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

[Robert_Sock]

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.

 

[Abu]

Robert Sock
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.

That idea should be in a class of thread labelled “SOCIAL INJUSTICE”, where government subsidies reward the good-for-nothings who “refuse” to work and steal from those who do work to do so.

The foolish ideas emanating from this source never encompass the injunction from God that “in the sweat of your brow you shall eat bread” (Gen 3:19). Neither do they understand or assent to Christ’s Parable of the Talents in which Jesus lauds the servant who has multiplied talents – “For to everyone who has, more will be given, and he will have abundance; but from him who does not have, even what he has will be taken away. And cast the unprofitable servant into the outer darkness. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” (Mt 25: 14-30). Christ certainly praised the wise use of the fundamental right of economic initiative and prudence in this parable.

 

[Robert_Sock]

That idea should be in a class of thread labelled “SOCIAL INJUSTICE”, where government subsidies reward the good-for-nothings who “refuse” to work and steal from those who do work to do so.

The foolish ideas emanating from this source never encompass the injunction from God that “in the sweat of your brow you shall eat bread” (Gen 3:19). Neither do they understand or assent to Christ’s Parable of the Talents in which Jesus lauds the servant who has multiplied talents – “For to everyone who has, more will be given, and he will have abundance; but from him who does not have, even what he has will be taken away. And cast the unprofitable servant into the outer darkness. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” (Mt 25: 14-30). Christ certainly praised the wise use of the fundamental right of economic initiative and prudence in this parable.

You’re ignoring Christ’s commandment that you should love your neighbor as yourself.

Sounds like you actually want extreme poverty to exist in the world.

Please don’t misconstrue Christ’s teachings to justify greed! That’s not what He intended.

What about the parable of the rich man and Lazarus? How does that fit into your thinking?

 

[Abu]

More foolishness.

When you love your neighbour you encourage those “refusing to work” to face reality and God’s creation and get out and find work; you help others to produce goods and services, you don’t indulge their destructive whims and fancies.

In the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, a preoccupation with wealth obscures the real sins – pride and selfishness are the culprits. St Augustine effectively says “It was not Lazarus’ poverty that saved him, but his humility. Nor was it wealth that kept the rich man from bliss, but his pride and selfishness.” (Sermon 24,3).

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, or assist others, when they acquire riches. The very term “excessive” is dependant on the feeling, prejudice, of the user.

Mt 19:16-21 refers finally to the rich young man becoming an Apostle, “come follow Me”. Nowhere does Christ require mankind to give up all their possessions either to be good followers or to be able to enter heaven. If all were poor, how could anyone be helped?

By His parable of the Talents Jesus is not implying that anyone should seek wealth first in their lives. He is preaching and rewarding prudence, justice, fortitude and temperance, rather than attacking those who accumulate wealth legitimately, He is lambasting the slothful. In the Encyclical Letter *Sollicitudo Rei Socialis *(On Social Concerns), 1987, #42, Bl John Paul II emphasises “Likewise, in this concern for the poor, one must not overlook that special form of poverty which consists in being deprived of fundamental human rights, in particular the right to religious freedom and also the right to freedom of economic initiative.”

Get real.

 

[meltzerboy]

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.

This sounds like utopia and not very realistic. Something to strive for, nonetheless. Just one quibble about “people refusing to work”: if they are physically, mentally, and emotionally able to work and refuse to, why should they be supported by government, with a computer no less? My brand of liberalism doesn’t go that far.

 

[abinjoy]

giving free food and subsidy for people who even refuse to work is much better than spending billions on Defence and arms and sending an exploration team to investigate if there is life in Mars.

 

[Robert_Sock]

More foolishness.

When you love your neighbour you encourage those “refusing to work” to face reality and God’s creation and get out and find work; you help others to produce goods and services, you don’t indulge their destructive whims and fancies.

In the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, a preoccupation with wealth obscures the real sins – pride and selfishness are the culprits. St Augustine effectively says “It was not Lazarus’ poverty that saved him, but his humility. Nor was it wealth that kept the rich man from bliss, but his pride and selfishness.” (Sermon 24,3).

