Extreme poverty needs to be eradicated from the face of the planet!

[St_Francis]

What he tilts at has never existed in any society or country, only in the minds of a few economists; he is thus unable to point to any unregulated laissez-faire market. There is no such thing as “unregulated capitalism”. “Capitalism” is a derogatory term coined by Karl Marx.

I would suggest that yours is a strawman argument. First, Pope Leo XIII did not condemn “unregulated capitalism;” second, he was very specific about what he was talking about, which did in fact exist in Europe and the US at the time he wrote, and which may still exist in former and current LDCs.

When considering the intent of a person’s words, it is look to consider what he is talking about. The first point is that Pope Leo XIII discussed “unchecked competition.” What was the situation to which he referred?

I have numbered the points I think he writes about what led to the problem he discussed.

{3} In any case we clearly see, and on this there is general agreement, that some opportune remedy must be found quickly for the misery and wretchedness pressing so unjustly on the majority of the working class: [1] for the ancient workingmen’s guilds were abolished in the last century, and no other protective organization took their place. [2] Public institutions and the laws set aside the ancient religion. Hence, by degrees it has come to pass that working men have been surrendered, isolated and helpless, to the [3] hardheartedness of employers and [4] the greed of unchecked competition. The mischief has been increased by [5] rapacious usury, which, although more than once condemned by the Church, is nevertheless, under a different guise, but with like injustice, still practiced by covetous and grasping men. To this must be added that [6] the hiring of labor and the conduct of trade are concentrated in the hands of comparatively few; so that a small number of very rich men have been able to lay upon the teeming masses of the laboring poor a yoke little better than that of slavery itself.

And what were the conditions which the Pope decried? 16-hour days, pay so low for adults that their children had to work, very unsafe set-ups, etc.

And what did the Pope condemn in employers?

{20] …wealthy owners and all masters of labor should be mindful of this – that to exercise pressure upon the indigent and the destitute for the sake of gain, and to gather one’s profit out of the need of another, is condemned by all laws, human and divine. To defraud any one of wages that are his due is a great crime which cries to the avenging anger of Heaven. “Behold, the hire of the laborers . . . which by fraud has been kept back by you, crieth; and the cry of them hath entered into the ears of the Lord of Sabbath.”[6] Lastly, the rich must religiously refrain from cutting down the workmen’s earnings, whether by force, by fraud, or by usurious dealing; and with all the greater reason because the laboring man is, as a rule, weak and unprotected, and because his slender means should in proportion to their scantiness be accounted sacred.

So what can we gather from the Pope’s teaching here? Not a mere generalized condemnation of that which does not exist, but instead a system in which “unchecked competition” leads to virtual slavery of those so desperate as to be forced to accept those ghastly and unfair conditions.​

 

[petra22]

If we lived in an economic situation where there were actually jobs for all, then your position might have some merit. But, sadly, we do not live in such times.

I’m just wondering why the government takes our money and gives it away… without getting anything for it. What happened to the idea of improving our infrastructure? Building roads and bridges would put people to work. I’m sure there are other things the government could put some fellas to work on…making bike and pedestrian paths, beautifying the grounds…

 

[Abbagail]

It makes perfect sense, and I find it refreshing to read. Thank you for your thoughts.

Wow. No thank you.

 

[djames99]

What would it take for EVERYBODY to live comfortably?

To reach one’s fullest potential, one needs readily available upper education (free on-line classes comes to mind, especially in self-help). To live comfortably, people need easy to get, decent paying jobs. The minimum wage would need to be placed at a comfortable rate, like it is in Australia. The value system of people would certainly need to change. But I think all this is realistic with government intervention and the help of the media. Imagine the potential with everybody receiving education and being put to work! People in the lower class can live fruitful, meaningful and comfortable lives!

People refusing to work would be guaranteed a roof over their heads, free food and a computer for self-help classes, but would be denied ‘luxuries.’ People with mental disabilities would receive free treatment and be encouraged to work as best as they can. Self-help consulars would abound, and would be paid using government subsidies.

Mmmm, I would say inequality needs to be eradicated.

