the Church, it is our right and responsibility to channel our resources toward promoting others, regardless of their station in life. We are charged with prayerfully and humbly distributing the gifts that come from God. Further, the state should limit the confiscation of private wealth in order to “redistribute” it to what it decides is the common good. This robs the giver of human dignity and human rights - it assumes that the individual does not know enough to give generously and prudently.
Think on this: the Federal Government funds millions of dollars to Planned Parenthood. This organization embodies values that are diametrically opposed to Catholic values. As Catholics, we would not give our money voluntarily to PP, however, our money is given to PP through taxes that we are required to pay. Is this justice on any level?

As a consultant in the non-profit arena, I see good work going on - without the state telling us where to make our “social investment”. Good resources on this topic: Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church by the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace and “The Greater Good” by Claire Gaudiani.
Abundant blessings and peace to you all . . .

 

[thomfra]

From the beginnings of this country in the seventeenth century, we as Americans have been the most philanthropic people in history.

That’s a big call

 

[Sailka]

Our government discourages job creation with their tax policies. We are one of only a few nations that tax corporations. This drives them overseas. There is a negative incentive for making money in the earned income tax credit. The school systems dumb down our youth and give social promotions which does not help our youth to learn to be workers.

I do NOT want the government to redistribute our money. Check out how much it costs to run public assistance. It is inefficient. There should be greater freedom for church and private run charities.

It is the Reagan, Bush W policies of (a) Subsidizing US corporations to Send US jobs and factories overseas, (b) Hoover 1920’s type Deregulation of our National Financial structure, and (c) Massive tax cuts on the richest Corporations and individuals that resulted in the Record Stock Market Crashes of October 1987 and 2008; Technical Deppression of 1987, begining now again; and Most significantly, Our, then World Financial structure Collapse, 1929 style. Deppression, not recession. Watch the next few months.

How do you define ‘public assistance’? Federal od Very highly efficient. The Social Security Adminstration 20 years ago had One Percent Overhead, cost of operation; Private insurance companies Were 7% overhead, probably Higher now.

Many other countries do tax corporations. Our Peers in the still advanced world, the European Union of 27 Nations, does tax Companies.

And tax Rates are of very little significance. Tax Deductions and incentives are massivelly Corporation directed, vastly more than for individuals.

Anyone noticed the Great similarities in the Great Deppression, the more minor Deppression of Reagan 1987, and only begimnning now? Only Tax payers can save Now. Only the Federal Government, not Free Market.

 

[bilop]

It is the Reagan, Bush W policies of (a) Subsidizing US corporations to Send US jobs and factories overseas, (b) Hoover 1920’s type Deregulation of our National Financial structure, and (c) Massive tax cuts on the richest Corporations and individuals that resulted in the Record Stock Market Crashes of October 1987 and 2008; Technical Deppression of 1987, begining now again; and Most significantly, Our, then World Financial structure Collapse, 1929 style. Deppression, not recession. Watch the next few months.

How do you define ‘public assistance’? Federal od Very highly efficient. The Social Security Adminstration 20 years ago had One Percent Overhead, cost of operation; Private insurance companies Were 7% overhead, probably Higher now.

Many other countries do tax corporations. Our Peers in the still advanced world, the European Union of 27 Nations, does tax Companies.

And tax Rates are of very little significance. Tax Deductions and incentives are massivelly Corporation directed, vastly more than for individuals.

Anyone noticed the Great similarities in the Great Deppression, the more minor Deppression of Reagan 1987, and only begimnning now? Only Tax payers can save Now. Only the Federal Government, not Free Market.

There was no recession, much less a depression, in 1987.

God Bless

 

[Sailka]

That’s a big call

How do you define philantrophy?
Are you not aware that the USA has the lowest percapita Philantophy donations. Socialized Norway, Scandinavian countries recently have been highest Per Capita donations recent years. USA only ranks high in Totals, because of our Large Population and Economy.

