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

[Robert_Sock]

Since when has the Middle East been the West? Being Irish-Czech I am use to people thinking and saying that I am ‘a nothing’ and a ‘nonperson’.

Who said that the Middle East was in the West? Not me.

How about the elections held less the two years ago in Egypt, where they free? How about the people in the streets disagreeing that the elections were free?

The elections may have been free, but the MB government was corrupt.

If you think that a corporation lives one country because of high taxes and high labor costs and goes to another with lower costs and there will be no jobs lost in the first country, you are living in la-la land and/or you know nothing about business.

Reread my original post and you will see that I stated that a restructuring of values is needed. The new markets in the developing countries would need to propel corporations to open new offices there.

 

[tabycat]

Who said that the Middle East was in the West? Not me.

The elections may have been free, but the MB government was corrupt.

Reread my original post and you will see that I stated that a restructuring of values is needed. The new markets in the developing countries would need to propel corporations to open new offices there.

So, blame the MB government for not doing what you what the rest of us to do.

You are not saying how to ‘restructuring’ the values of another person, let alone those of another country. What you seem to want may happen in the Star Trek world, but this is the real world, not a fantasy world like Star Trek. The only way to get rid of poverty is for the Lord God to come back, then maybe the world will be to your liking. :tiphat:

 

[petra22]

Once you accept that mission, you should not have any objection to anyone including the government attempting to fulfill that mission. (regardless of what Pope Paul or anyone else says - Jesus’s injunctions override **everyone **else).

How far are you willing to go with this? What about when the government says ok people, we have too many mouths to feed. Let’s limit it to one child per family. The rest of you get mandatory abortions.???

 

[openmind77]

How far are you willing to go with this? What about when the government says ok people, we have too many mouths to feed. Let’s limit it to one child per family. The rest of you get mandatory abortions.???

I am confused - what has providing food for people got to do with forced abortions?

Norway and Sweden, both have a pretty comprehensive social safety net, do you think they are about to force anybody to have abortions?

All this is just some weird speculation, basically spread by people who don’t like the idea of providing for the needy. There are many people who come up with these types of fantasies,

They are really people with a politically ideology that says everyone should just take care of themselves and not care for the disadvantaged - a totally unChristian thing.

 

[BRZ]

The problem is that if the government is to help feed, clothe and give jobs to people it needs the money to do so. So yeah, the government could spend less money on wars and such and more on helping people, but the government isn’t going to do so. This is never going to happen. If not that, then the government raises taxes and forces people to pay more money to the government to fund these programs. This is forcing people against their will, which is not something that God does. God asks for our consent and it is up to us to decide how much or how little or what we will do or what we are capable to do for others. Some may not do enough and some do more then their share, but this is our decision and choice (having free will). What you are arguing is to take away choice (free will) and replace it with forced obedience (no free will) and this is not God’s will. We are called to be charitable out of love for others not out of a forced sense of charity but out of our free will to love. This is what God cherishes.

Also, your idea of paradise is utterly ridiculous. No matter how hard we try we will never eradicate poverty and we will never have paradise on Earth, this is a statement of fact. This does not mean we ignore those in need, it does not mean we do not try to help others nor does it mean we don’t love others. We need to seek God and rely on God in our work and in the work of the world. We can never rely on ourselves or on government to fix things, it is never going to happen. I too dream of a perfect world, a better form of government but it isn’t going to happen, especially when so many in the world are not Christian and not Catholic and even many (if not most) Catholics do not live their Catholic faith.

For those willing, I would be willing to start up a new country where we can try to live out our Catholic faith in government and society but the problem I always bang my head on is where would we start this country, Antarctica? hah.

 

[Reep]

Randy England wrote:

Here is an illustration from The 19th-century abolitionist Lysander Spooner. He pretty well gives the lie to the ridiculous notion that taxes are voluntary:

“The fact is that the government, like a highwayman, says to a man: Your money, or your life. And many, if not most, taxes are paid under the compulsion of that threat.

