R
Robert_Sock
Guest
http://forums.catholic-questions.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=19863&stc=1&d=1398604051
Pope Francis has his doubts.
LOVE!
Pope Francis has his doubts.
LOVE!
- Status
S
SJBurgess
Guest
Nope. Wealthy people invest their money to make money, they don’t `spread it around’. The wealthiest 2% of America controls more money than the bottom 90% combined. Trickle down economics doesn’t work because it doesn’t even occur. People are suffering needlessly whichis contrary to the Church’s Social Justice teachings
S
SuperLuigi
Guest
Free-market capitalism and free enterprise work. It incentivizes the rich to risk their money.
If the rich are overtaxed, like they are in the United States, they have to spend time and money to work around those rules.
If the rich are overtaxed, like they are in the United States, they have to spend time and money to work around those rules.
meltzerboy
New member
I am no authority on the Church’s social justice teachings; however, I understand they may be more complex than what you state. However, I do agree with your statement that trickle-down economics does not work, in large part because it does not occur. Rather, the rich get richer (apparently more so under Democrat administrations) by spending and investing their money mainly for their own benefit; while the (working) poor and middle-class either stagnate or, with respect to real cost-of-living wages, get poorer. There must be a better economic solution than this kind of capitalism, a middle ground which does not entail a socialistic redistribution of wealth. Any ideas?
S
SuperLuigi
Guest
Which in turn helps the middle class more than any government or group of idealists screaming “love” and “equality” at the top of their lungs does.
In my experience/observation a lot of those people really don’t care so much.
Governments sometimes try and do that, but since the rich are good at getting special exemptions, the burden often falls on the upper middle class.
Those who have idealist partisian loyalties are not likely candidates to see that truth.
So what? Income inequality is a good thing, at least in the secular sense. As Rush Limbaugh recently noted:
“because some people are better, smarter and more talented than others. Also, some folks who are talented don’t want the risks or the stress that goes with being rich.”
It can’t occur with crony capitalism and anti-business presidential candidates are reelected for trivial reasons (skin color being one) are suffocating investment.
Define “suffering”. A lot of Americans seem to think that having full bellies, a DVD player, the latest videogame console and a car is “impoverished”.
I refer them to the Horn of Africa.
Also, the teaching of the Church is for people to be generous in whatever capacity they can, be they rich, middle class or even poor.
Spending all one’s time trying to use the force of big government to make the “rich” give their money, a lot of which is inevitably wasted on corruption and special favors, is not the central message of the Gospel, especially when selfish intention and motives are present, and they often are.
These are points that Catholics who advocate for big government need to seriously consider in their examination of conscience. That is not a joke or a blogging trump card.
[/quote]
S
SuperLuigi
Guest
I appreciate the crisp, educated approach to this comment.
A couple of things:
- The message of the Gospel is an emphasis on individual giving, not running around trying to find excuses to use shadowy forces to take from the rich like Robin Hood, especially when the motives are selfish.
- The Catholic Church has specifically rejected socialism, communism and has a dim view on central planning.
- The Catholic Church states explicitly that all persons have a right to private property.
- The Catholic Church rejects corruption and I cannot imagine they’d be okay with crony capitalism.
- My message to non-Catholics is to be very wary of what some “Catholics” say on here even if they note themselves as Catholic on their profile. Catholics are notorious in many cases for picking and choosing what rules they want to follow. :tsktsk:
The rich need to be incentive to risk their money in the free market. If they get involved in the free market and start spending their money, jobs are created and resources are better utilized.
If the rich (even many who run around yelping about helping poor people) feel under siege by government, a lot of them will transfer their resources
The only way to fix is for certain individuals in the American liberal base to take off the rosy googles and see their leaders for who they are.
The veins of corruption and scandal in DC run deep.
If you’re talking about crony capitalism, that has to go. But the problem is liberals love getting millions for their pet projects like Solyndra that would not work in the free market.
What is needed is free market capitalism with proper oversight. Reasonable rules such as the Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act or making sure that monopolies don’t return should be fine.