 

[Sailka]

There was no recession, much less a depression, in 1987.

God Bless

The 1987 Stock market crash was the biggest Value loss until then. And there was Major Recession, Meeting the minimal requirements of Deppression. Don’t recal the Massive S & L, Stock, economy Crash of late 1987? Don’t know about October 1987? I certainly do.

 

[bilop]

The 1987 Stock market crash was the biggest Value loss until then. And there was Major Recession, Meeting the minimal requirements of Deppression. Don’t recal the Massive S & L, Stock, economy Crash of late 1987? Don’t know about October 1987? I certainly do.

The stock market crashed, but there was no recession. The stock market fully recovered by 1989 and had no real economic effects. GDP growth was never less than +2.0% for any quarter in 1987 and 1988. The recession happened in 1990 due to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait and resulting oil prices spike.

I recall perfectly.

God Bless

 

[lauranne]

The stock market crashed, but there was no recession. The stock market fully recovered by 1989 and had no real economic effects. GDP growth was never less than +2.0% for any quarter in 1987 and 1988. The recession happened in 1990 due to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait and resulting oil prices spike.

I recall perfectly.

God Bless

I was a portfolio manager at a major banking institution in October 1987. I recall the same facts as bilop . . . It was almost a purely techinical “crash” that recovered quickly. In fact, the S&P 500 was up about 5% that year. The circumstances were completely different from 2008 or 1929. Thanks and God Bless . . .

 

[christcnection1]

In fact, many people have redirected resources and engaged in activities in the interest of charity and justice DESPITE the government (e.g., abolition of slavery, women’s sufferage, etc.) Hospitals, schools, immigrant services . . . all were begun by private individuals banding together to raise their neighbors and cause them to flourish. If anything, the US Government has been a ***follower ***. . .
.

Yes, I believe this is largely true. It’s one of the main reasons we are as “successful” as we are today. However, for every example of charity, there are many instances where people did nothing, or too little. The Catholic Church still had segregation in many parishes prior to the 50’s. I was told that the Catholic Church had slaves earlier in our country’s history, even though they probably treated them well (relatively speaking).

It would be nice if we could move in this direction without government intervention; without a doubt this ought to be explored first. But when that fails, I am in favor of allowing government to intervene when it comes to issues that are in line with Catholic teaching. (Obviously not PP)

I don’t believe the government should be the solution to every woe in this country, but I do believe that government should step in when others fail to rise to the challenge. This of course assumes they are acting within the truth, something they are often far from.

 

[christcnection1]

How do you define philantrophy?
Are you not aware that the USA has the lowest percapita Philantophy donations. Socialized Norway, Scandinavian countries recently have been highest Per Capita donations recent years. USA only ranks high in Totals, because of our Large Population and Economy.

That’s an interesting fact. Where do you get your sources from? If this is essentially true across the board, it may very well turn some people’s ideas about charity and generosity on its head. I have been fed with the notion that the U.S. is the most generous; I guess I assumed it was also “per capita.”

 

[Feste_1242]

I am in favor of traditional grades and scores. I’m not sure what you mean. I think my point was that too much segregation, or in the wrong fashion, could have the opposite effect of what we are trying to achieve. The goal is to maximize the potential of each individual, as well as help them discern their gifts and interests.

Hahaha, I think you misunderstood me. I meant grades as in the succession of levels of education - first grade, second grade, etc.

Unless I’m misunderstanding you, my point is exactly opposite of what you think my concern is. People should not be forced to go to special or specific schools. One reason is because this can potentially foster an unhealthy belief that they are either superior or inferior. In my opinion, this is not for the common good. We need a healthy blend of integration, and try to avoid segregation, unless the benefit is profound and the circumstances are appropriate.

But segregation occurs naturally, so there would have to be intervention to stop it. Wouldn’t that mean at least some slight control over who goes where?

In many instances I agree with you. In other instances, I believe government intervention may serve the common good. I believe the solution, or at least a move in the right direction, calls for a both/and approach.