“The government does not, indeed, waylay a man in a lonely place, spring upon him from the road side, and, holding a pistol to his head, proceed to rifle his pockets. But the robbery is none the less a robbery on that account; and it is far more dastardly and shameful.

“The highwayman takes solely upon himself the responsibility, danger, and crime of his own act. He does not pretend that he has any rightful claim to your money, or that he intends to use it for your own benefit. He does not pretend to be anything but a robber. He has not acquired impudence enough to profess to be merely a “protector,” and that he takes men’s money against their will, merely to enable him to “protect“ those infatuated travelers, who feel perfectly able to protect themselves, or do not appreciate his peculiar system of protection. He is too sensible a man to make such professions as these.

“Furthermore, having taken your money, he leaves you, as you wish him to do. He does not persist in following you on the road, against your will; assuming to be your rightful “sovereign,” on account of the “protection” he affords you. He does not keep “protecting” you, by commanding you to bow down and serve him; by requiring you to do this, and forbidding you to do that; by robbing you of more money as often as he finds it for his interest or pleasure to do so; and by branding you as a rebel, a traitor, and an enemy to your country, and shooting you down without mercy, if you dispute his authority, or resist his demands.

“He is too much of a gentleman to be guilty of such impostures, and insults, and villainies as these. In short, he does not, in addition to robbing you, attempt to make you either his dupe or his slave.”

*Robert Sock responded: *

This sounds like the personal opinion of one person, an abolitionist at that. It does not necessarily reflect the view of most Americans today. It may, or may not, be a fact worth holding on to.

It is clear from the context that Spooner’s analysis is at least two men’s opinion (his and mine). While many Americans find the truth of it distasteful (and so choose to view it differently), I challenge them or you to point to any error in it.

 

[openmind77]

The problem is that if the government is to help feed, clothe and give jobs to people it needs the money to do so. So yeah, the government could spend less money on wars and such and more on helping people, but the government isn’t going to do so. This is never going to happen. If not that, then the government raises taxes and forces people to pay more money to the government to fund these programs. This is forcing people against their will, which is not something that God does. God asks for our consent and it is up to us to decide how much or how little or what we will do or what we are capable to do for others. Some may not do enough and some do more then their share, but this is our decision and choice (having free will). What you are arguing is to take away choice (free will) and replace it with forced obedience (no free will) and this is not God’s will. We are called to be charitable out of love for others not out of a forced sense of charity but out of our free will to love. This is what God cherishes.

Also, your idea of paradise is utterly ridiculous. No matter how hard we try we will never eradicate poverty and we will never have paradise on Earth, this is a statement of fact. This does not mean we ignore those in need, it does not mean we do not try to help others nor does it mean we don’t love others. We need to seek God and rely on God in our work and in the work of the world. We can never rely on ourselves or on government to fix things, it is never going to happen. I too dream of a perfect world, a better form of government but it isn’t going to happen, especially when so many in the world are not Christian and not Catholic and even many (if not most) Catholics do not live their Catholic faith.

For those willing, I would be willing to start up a new country where we can try to live out our Catholic faith in government and society but the problem I always bang my head on is where would we start this country, Antarctica? hah.

Jesus did not say help the poor only if you want to. It is part of your faith to help the poor, just like any other requirement imposed by the Church. Jesus is not asking for your consent when he tells you to help the poor.

In any case, the whole point of representative democracy is that once you vote for a government, the decisions made by the legislature are your decisions. So the laws and budgets passed are not forced on to you or against your free will.

Eradicating poverty has to be done one step at a time. Right now there is enough food to feed everyone (wfp.org/hunger/faqs See #1).It is just a question of distribution - we should start with that.

 

[Jozefo]

For those willing, I would be willing to start up a new country where we can try to live out our Catholic faith in government and society but the problem I always bang my head on is where would we start this country, Antarctica? hah.

