Does anyone have a "Right" to my money?

[LilyM]

I would not say that Mother Teresa was putting God to the test. “Putting God to the test” is not a good thing (see Matthew 4:7). Mother Teresa had a very special calling, with special graces attached to it.

And yet how many more of us probably would find that we actually DID have exactly the same calling that she had if we carefully and prayerfully considered it?

 

[CarolAnnSFO]

And yet how many more of us probably would find that we actually DID have exactly the same calling that she had if we carefully and prayerfully considered it?

I have, and I don’t.

 

[LilyM]

I have, and I don’t.

 

[melensdad]

Has anyone heard of distributism? I am not sure how it works but it is an economical theory endorsed by G.K. Chesterton and other great catholics. Aside from that I don’t know much.

I just spent some time on two different websites for distributism. It claims not to be socialism, but honestly I don’t see much difference. Interesting I am the president of an Employee Owned company (E.S.O.P.) and what I have seen is that “distributism” does not work based on my experiences at an employee owned company. Many of the employees actually do not seem to have the mental capacity to understand what being an owner really is, some even believe they can ‘take things’ because they are part owners. We have to terminate people for stealing from themselves! Others think that because they have been their longer they no longer have to put forth effort, they think that since they own more shares of the company they are entitled to produce less than newer employees.

Based on my experience, I’d say that 10% to 20% of the people rise to a higher level. Roughly 20% fall to the bottom, and probably would do the same under any other form of ownership. And the middle 60% really don’t much care one way or another as long as they get a check at the end of the week. But of that 60% in the middle, virtually none of them really seem to care about the company.

Now to put that into some sort of distributism perspective, it makes the false claim that people will work harder if they own a share. I find their claim is not true. In fact the people who would have excelled do excel under this type of system, but before our company was an ESOP (it was a family owned company most of the family have retired) the same people excelled under the old style of ownership. Simply put, it seems to me that human nature is often one that expects hand out. The majority just won’t rise to the occasion but they will willingly follow others who do rise. That happens under any sort of system. But one that redistributes the wealth is doomed to fail as a form of socialism (even if they protest that name and claim ‘distributism’ as their banner). JMO

 

[jman507]

I just spent some time on two different websites for distributism. It claims not to be socialism, but honestly I don’t see much difference. Interesting I am the president of an Employee Owned company (E.S.O.P.) and what I have seen is that “distributism” does not work based on my experiences at an employee owned company. Many of the employees actually do not seem to have the mental capacity to understand what being an owner really is, some even believe they can ‘take things’ because they are part owners. We have to terminate people for stealing from themselves! Others think that because they have been their longer they no longer have to put forth effort, they think that since they own more shares of the company they are entitled to produce less than newer employees.

Based on my experience, I’d say that 10% to 20% of the people rise to a higher level. Roughly 20% fall to the bottom, and probably would do the same under any other form of ownership. And the middle 60% really don’t much care one way or another as long as they get a check at the end of the week. But of that 60% in the middle, virtually none of them really seem to care about the company.

Now to put that into some sort of distributism perspective, it makes the false claim that people will work harder if they own a share. I find their claim is not true. In fact the people who would have excelled do excel under this type of system, but before our company was an ESOP (it was a family owned company most of the family have retired) the same people excelled under the old style of ownership. Simply put, it seems to me that human nature is often one that expects hand out. The majority just won’t rise to the occasion but they will willingly follow others who do rise. That happens under any sort of system. But one that redistributes the wealth is doomed to fail as a form of socialism (even if they protest that name and claim ‘distributism’ as their banner). JMO

I’d say also that when your forced to learn something you learn it, unless your incapable of learning it.

I would say the dynamic of the time in the early 20th century and today are far different in the ability to adopt a distributionalist system. Too many products (manufacture, transport and sales) are tied up into too big of organizations. Many of the products today are service oriented tied up in large organizations. That all makes it too big to co-ordinate in that type of system.

On the other hand, more people who are business ownership oriented are good for the nation. One problem with specialization is that one loses sight of what it takes to have a sustainable enterprise. If anything, distributionalism seems way too impractical now, but for anyone I do not see it as a bad thing to understand, and even trying to adopt some of the ideas into your own little micro economy. If people tried to run their finances like a CFO, I doubt there would be as many people who would go into debt for silly things, but for mainly the necessary things.

I don’t think it is exactly right to charcaterize it as, it is false people will work harder if they have their own share. It is more the case, you don’t have a share; what you have is yours. Your money is tied to your capital, granted there will be some that need to be helped. Part of the problem now, is a lot of capital cannot help be being part of a share.

 

[chewchoo]

the Lord will provide.

God has provided me with a job, so that i can afford a house and a car. the car allows me to get to my job every day so that i can continue participating in that job that He has given me.

yes, i have some excess that i share accordingly. but if i gave it all away, then i wouldn’t be able to take care of myself anymore. and God had already provided me with that ability.

 

[blessedtoo]

Jobs are created by economic activity. We do better when we start businesses or otherwise invest and provide jobs for our fellow man. If we fail to do this, then we – and all our neighbors – are condemned to generation after generation of poverty.