I just don’t see why the government would be able to do this right; they’ve never done good by sticking their nose in the people’s business.

Our government discourages job creation with their tax policies. We are one of only a few nations that tax corporations. This drives them overseas. There is a negative incentive for making money in the earned income tax credit. The school systems dumb down our youth and give social promotions which does not help our youth to learn to be workers.

I do NOT want the government to redistribute our money. Check out how much it costs to run public assistance. It is inefficient. There should be greater freedom for church and private run charities.

Well said.

 

[christcnection1]

How do you define philantrophy?
Are you not aware that the USA has the lowest percapita Philantophy donations. Socialized Norway, Scandinavian countries recently have been highest Per Capita donations recent years. USA only ranks high in Totals, because of our Large Population and Economy.

I took this passage from the LA Times:​

Archive for Friday, December 31, 2004
U.S. Aid Generous and Stingy

By Sonni Efron
December 31, 2004 in print edition A-1

"Americans think of themselves as the most generous people on Earth. So to many, it came as a shock to hear that the U.S. response to the southern Asian tsunami this week was considered stingy.

But views of American generosity depend on who is doing the measuring and how.

By total money, the United States by far donates more than any other country in the world. This is the gauge preferred by most U.S. officials.

But when aid is calculated per U.S. citizen or as a percentage of the economy, the United States ranks among the least generous in the industrialized world.

As U.S. officials and foreign aid experts debate which measure is more apt, the issue is another example of how Americans’ views of themselves differ from those from around the world…"

---

If this is true, I find it very sad and shameful. If anyone knows of unbiased statistics out there that either validate or invalidate this, please post this information.

 

[christcnection1]

Hahaha, I think you misunderstood me. I meant grades as in the succession of levels of education - first grade, second grade, etc.

Haha… Yes, I’m in favor of that kind of segregation. But I also believe it’s appropriate to allow some students to move ahead, or for some to stay behind. We all develop at different paces. I do not have a real problem with the way its being done now.

But segregation occurs naturally, so there would have to be intervention to stop it. Wouldn’t that mean at least some slight control over who goes where?

Yes, to a degree. For example, the desegregation of schools in the 50’s was a good thing. Some of it should happen naturally; in other instances government intervention, if necessary, is appropriate. It just depends on what we are talking about. IMO, this issue doesn’t get answered easily with a blanket statement.

I just don’t see why the government would be able to do this right; they’ve never done good by sticking their nose in the people’s business.

Generally speaking, the perspective I hold would mean less government intervention when it comes to public education. I’m sorry you thought otherwise. I believe in a freer and more competitive public education system, that has the government as an overseer of obvious or severe abuses. However, the public would be the primary overseer.

 

[Feste_1242]

Haha… Yes, I’m in favor of that kind of segregation. But I also believe it’s appropriate to allow some students to move ahead, or for some to stay behind. We all develop at different paces. I do not have a real problem with the way its being done now.

I agree, and I think this is one fatal flaw in our public school system; there’s no room for individuality, so some kids really struggle while others are bored to death.

Yes, to a degree. For example, the desegregation of schools in the 50’s was a good thing. Some of it should happen naturally; in other instances government intervention, if necessary, is appropriate. It just depends on what we are talking about. IMO, this issue doesn’t get answered easily with a blanket statement.

Generally speaking, the perspective I hold would mean less government intervention when it comes to public education. I’m sorry you thought otherwise. I believe in a freer and more competitive public education system, that has the government as an overseer of obvious or severe abuses. However, the public would be the primary overseer.

Ok, we’re more or less on the same page. I think my views are just a little farther in the same direction.

I suppose the problem is that public school exists; as long as it does, the government will have the right to do whatever they like with it. I know this has already been suggested, but… how about we abolish the system altogether? It would solve this whole education mess.