Otherwise, people who want products that the market is going for either to grin and bear the cost in principle or make their ideas work FAIRLY in the marketplace.
World governments, except perhaps the Vatican, cannot be trusted to be generous and giving for decent motives. The best case scenario is for governments to stay out of the way of the free market and for religion and culture in the name of private charity to give.
If charity is subject to the free market, it will like anything else have to conform to market discipline which is a check against corruption.
S
SJBurgess
Guest
The rich are in no way over taxed in the u.s. we have some of the lowest income tax caps in the ‘free’ world
S
SJBurgess
Guest
Rush Limbaugh is an overpaid talking head. I can’t help but notice that the people who act like the privileged are the victims are themselves rich, white male i.e. priviledged. Income inequality is NOT some noble system where the people who deserve it get the benefits since the wealthy are rarely of independant means. They inherit their money connections and influence. If working hard led to financial success every woman in sub Saharan Africa would be a millionaire.
B
Butaperson
Guest
I’m not sure I agree with this statement here. Taxing the rich is not finding an excuse to use shadowy excuses to take from the rich…it’s asking the rich to pay their fair share. When you give the rich tax breaks and place the burden on the middle class, you are placing way too much trust in the good hearts of the rich. You are trusting them to spread around their money, and if they choose not to do that, then you’re just stuck.
This doesn’t mean taxing the rich at a higher rate than everyone else. This means taxing the rich at the same rate. There are some members of the 1% who pay a smaller percentage of taxes than members of the middle class. This does not make any sense.
Of course, the biggest problem is that the rich are very skilled at hiding their money, appearing poorer and less able to pay than people who can’t afford to pay for help like that. If we can find a way to stop them from doing this, we would live in a better place.
Trickle down economics do not work, because when you rely on that, you essentially place the economy in the hands of the rich. I understand the emphasis on giving…but that doesn’t mean placing the well-being of the lower classes into the hands of the very very rich. If they choose not to do anything with their money…well, you are screwed.
S
SJBurgess
Guest
I also find it sad and frustrating that if some one disagrees with your politics then they aren’t really Catholic
meltzerboy
New member
I think there should be equal opportunity for all to make at least a living wage and perhaps become financially secure and wealthy in time; but there is no way we can mandate equal talent regarding money management, that is, savings and investments (the means toward wealth) or equal outcome, which also involves, as you say, connections (networking), though not necessarily inheritance. Further, I am sure you are aware there are certain industries which are more likely to offer the prospect of wealth than others, and people who are mainly motivated toward achieving wealth are more likely to enter those industries. Should lower-paying industries–for example, education and social work–pay as much as banking and real estate, for example? I believe they should, but that is another issue.
meltzerboy
New member
Some of your comments I agree with and others not. However, I think there is room for compromise. Thanks for the compliment!I appreciate the crisp, educated approach to this comment.
A couple of things:
The rich need to be incentive to risk their money in the free market. If they get involved in the free market and start spending their money, jobs are created and resources are better utilized.
- The message of the Gospel is an emphasis on individual giving, not running around trying to find excuses to use shadowy forces to take from the rich like Robin Hood, especially when the motives are selfish.
- The Catholic Church has specifically rejected socialism, communism and has a dim view on central planning.
- The Catholic Church states explicitly that all persons have a right to private property.
- The Catholic Church rejects corruption and I cannot imagine they’d be okay with crony capitalism.
- My message to non-Catholics is to be very wary of what some “Catholics” say on here even if they note themselves as Catholic on their profile. Catholics are notorious in many cases for picking and choosing what rules they want to follow. :tsktsk:
If the rich (even many who run around yelping about helping poor people) feel under siege by government, a lot of them will transfer their resources
The only way to fix is for certain individuals in the American liberal base to take off the rosy googles and see their leaders for who they are.
The veins of corruption and scandal in DC run deep.
If you’re talking about crony capitalism, that has to go. But the problem is liberals love getting millions for their pet projects like Solyndra that would not work in the free market.
What is needed is free market capitalism with proper oversight. Reasonable rules such as the Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act or making sure that monopolies don’t return should be fine.