You seem to be referring to a capitalist system here and I agree that it’s the best system around. However, I am not talking about “systems” or economic principles or politcial parties. I am talking about what we, on an individual level, and as the Church are directed to do by Our Savior. The Lord told us the poor would always be with us. He didn’t say that if we created enough jobs they would eventually rise from poverty. What He did say to the man who asked how to achieve eternal life was to sell EVERYTHING he owned, give it to the poor, and follow Him.

I don’t think it’s the government’s job to re-distribute wealth. I strongly disagree with the OP’s pastor about “health care for all”. I don’t feel comfortable with the Church making declarations of that type. The programs established by our government to help the poor have been dismal failures. My point is that giving to those who need is the job of the Church, and each of us as the Body of Christ.

 

[blessedtoo]

Not if you have respiratory problems. Not if you are expected to arrive at work not dripping with sweat and/or smelling like a pig.

Obviously, if someone has respiratory problems, then a/c is not an excessive expense. This is where discernment comes in. I believe each one of us knows in our hearts if the things we spend our money on are really needed or just frivolous expenses designed to make us feel “happy”. If you have asthma, you should have a/c. As for the other issue, I’m sorry, that’s just silly. Such a statment makes a person look defensive. No one has the right to tell you whether you should have a/c or not. But millions of people arrive at work smelling just fine without such luxuries.

It is one thing to spend time in prayerful discernment, but I do have a problem with other people deciding for me (or for anyone else) what constitutes “excess”. Individuals can only discern that for themselves, not for others.

I agree. The truth is written in every heart. Only you know what you could live without and offer as a gift to the poor.

Wouldn’t it be irresponsible to give away my retirement funds (not to mention putting God to the test)? It’s not as if I’m young enough or able-bodied enough to roam from town to town seeking food and shelter.

Man, the rhetoric is flying! Do you really think you would be forced to roam from town to town seeking food and shelter? Millions of Americans do not have personal retirement funds. I haven’t noticed gangs of geriatrics roaming my city streets looking for food and shelter.

Fr. Groeshel has spoken at length about our responsibility to give to the poor. In particular, he has addressed this issue of retirements funds. God wants us to be responsible for oursevles. It doesn’t do the poor any good if we eventually end up joining their ranks.

 

[Proletarian]

I just spent some time on two different websites for distributism. It claims not to be socialism, but honestly I don’t see much difference. Interesting I am the president of an Employee Owned company (E.S.O.P.) and what I have seen is that “distributism” does not work based on my experiences at an employee owned company. Many of the employees actually do not seem to have the mental capacity to understand what being an owner really is, some even believe they can ‘take things’ because they are part owners.

There’s a huge difference between ownership and management. Distributionism does not suggest that every person performs a management role, it simply implies that every person owns the means of production. This is no different than a company that has a 100% share holding by private citizens; in such companies share holders may indeed have a say on major management isuues, yet allocate the day to day management role to a particular group. These companies function perfectly well, therefore there is no reason why distributionism would not work equaly as effecrtivly.

 

[jman507]

There’s a huge difference between ownership and management. Distributionism does not suggest that every person performs a management role, it simply implies that every person owns the means of production. This is no different than a company that has a 100% share holding by private citizens; in such companies share holders may indeed have a say on major management isuues, yet allocate the day to day management role to a particular group. These companies function perfectly well, therefore there is no reason why distributionism would not work equaly as effecrtivly.

No matter the economic system – capitalism, communism, distributioinalism, self management is key to sustainability.

 

[Proletarian]

No matter the economic system – capitalism, communism, distributioinalism, self management is key to sustainability.

Yes, but self management in what sense?

I agree with melensdad that some people are incapable of effective management. This is why I believe that a company that embodies distributionism should be run by specially trained management staff. The difference is that the workers must entrust their management control to others, rather than be subject to a management corps. In this respect the workers will always maintain self management. “For as in one body we have many members, and all the members do not have the same function, so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another.” (Rom 12:4-5)

 

[jman507]

Yes, but self management in what sense?

I agree with melensdad that some people are incapable of effective management. This is why I believe that a company that embodies distributive should be run by specially trained management staff. The difference is that the workers must entrust their management control to others, rather than be subject to a management corps. In this respect the workers will always maintain self management. “For as in one body we have many members, and all the members do not have the same function, so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another.” (Rom 12:4-5)

That’s great, if we could have specially trained managers who could always get their employees on task that’d be great. I believe we lost that somewhere at the time of Adam and Eve. To get workers to entrust the managment and consistantly would seem easier said than done.

I’d really like to get some of that special managment training myself. I’ve long figured to get anyone to directly to work faster and on task, is at best works in the short term. The best I’ve managed to do is to do it indirectly, by honing the tone and by making sure than are able to quickly get to their task. There is only so much I can do.

Granted we might be one body, but apperantly that body has some cancer that has it’s own will. Not to worry that’ll be worked out in end times.