 

[christcnection1]

I suppose the problem is that public school exists; as long as it does, the government will have the right to do whatever they like with it. I know this has already been suggested, but… how about we abolish the system altogether? It would solve this whole education mess.

I am not against a public education system, but I do believe their should be greater freedoms for parents to choose a school closer to their liking, and more appropriate for their children’s needs. Schools are not doing enough to form the whole person; changing our system into something closer to what you believe would help in this area.

This is a very good topic, but I’m concerned that it’s deviated too far from the original issue. If you start a new thread, I will likely participate in it. I think you would have a lot of participants.

 

[Feste_1242]

I agree, I feel like I’ve hijacked the thread. Perhaps I’ll start that new thread. Now where were we?

 

[Sailka]

I was a portfolio manager at a major banking institution in October 1987. I recall the same facts as bilop . . . It was almost a purely techinical “crash” that recovered quickly. In fact, the S&P 500 was up about 5% that year. The circumstances were completely different from 2008 or 1929. Thanks and God Bless . . .

Um, the October 1987 Stock Plunge was ‘only a technical correction’? Wish you would have told that then to the office secretary acquintance of mine who had a $36,000 Margin call (Then Dollars) on her Emplyer company stock. There was No Way she could cover that. Remember the much reduced Margin requiremnents, like Recent years?

1. 
   
   The 1980’s S & L/ Banking Crisis, caused by Deregulation, like the Current Entire Credit system total Collapse are just a ‘correction’? The Current now World Credit and Financial crisis is just another Trickle Down correction?
   The British FTSE now has the biggest drop since October 1987. telegraph.co.uk/finance/markets/3146097/
   FTSE-100-heads-for-sharpest-fall-since-1987.html
   
   And Laissez Faire deregulated Financial/Stock industries were not the principals in 1929, 1987, 2008? Overly deregulation being the Key word

 

[Man]

I am not against a public education system, but I do believe their should be greater freedoms for parents to choose a school closer to their liking, and more appropriate for their children’s needs. Schools are not doing enough to form the whole person; changing our system into something closer to what you believe would help in this area.

This is a very good topic, but I’m concerned that it’s deviated too far from the original issue. If you start a new thread, I will likely participate in it. I think you would have a lot of participants.

Various court ruling and impersonal governmental levels have definitely assaulted a local school boards authority to teach what the local parents want taught. This could certainly include religious courses, except for the evil assault by certain anti-education rights lobbies. And that’s the truth.

The Irish government, even, has had the audacity to assault the rights of local parents to determine that theology be taught in their local schools. The hubris is amazing.

 

[Sailka]

That’s an interesting fact. Where do you get your sources from? If this is essentially true across the board, it may very well turn some people’s ideas about charity and generosity on its head. I have been fed with the notion that the U.S. is the most generous; I guess I assumed it was also “per capita.”

Big Money Presidents Reagan and Bush W have been repeating these and many other spins, for years: The USA has the best medical system in the world (False; The French Nationalized do); etc, etc, etc. These are knowing spins, to mislead the piblic. I noticed on TV News, other sources after Natural Disasters, etc, How much other countries gave.
Anything can be googled easily now. Olympic Medals per capita yields Armenia and smallest countries. US health system ranks in the 40tjh best, although 50% per Capita more expensive than the Next most expensive.
Even the US having the most productive workers in the world is a Spin, by Removing the 4-8 week Paid vacations required in the European Union. The French had the most productive workers a couple years ago, per paid Work hours, not including vacation hours

 

[royal_archer]

I agree with this. However, I also believe that your typical “working poor” is not getting paid a reasonable wage, so they are able to properly take care of their families.

And are these people actively working to get into better possitions? I have seen to many in this bucket who spend more time complaining about their situation than actually trying to improve it.

In the old days bosses would tell these people to pick up the pace and give them other feed back about their performance. Now employers are afraid to give such constructive criticism for fear of a lawsuit or fear that the people will quit and just go on welfare. Or managers are just not good managers and are trying to be “nice”.