Otherwise, people who want products that the market is going for either to grin and bear the cost in principle or make their ideas work FAIRLY in the marketplace.
World governments, except perhaps the Vatican, cannot be trusted to be generous and giving for decent motives. The best case scenario is for governments to stay out of the way of the free market and for religion and culture in the name of private charity to give.
If charity is subject to the free market, it will like anything else have to conform to market discipline which is a check against corruption.
S
SJBurgess
Guest
Absolutely they should. The problem with our system is that money is the only real motivator. Jobs that benefit human health and dignity aren’t as valued as jobs that generate more money for the wealthy. By the way Luigi, Jesus was not a capitalist. Eye of a needle and all that. If you (and I mean the general You not you specifically)are hoarding money for your own excessive comforts while others die from neglect, exposure starvation and lack of medical care because 'that’s capitalism, baby! Survival of the fittest! ’ then you are not in line with the teachings of Christ or the Church. You are not more valuable than another human being. Being smarter and wealthier is 99% the luck of the draw. You do not deserve more than your neighbor because you were born the right color gender or into the right family in order to enjoy greater opportunities in a broken society that places more value on getting tge most money possible for a lucky few than to ensure equal dignity and security for ALL of God’s creation. Not just the Koch brothers.
J
jeannetherese
Guest
For those at the top of the heap? You bet.
But the trickling seems a bit slow and i worry about those a bit further down the hill.
May God bless us all.
Amen.
But the trickling seems a bit slow and i worry about those a bit further down the hill.
May God bless us all.
Amen.
J
JSSD
Guest
Nice post, SuperLuigi.
I think “trickle-down” is sort of a perjorative by those who don’t like capitalism, but what you point out is that in the United States, we have more of a crony capitalism system than a free market. Our government constantly picks winners and losers, if not financially than via burdensome regulation, and it likes to dabble in socialist policies.
I’ve personally never understood demonizing success. We complain about the 1% (or pick your percent), but how many have been given an opportunity by the destitute?
Is free market economics evil? For those not familiar with Adam Smith’s masterpiece, I might encourage a peek at his next most famous book!
I think “trickle-down” is sort of a perjorative by those who don’t like capitalism, but what you point out is that in the United States, we have more of a crony capitalism system than a free market. Our government constantly picks winners and losers, if not financially than via burdensome regulation, and it likes to dabble in socialist policies.
I’ve personally never understood demonizing success. We complain about the 1% (or pick your percent), but how many have been given an opportunity by the destitute?
Is free market economics evil? For those not familiar with Adam Smith’s masterpiece, I might encourage a peek at his next most famous book!
D
DanielJT
Guest
There is nothing inherently evil with capitalism.
There is also nothing inherently evil with socialism.
Just like there is nothing inherently evil with your iPod, or your toaster, or nuclear fusion.
The evil comes from the way people use it. Trickle down economics works in theory just like redistributing the wealth works in theory - but they are both THEORIES that require strict practice. And just like in the garden of eden, the problem here is where choice comes together with human nature.
I’m so tired of the right and left throwing statistics and rhetoric at each other like they have the answer that the other is somehow so completely ignorant to. And I am especially tired of smart people towing the party line by listening to the sound bites and taking them as gospel.
There is also nothing inherently evil with socialism.
Just like there is nothing inherently evil with your iPod, or your toaster, or nuclear fusion.
The evil comes from the way people use it. Trickle down economics works in theory just like redistributing the wealth works in theory - but they are both THEORIES that require strict practice. And just like in the garden of eden, the problem here is where choice comes together with human nature.
I’m so tired of the right and left throwing statistics and rhetoric at each other like they have the answer that the other is somehow so completely ignorant to. And I am especially tired of smart people towing the party line by listening to the sound bites and taking them as gospel.