 

[cynic]

I agree. The truth is written in every heart. Only you know what you could live without and offer as a gift to the poor.

so any kind of unneccessary expense is a sin? So all forms of recreation (that cost money), any kind of household appliance that isn’t required (for eg a TV, stereo), any hobbies that take up time and money. Any form of spare time, ‘fun’, relaxation - it’s all bad. Every waking moment of our lives should be spent at work, doing family duties, or helping those less fortunate…wow

 

[Proletarian]

so any kind of unneccessary expense is a sin? So all forms of recreation (that cost money), any kind of household appliance that isn’t required (for eg a TV, stereo), any hobbies that take up time and money. Any form of spare time, ‘fun’, relaxation - it’s all bad. Every waking moment of our lives should be spent at work, doing family duties, or helping those less fortunate…wow

That depends; do you want to commit your WHOLE life to God and his Kingdom? Or do you believe that we need to take regular breaks to Indulge ourselves?

Every aspect of our lives, everything we do, should glorify God, not ourselves. How do stereos, TVs or hobbies glorify God?

 

[anniemart]

That depends; do you want to commit your WHOLE life to God and his Kingdom? Or do you believe that we need to take a break every now and then to Indulge ourselves?

Every aspect of our lives, everything we do, should glorify God, not ourselves. How do stereos, TV or hobbies glorify God?

Proletarian,

It painfully obvious that the responses have been negative in reference to the priest’s homily…how many of them took to heart Ecclesiastes and Qoheleth? Vanity of Vanities…sure, what you do with **YOUR **wealth while you are alive is what matters…give it away; horde it; invest it; whatever you want-it’s your FREE will…but like our pastor summed it up this past weekend…“when you leave this earth you won’t have a U-Haul attached!”

God bless you for your efforts…

 

[blessedtoo]

so any kind of unneccessary expense is a sin? So all forms of recreation (that cost money), any kind of household appliance that isn’t required (for eg a TV, stereo), any hobbies that take up time and money. Any form of spare time, ‘fun’, relaxation - it’s all bad. Every waking moment of our lives should be spent at work, doing family duties, or helping those less fortunate…wow

Holy cannoli! You got all that out of this:

The truth is written in every heart. Only you know what you could live without and offer as a gift to the poor.

A bit defensive, aren’t we???

 

[jman507]

Proletarian,

It painfully obvious that the responses have been negative in reference to the priest’s homily…how many of them took to heart Ecclesiastes and Qoheleth? Vanity of Vanities…sure, what you do with **YOUR **wealth while you are alive is what matters…give it away; horde it; invest it; whatever you want-it’s your FREE will…but like our pastor summed it up this past weekend…“when you leave this earth you won’t have a U-Haul attached!”

God bless you for your efforts…

Explain which responses are negative?

 

[Zooey]

Perhaps we should eliminate some types of food so they cannot be purchased with food stamps?

Okay, I get food stamps. So I know a little bit about this. And yes, there are some people who “work the system”, & they get more than they should. And some of us barely get enough to live on. (Have you ever tried to live for a month on $81 worth of groceries?)

That said, I would have no problem, if they reworked the system a little. The main thing they need to do, IMO, is to make them “necessary items stamps” instead of “food stamps”. By which I mean, they would cover things like soap & toilet paper, but they would not cover candy bars, coka-cola, and the ever popular Hostess Twinkies.
The other thing we need to do, & this is a big thing with me, is to go back to giving out actual “stamps”. They were great. You could use them like coupons, to keep your bills down. But they could be saved, also, so that when they had a sale on peanut butter, or tuna fish, you could pull out your little store of stamps, & buy LOTS of the things on sale, to have over a period of times.
As it is,the lady you saw, was most likely doing what we all have to do, who get them: We get a notice that we have 7 to 10 days to spend the whole amount in their computer , or they will just vanish from the account. So, she went in, & bought frozen dinners, because she had space in her freezer. (I once filled my freezer with pork chops. I love 'em, & they are mostly beyond my budget).
Don’t blame the victims. Blame the loons in government who decided to make it impossible for us to be thrifty shoppers. We’re just trying to keep going around here.

 

[anniemart]

Explain which responses are negative?

Sorry…my mistake…did not mean to clump all responses as negative; certainly not all are. I meant to say that it is painfully obvious that those who responded negatively to the homily took the words to heart and not the message intended.

 

[stinkcat_14]

so any kind of unneccessary expense is a sin? So all forms of recreation (that cost money), any kind of household appliance that isn’t required (for eg a TV, stereo), any hobbies that take up time and money. Any form of spare time, ‘fun’, relaxation - it’s all bad. Every waking moment of our lives should be spent at work, doing family duties, or helping those less fortunate…wow

No, not necessarily. There is nothing wrong with recreation although if we put too much emphasis on it, then it might be sinful. Or if when we go out and buy all these things when God is calling us to give everything away to the poor.

However, as I said before, as we get wealthier we seem to get more spoiled. The line between what is a necessity and what is a luxury seems to keep moving.