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, or assist others, when they acquire riches. The very term “excessive” is dependant on the feeling, prejudice, of the user.

Mt 19:16-21 refers finally to the rich young man becoming an Apostle, “come follow Me”. Nowhere does Christ require mankind to give up all their possessions either to be good followers or to be able to enter heaven. If all were poor, how could anyone be helped?

By His parable of the Talents Jesus is not implying that anyone should seek wealth first in their lives. He is preaching and rewarding prudence, justice, fortitude and temperance, rather than attacking those who accumulate wealth legitimately, He is lambasting the slothful. In the Encyclical Letter *Sollicitudo Rei Socialis *(On Social Concerns), 1987, #42, Bl John Paul II emphasises “Likewise, in this concern for the poor, one must not overlook that special form of poverty which consists in being deprived of fundamental human rights, in particular the right to religious freedom and also the right to freedom of economic initiative.”

Get real.

You’re interpreting the Holy Scriptures to your own liking. Love your neighbor as yourself implies just what it says. When a person refuses to work, there is something wrong with the social system, whereby the motives for working are not great enough to get some people to work. In such cases, the Christian virtues of love and charity ought to easily override their refusal to work. These people are in need of help, and are in need of self-help consoling. All humans are entitled to a certain amount of dignity, and caring for the basic needs of such individuals are warranted. The value structure of people with insensitivity toward those unwilling to work need to change, and replaced with some degree of humanitarianism and brotherly love. The way you’re talking, these people should be allowed to starve to death; how inhumane and a crime against humanity! Why not just round them up and exterminate them? Again, to simply allow such people to starve to death is to overlook the real problem inherent in any economic system that does not properly motivate all of its citizens.

Trying to intimidate me by saying ‘more foolishness’ and ‘get real’ does nothing to further your weak argument.

 

[St_Francis]

Robert,
Your ideas seem to fall in the realm of liberalism–the idea that man can perfect this world and the people in it through human effort alone without reference to God. Liberals hate to see suffering of any kind because it reminds them of human limits which can be helped only by God. I’m not saying you mean to do this; I’m just pointing out a problem with your thinking that I see

What would be much better would be if all the world became Catholic! God set up a perfect system for us already If everyone were Catholic, those in need would be cared for without the need for government intervention. Instead voluntary institutions would be set up, neighbors would help their neighbors, goods would flow from one to another in the most appropriate ways!

So I think the best way to accomplish what you suggest is for each Catholic to pray a lot, including for conversions and for the good of the world, and for each Catholic to do their best in the area of evangelization, while relying on prayer.

I think this would work more quickly, and set up a better system in the end.

It is true that we see the majority of the world is not Catholic, but consider this: Catholics are about 1 in 6 people. Think about that! If each Catholic prayed, fasted, and sacrificed for the conversion of a mere 5 people, the whole world would be converted!

 

[ChurchSoldier]

We have a place like that. It called Detroit.

 

[ChurchSoldier]

I don’t want to sound uncharitable, but if you didn’t have so many posts I’d think this is a troll thread.

What would be needed is #1 for the Bible to be wrong (the poor will always be with you).

Secondly, we have places like this in the US. Detroit comes to mind. In reality it doesn’t work so well.

Nice thought though.

 

[Mrs_Sally]

Robert,
Your ideas seem to fall in the realm of liberalism–the idea that man can perfect this world and the people in it through human effort alone without reference to God. Liberals hate to see suffering of any kind because it reminds them of human limits which can be helped only by God. I’m not saying you mean to do this; I’m just pointing out a problem with your thinking that I see

What would be much better would be if all the world became Catholic! God set up a perfect system for us already If everyone were Catholic, those in need would be cared for without the need for government intervention. Instead voluntary institutions would be set up, neighbors would help their neighbors, goods would flow from one to another in the most appropriate ways!

So I think the best way to accomplish what you suggest is for each Catholic to pray a lot, including for conversions and for the good of the world, and for each Catholic to do their best in the area of evangelization, while relying on prayer.