It is possible the world could naturally be reduced to levels of subsistence. In such an environment we would be evaluated by our charity.

 

[Robert_Sock]

What is the difference between what you are suggesting and what the US has as its basic goal–high employment, with government aid for those those are not working? What specifically do you find in the US system which does not accord with what you are proposing?

Yes, we currently have high unemployment, but we generally have higher rates of employment and lower rates of poverty.

I’m talking about easy to find, decent paying jobs, where the minimum wage is set to a level where one can live comfortably. Australia has their minimum wage set to about $15 US dollars per hour and their economy is doing quite fine. In fact, they were not affected by the recent recession that has plagued the rest of the world.

I’m also talking about renewal projects where poverty stricken areas are brought up-to-date with the rest of society. Initially, such projects would require government subsidies, but in due time the efforts would be a boon to the economic system.

Worldwide, I’m also talking about free education, which could be brought about using simple computers. The literacy rate needs to improve to employ people in meaningful work. Self-help must also be employed to get those living in extreme poverty to become self-sufficient. Again, such projects would initially require government subsidies, but would eventually pay dividends in it causing a boon to the economy. Food, shelter, and mandatory education for children must be brought into practice for the renewal projects to be effective.

 

[Jozefo]

Lack of trust in society is the reason for high unemployment. People are holding onto what money they have, because it’s too hard to come by (for a number of reasons). This stifles demand, which slows production, which keeps employment down.

Minimum wage laws encourage distrust. When wages are set too high, they cost jobs in the economy. When too low, they don’t matter. It is impossible to set minimum wages at just the right level everywhere in the country. Everyone knows these things on some level, but I think talk about minimum wage laws persist because few people see any other way of addressing the problem, which is lack of trust in society.

It’s the money causing all of this distrust. It’s inherently dishonest. People may not know and understand all the mechanics of it, but they know the money has been corrupted. Nobody knows what a ‘$’ is, yet we trade in currency denominated in it. Getting a firm standard by which to value the money would go a long way toward alleviating the distrust.

 

[tabycat]

Please tell me where I’m coming across as a communist, socialist and or somebody into a welfare state? Again, I’m talking about self-help, self-sufficiency and the creation of decent-paying jobs, all of which are easily available in a largely free-market society. In fact, the implementation of what I’m suggesting would probably cost less in government subsidies than what we are spending today, plus it would be a boon to our economy.

Who would pay for setting up the self-help and the creation of ‘decent-paying’ jobs? The government through higher taxes or the people (the tax payers) through lower government taxes?

 

[Robert_Sock]

Who would pay for setting up the self-help and the creation of ‘decent-paying’ jobs? The government through higher taxes or the people (the tax payers) through lower government taxes?

Yes, the governments would need to take the first step, especially with the renewal programs, until the programs started working. But corporations and businesses could be given government incentives to provide the jobs. Again, the self-help could be done largely through computers. In the end, the society would be a boon to the economy.

 

[tabycat]

Yes, the governments would need to take the first step, especially with the renewal programs, until the programs started working. But corporations and businesses could be given government incentives to provide the jobs. Again, the self-help could be done largely through computers. In the end, the society would be a boon to the economy.

Are you saying that someone with a job and paying fifty-five percent of their pay in taxes should be paying MORE in taxes for the ‘renewal programs’ (ie ubern renewal)? Or should the government LOWER taxes, so that the taxpayers would hove the money to hire more people (more people paying taxes) and buy more things?

 

[Abu]

Epan #216
Contrary to the trend of declining labor requirements, is the burgeoning population.

The rate of births needed for a generation to replace itself is an average 2.1 per woman. The USA’s is below at around 2.06, and most countries have even lower birthrates and looming problems with a shrinking work force.
usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/census/2011-01-06-us-population_N.htm

The accumulation of wealth is unprecedented in modern times. How do we redress this injustice?

Face reality from the Church:
The Church is not against the accumulation of wealth which is not an injustice in itself.
Christ and His Church do not teach anything concerning the question of acquiring “excessive wealth”, but they do teach on how one should make use of it, or assist others, when they acquire riches. The very term “excessive” is dependant on the feeling, prejudice, of the user.