S
Sochi
Guest
It “works” if the capitalists are all ethical, have a social conscience, and exercise those against the God of their bottom line. As it is, they spend time and money to work around “those rules” by living in the second, or paper economy. That is the economy which the “news” media they own doesn’t distinguish so that you think that you are a part of the supposed economy, rather than the cash cow you actually are. The money they spend to get around it, the part that is supposed to “trickle down,”
rotfl: x N, where N = taxpayer subsidized tax free corporations making millions/billions in profits) is spent on lobbyists to make the robbery we call our “economy” legal.- The US has the second lowest tax rate in the world
thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/07/05/260535/graph-corporate-tax-second-lowest/ - Proportion of Congress that are millionaires or better, 50%
Proportion of population that are millionaires or better, 1%
politicalruminations.com/2011/12/millionaires-in-congress-are-in-the-majority.html - Coprporate profits rising, wages falling
washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/files/2013/02/corporate-profits-labor-share.jpg - Vastly disproportional rise in CEO income
allenergyconsulting.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/incomedistribution.jpg - Astounding difference in wealth of top .001% and the rest of us
schools-wikipedia.org/images/2181/218126.jpg - Money is debt; who profits and how much? (also known as "If you counterfeit, you go to jail; if the Fed. a private corporation prints money out of thin air, your labor gives it value.) Also known as, why $100 now is worth $10 of my birth year. youtube.com/watch?v=qiUX5VucXys
- The main job of Congress is to raise money for re-election, and other problems related to length of term and indebtedness to sponsoring corporations thecontributor.com/members-congress-spend-almost-fifth-their-time-fundraising
- The rich invest in paper, not jobs
vitalsformen.com/2013/03/why-rich-men-invest-in-assets-2/
bankrate.com/financing/taxes/21-trillion-hidden-offshore/ - You have no clue how rich super rich is:
youtube.com/watch?v=woIkIph5xcU
and
youtube.com/watch?v=krwdJ6DyafQ - The costs of capitalism are approaching suicidal in terms of the health of the Race and the Planet. For mild starters:gerdzeitler.wordpress.com/excesses-of-capitalism/
- It takes naivety and ignorance of how money works to believe in the hoax of “trickle down.” Given how money works, the whole thrust of the GOP to reduce debt (which has happened significantly under the present Administration) and cut spending is a thrust to reduce money and increase poverty, and therefore ignorance in the many and power of the few. The current efforts to restrict voting is also an example of this.
C
Cricket2
Guest
You are so right. It never works because it is not intended to work except for those who have control of the wealth. Why more don’t understand this is beyond me.
C
Cricket2
Guest
Well number one, the rich are not over taxed in the US or any other country for that matter. We need to return to the progressive tax structure to even come close to that scenario.
Since God only asks 10% of our “property, money, goods” (a tithe) why not just tax everyone at the same rate? Well? And why not just pay everyone the same daily wage no matter the field of work they are in, after all work is good for our souls and counts toward our salvation. Why should we bother deciding that one job is more important that another?
Why? Because a handful of people have decided that some people are more deserving than others, more important than others, and if they can stand on their backs, pay them slave wages AND get out of paying their “SHARE” of taxes, then trickle down economics is the way to go. It has never worked and never will because it is a false, self serving way to keep the class system alive and well.
So Kingdoms practice it, Monarchies practice it, Dictatorships practice it and so do Capitalistic Run-a-Mucks. It keeps the poor poor, the super wealthy wealthy…always has and always will.
S
shockerfan
Guest
Lets use an example:
Which is harder to do: Become qualified to flip burgers at McDonalds or become a doctor? In order to work at McDonalds (which is an honorable job) it is not required that you complete high school or college. There is no requirement of sacrifice outside of the job in order to be qualified to do it. There is no cost associated with meeting the requirements of working at McDonads.
Now lets consider doctors. In order to become a doctor, someone had to go to medical school, college and high school. In order to graduate from medical school, it requires a person get good grades, which requires sacrifice and money. In order to get into medical school, a person had to get good grades in college, which requires sacrifice and money. Those people (more than likely) also studied hard in high school, which involved sacrifice.
If all jobs paid the same, the nobody would try for the more difficult jobs like doctors or engineers. Society would collapse.
I hope you see my point
- Status