I think this would work more quickly, and set up a better system in the end.

It is true that we see the majority of the world is not Catholic, but consider this: Catholics are about 1 in 6 people. Think about that! If each Catholic prayed, fasted, and sacrificed for the conversion of a mere 5 people, the whole world would be coynverted!

That is the best idea yet. I’m sure We all know 5 non catholics. I will start this immediately.

 

[Deus_tecum]

People are called to love one another. I do not know of any Scripture that commands governments to “love” people by confiscating wealth from one group and giving it to another.

 

[john_ennis]

What would it take for EVERYBODY to live comfortably?
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! .

Does human history give us any reason to think this is realistic? Quite the opposite.

It’s certainly within the teaching of the Gospels to say, “I must do all I can to love my neighbor, but I know that the poor will always exist.”

A search for a perfect society, and economic systems which we believe can attain it, generally amount to a distraction from God and becoming selfless. They proudly assume the perfectibility of man, by his own efforts.

 

[Country_Gal]

I don’t want to sound uncharitable, but if you didn’t have so many posts I’d think this is a troll thread.

What would be needed is #1 for the Bible to be wrong (the poor will always be with you).

Secondly, we have places like this in the US. Detroit comes to mind. In reality it doesn’t work so well.

Nice thought though.

You sound uncharitable.

As to the original idea presented, it’s entirely impractical and unrealistic. You would definitely run out of other people’s money.

 

[TEPO]

Its true that the only way to love others is to pay them money. Therefore, those who do not pay others money are hateful, and are possessed by the devil.

 

[Country_Gal]

Some people need a kick in the pants and the wolf at the door to motivate them. Give the money and they’ll buy Meth.

 

[petra22]

giving free food and subsidy for people who even refuse to work is much better than spending billions on Defence and arms and sending an exploration team to investigate if there is life in Mars.

In my mind it isn’t just the ones who refuse to work, but the ones who choose to spend their money on illegal drugs, excessive drinking or other vices and let their families suffer want…
How can you fix that free will that lets people choose to do the “fun thing” instead of the prudent thing??? Give them more money to waste on free will???

 

[thistle]

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.

According to Jesus poverty will never be eliminated.

Matt 26:11 The poor you will always have with you; but you will not always have me.

 

[Didascalia]

**

What would it take for EVERYBODY to live comfortably?

The even distribution of wealth would solve world poverty at the stroke of a pen. Queens University Belfast did a study based on the “free personal capital” sitting in UK banks. Free personal capital is the money in your current and savings account after all of your outgoings are deducted. If all of the FPC in the UK was put into a pot and evenly divided by every man, woman and child in the UK 70 MILLION SOULS, then every single one of them would have £73.8 million £73,800,000 in there bank accounts! In US Dollars that’s over $115.2 million $115,276,476 Capitalists will go to any ends to justify these figures, and Americans in particular will call you a communist for condemning such disparity, while American people work for the lowest wages in the western hemisphere, and half the world [or more] starve!**

 

[Timothysis]

**
Robert Sock;11110092:

What would it take for EVERYBODY to live comfortably?

**

The even distribution of wealth would solve world poverty at the stroke of a pen. Queens University Belfast did a study based on the “free personal capital” sitting in UK banks. Free personal capital is the money in your current and savings account after all of your outgoings are deducted. If all of the FPC in the UK was put into a pot and evenly divided by every man, woman and child in the UK 70 MILLION SOULS, then every single one of them would have £73.8 million £73,800,000 in there bank accounts! In US Dollars that’s over $115.2 million $115,276,476 Capitalists will go to any ends to justify these figures, and Americans in particular will call you a communist for condemning such disparity, while American people work for the lowest wages in the western hemisphere, and half the world [or more] starve!

You have obviously never heard of inflation. If, overnight, everyone suddenly became instant millionaires, then the prices of goods and commodities would multiply exponentially. How many tens of thousands of dollars would a gallon of gas cost? Or a loaf of bread?