 

[Robert_Sock]

Are you saying that someone with a job and paying fifty-five percent of their pay in taxes should be paying MORE in taxes for the ‘renewal programs’ (ie ubern renewal)? Or should the government LOWER taxes, so that the taxpayers would hove the money to hire more people (more people paying taxes) and buy more things?

Perhaps governments could spend less on other things, like the military, and place that money into renewal projects. Perhaps tax corporations and the extremely rich.

 

[Abu]

St Augustine taught that wickedness was not inherent in commerce that price was a function not simply of the seller’s costs, bit also of the buyer’s wants, and it was up to the individual to live righteously. Politics I, 1254]. Thus legitimacy was acquired by merchants, and the deep involvement of the Church in the birth of free enterprise. [Stephen P Bensch, *Historiography: Medieval European and Mediterranean Slavery 1998, p 231; Cf. Stark, The Victory of Reason, Random House, 2005, p 57,58, 254].

Socialism has been condemned in Encyclicals by Popes Leo XIII and Pius XI and its disastrous effects were a major factor in the demise of the Soviet Union.

As is clear, there has been no condemnation of free enterprise similar to the denunciation of socialism because “unbridled capitalism” has never existed in any society or country as a political/economic system like socialism, but in the minds and actions of those people described as “the inhumanity of employers and the unbridled greed of competitors” (Rerum Novarum, # 6).

Leo XIII asserts: “…the socialists, working on the poor man’s envy of the rich, are striving to do away with private property, and contend that individual possessions should become the common property of all, to be administered by the State or by municipal bodies.” Rerum Novarum, #4]. Similarly the acknowledged St John Paul II condemns socialism for precisely this among other errors, in Centesimus Annus, making a frank acknowledgement that socialism has failed on its own terms as witnessed by events in Eastern Europe.

Of course free enterprise is not based on greed; that is a false assumption. Free enterprise is based on the fundamental and positive role of business, the market, private property and the resulting responsibility for the means of production, as well as free human creativity in the economic sector. People can be greedy. Many are, many are not.

No economic laws encourage “hoarding of wealth” and greed – some PEOPLE hoard wealth, some people are greedy. No wealth can be created until it is produced – that’s why the Catholic Late Scholastic system works so well to enable everyone to produce some wealth and to do with it as they choose through free-will. Economic laws are based on the principles of human action – of cause and effect involving God-given reason.

Greed, deceit and cheating have no place in any human activity. Individual morality determines how owners, managers and employees treat each other and the customers, which requires the morality taught by Christ’s Church. That’s why we have laws to seek and punish those who steal, cheat, swindle, and worse crimes. That’s why we have the Catholic Church to guide us – She who invented charity in the West. It’s time to face reality.

 

[tabycat]

Perhaps governments could spend less on other things, like the military, and place that money into renewal projects. Perhaps tax corporations and the extremely rich.

What out the military and the police, who is going to protect you (and other people) from those who want what you have and are will to take it by force? I do not mean just things like housing, food, and water, I mean things like your life and the lives of the people closest to you. Corporations pass on the taxes that they pay to the ones that buy the corporations’ products; the higher the taxes are, the higher the price of the products (Business 101).
As for the extremely rich, are you saying that the government knows better then Bill Gates how to spend Gates’s money?

 

[Abu]

Tabycat #229
As for the extremely rich, are you saying that the government knows better then Bill Gates how to spend Gates’s money?

Bill and Melinda Gates use their money in evil designs as well, while she rubbishes Catholic doctrine, as a Catholic.

Melinda Gates challenges Catholic teaching on contraception
CWN - July 09, 2012
The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is set to unveil funding a sum in the hundreds of millions of dollars for a campaign to improve access to contraception in the developing world.
reuters.com/article/2012/07/10/us-contraception-gates-idUSBRE86917920120710

 

[tabycat]

Bill and Melinda Gates use their money in evil designs as well, while she rubbishes Catholic doctrine, as a Catholic.