1 Peter 2:9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light;

Philippians 3:20 For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ:

Luke 17:20 And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: 17:21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.

We have a country, and a home, for the kingdom is within us.

 

[Abu]

openmind77 #302
Eradicating poverty has to be done one step at a time. Right now there is enough food to feed everyone

That has been so for many decades.

Further, between 1990 and 2010, their number fell by half as a share of the total population in developing countries, from 43% to 21%—a reduction of almost 1 billion people.
tinyurl.com/ldjt6go

As even Bono (post #110) has come to see, free enterprise reduces poverty more than foreign aid which is not a realistic solution – the realization is that the solution is the right attitude to work and the Catholic-developed free enterprise approach.

As Fr Shall emphasises, to reduce poverty, a free, governmentally “limited society guided by principles of justice and generosity” having “a productive, expansive, and efficient economy…[can]…actually make the poor rich, if given a chance…. but they must include a juridical system, profit, enterprise, knowledge, exchange, a market, voluntary organisations, a relatively independent economy, private property, and respect for work and excellence.” (Fr James V Schall, S.J., in *Does Catholicism Still Exist?, *Alba House 1994, p 178, 185).

Just as Jesus did not mollycoddle anyone, and constantly values the domain of work as does St Paul, as the acknowledged St John Paul II points out (post #65) – so the value of free enterprise in supporting and encouraging work and overcoming poverty, is unsurpassed – hence the reduction in the poor.

 

[Robert_Sock]

And again, extreme poverty 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.

 

[Robert_Sock]

That has been so for many decades.

Further, between 1990 and 2010, their number fell by half as a share of the total population in developing countries, from 43% to 21%—a reduction of almost 1 billion people.
tinyurl.com/ldjt6go

As even Bono (post #110) has come to see, free enterprise reduces poverty more than foreign aid which is not a realistic solution – the realization is that the solution is the right attitude to work and the Catholic-developed free enterprise approach.

As Fr Shall emphasises, to reduce poverty, a free, governmentally “limited society guided by principles of justice and generosity” having “a productive, expansive, and efficient economy…[can]…actually make the poor rich, if given a chance…. but they must include a juridical system, profit, enterprise, knowledge, exchange, a market, voluntary organisations, a relatively independent economy, private property, and respect for work and excellence.” (Fr James V Schall, S.J., in *Does Catholicism Still Exist?, *Alba House 1994, p 178, 185).

Just as Jesus did not mollycoddle anyone, and constantly values the domain of work as does St Paul, as the acknowledged St John Paul II points out (post #65) – so the value of free enterprise in supporting and encouraging work and overcoming poverty, is unsurpassed – hence the reduction in the poor.

Free enterprise is not currently working to end extreme poverty. We need for nations to group together, with rich nations initially helping out the poor ones. Imagine the super-strong economic system that would result with all people having decent-paying jobs and contributing to society. Imagine the advances in technology with corporations having offices in what are now poverty-stricken nations. All this is possible with free enterprise; all that is needed is the initiative to make it all happen.

 

[Abu]

Robert Sock continues to conjecture, and his confused ideas, repeatedly exposed, fail to come to grips with the confusion and failure of so many politicians and governments worldwide to even understand free enterprise or even freedom and the wise policies necessary to enable societies to flourish.

Yet, he fails to acknowledge the progress made even under such conditions and still wallows in the foolishness of providing food for those refusing to work. There are few who would not jettison such an error after being shown the idiocy of that idea.

 

[BRZ]

Jesus did not say help the poor only if you want to. It is part of your faith to help the poor, just like any other requirement imposed by the Church. Jesus is not asking for your consent when he tells you to help the poor.

In any case, the whole point of representative democracy is that once you vote for a government, the decisions made by the legislature are your decisions. So the laws and budgets passed are not forced on to you or against your free will.

Eradicating poverty has to be done one step at a time. Right now there is enough food to feed everyone (wfp.org/hunger/faqs See #1).It is just a question of distribution - we should start with that.

It is absolutely a choice. The choice is not in that God is saying you can do this or that but you have a choice to do what is right or not. However, how you help the poor is your choice, your failure to understand that is silly. There is absolutely no guidebook on how to help the poor, just that we have to do it. Please find one quote from the Bible where it says to eradicate poverty. There isn’t one. Jesus says to help the poor without a doubt but eradicating poverty is most likely impossible because of our fallen nature. You want to force people to help but what you are saying is immoral. God has never force anyone to do anything. He always asks for consent. Not only that but to do what you want, everyone in the world would have to participate. Most people in the world are not Christian and Catholic. You want to force Christian values on them and force compliance, that in and of itself is wrong despite your intentions being good. So keep on dreaming, ill pray for the end of poverty and do my share.

 

[Robert_Sock]

Robert Sock continues to conjecture, and his confused ideas, repeatedly exposed, fail to come to grips with the confusion and failure of so many politicians and governments worldwide to even understand free enterprise or even freedom and the wise policies necessary to enable societies to flourish.

Yet, he fails to acknowledge the progress made even under such conditions and still wallows in the foolishness of providing food for those refusing to work. There are few who would not jettison such an error after being shown the idiocy of that idea.

Show me where our current economic system is working towards ending extreme poverty worldwide! Your position is to maintain the status quo, where greed and power run rampant. You need to acknowledge that extreme poverty is a crime against humanity! It must come to an end.

 

[BRZ]

I don’t think anyone disagrees that it would be wonderful if extreme poverty didn’t exist. The problem is that you want to provide a system where people can choose to do nothing and they will get free stuff and this is wrong. They should have to work. Now you can provide housing and food, the basics, to those who are willing to work. Jobs could be created like maybe road repair or community cleaning where people go around cleaning up neighborhoods and such. That’s something I could get behind.

 

[fnr]

How many people arguing that poor people are just lazy do-nothings on the dole have actually talked with poor people? At that, how many of all of us have actually spoken with a poor person?

Here’s an idea: everyone go to mass today at parish in a poor area near you. Try to talk with some of the parishioners and explain that you’re here in fellowship. See what happens!

 

[BRZ]

Who said they are lazy? I don’t think anyone said that so perhaps you shouldn’t put words in anyone’s mouth. If someone did say that feel free to quote it so I can be wrong. Making assumptions isn’t exactly charitable.

 

[Robert_Sock]

Who said they are lazy? I don’t think anyone said that so perhaps you shouldn’t put words in anyone’s mouth. If someone did say that feel free to quote it so I can be wrong. Making assumptions isn’t exactly charitable.

These have been two posts in this thread that called those living in extreme poverty “lazy bums” or “bums.”

One example:

Robert, you are going to be incapable of understanding other people until you desist in putting words into their mouth.

Red herring!!

Robert, this idea that welfare can somehow solve the world’s problems is unfounded in history, science, political science, and math. **It is literally impossible for all the hardworking people to pay for everything for all the **lazy bums, and the fact is the more and more of the hard workers will BECOME lazy bums when they realize the government is going to give all their money TO the lazy bums. [highlight mine]

 

[petra22]

I am caught in an impossible situation. I know and am fully aware of how the US has fallen down into despotism and idolatry. I know the mechanics of how it was done, and it makes me an alien in this country. I take heart in the knowledge that my citizenship is in heaven, and I am nothing more than a wandering and wayfaring stranger on the land.

You are not alone…I feel just like you. Let us pray, pray, pray and wait in hope for the day…

 

[BRZ]

Wow, Robert either you honestly completely misunderstood that person or you are intentionally trying to mislead. It does not take a genius to know that person was not referring to poor people. That was in response to your comment that anyone who didn’t want to work wouldn’t have to work and would get free housing and food given to them. Any person who chooses not to work when they can in order to just be taken care of for free is a “lazy bum”. That person was not saying that people who are poor and homeless are lazy bums.