Melinda Gates challenges Catholic teaching on contraception
CWN - July 09, 2012
The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is set to unveil funding a sum in the hundreds of millions of dollars for a campaign to improve access to contraception in the developing world.
reuters.com/article/2012/07/10/us-contraception-gates-idUSBRE86917920120710

Gates was the first name that came to me when I was posting.

 

[Robert_Sock]

What out the military and the police, who is going to protect you (and other people) from those who want what you have and are will to take it by force? I do not mean just things like housing, food, and water, I mean things like your life and the lives of the people closest to you. Corporations pass on the taxes that they pay to the ones that buy the corporations’ products; the higher the taxes are, the higher the price of the products (Business 101).
As for the extremely rich, are you saying that the government knows better then Bill Gates how to spend Gates’s money?

All I wanted to say is that extreme poverty, like in Calcutta, is a crime against humanity and must be eliminated. It’s time that we stop turning a blind eye to the most urgent problem facing societies today. It’s a tragedy that’s taking place on a daily basis! Whatever it takes, we must do.

There will be an initial sacrifice, but eventually the entire world will reap the benefits in having a super-strong economic structure.

 

[tabycat]

All I wanted to say is that extreme poverty, like in Calcutta, is a crime against humanity and must be eliminated. It’s time that we stop turning a blind eye to the most urgent problem facing societies today. It’s a tragedy that’s taking place on a daily basis! Whatever it takes, we must do.

There will be an initial sacrifice, but eventually the entire world will reap the benefits in having a super-strong economic structure.

Like what? Give the countries that have the most poor the most money? Would the use of the money be left up to the country getting it? If not, how would the giving country make the getting the money do with it? How much money would be enough? A million? A billion? A trillion? Ten trillion?

Oh, by the way, how much money, in taxes, are you will to give?

PS, India ( the country that Calcutta is in) has the a bomb, maybe you should tell them to get rid of them and use the money to take care of the poor.

 

[Robert_Sock]

Like what? Give the countries that have the most poor the most money? Would the use of the money be left up to the country getting it? If not, how would the giving country make the getting the money do with it? How much money would be enough? A million? A billion? A trillion? Ten trillion?

Oh, by the way, how much money, in taxes, are you will to give?

Again, we’re talking about crimes against humanity here, and countries need to work together to get the tragic problems solved. And, again, there would be rewards down the line when we could get the vast majority of the world’s population working and contributing to the economy.

 

[Reep]

People refusing to work would be guaranteed a roof over their heads, free food and a computer for self-help classes, but would be denied ‘luxuries.’ People with mental disabilities would receive free treatment and be encouraged to work as best as they can. Self-help consulars would abound, and would be paid using government subsidies.

I guess I might as well not work at all and take my free “roof over [my] head, free food and a computer,” because if I have to do that for you and everybody else I won’t have a nickel left for any luxuries anyway.

So, exactly who do we look to, to pull this wagon? Even if we use the government to steal everything for us, who will they steal it from? Seriously, this is insane. We will all starve. Besides, it is simply evil and immoral to steal from one to give to another:

*Let us say that someone robs in order to feed the poor: in this case, even though the intention is good, the uprightness of the will is lacking. Consequently, no evil done with a good intention can be excused.
*

~John Paul II, Veritatis Splendor (1993) 78.​

 

[Robert_Sock]

I guess I might as well not work at all and take my free “roof over [my] head, free food and a computer,” because if I have to do that for you and everybody else I won’t have a nickel left for any luxuries anyway.

So, exactly who do we look to, to pull this wagon? Even if we use the government to steal everything for us, who will they steal it from? Seriously, this is insane. We will all starve. Besides, it is simply evil and immoral to steal from one to give to another:

Let us say that someone robs in order to feed the poor: in this case, even though the intention is good, the uprightness of the will is lacking. Consequently, no evil done with a good intention can be excused.

~John Paul II, Veritatis Splendor (1993) 78.​

It comes down to one’s moral obligation to end the crimes against humanity.

Taxes are legitimate, not stealing or robbing.

If decent paying jobs were readily available, those refusing work would be a very small portion of the lower class.

Initially, there would be sacrifice, but in the end everybody would reap the benefits when everyone is working and the world economy is thriving.