Genesis of social justice

[tpw]

A good reading of the Old Testament reveals support for distribution of wealth. That was one of the purposes of the Jubilee Year. Wealth while earned and created through work doesn’t mean that one can hoard wealth or use it for self-promotion which alas is all to often “the American way”.

Government’s role in re-distributing wealth doesn’t mean it’s communism. How could taxes be used to build roads, create a postal system, establish social security, support for public projects, etc. be conducted without there- distribution of wealth.

Communism is when the government owns all property and means of production. It’s not communist to re-distribute wealth.

I nearly left the church last week at confirmation class. I’m older and am taking classes to get confirmed since I have returned to the church. The issue was social justice. The class leader said that their Faith Formation Minister class put on by the diocese said that social and distributive justice is necessary to live the christian life. That class she was tought in said, “as wealth accumulates in a community it is the government’s job to equitably distribute that wealth.” This is communism! Wealth doesn’t accumulate, it is earned and created through effort and work. If the catholic church is about that then either I’ll find a new church or some changes need to be made.

 

[Tom_Qualey]

*Hi, Tpw,

I think you need to provide some examples of OT wealth distribution. Honestly, all of the kings and princes identified in the OT at least gave the appearance of having more wealth then their subjects. As I recall, David had quite a lot of wealth - over and above what he had set aside for the building of the Temple. Solomon started out with what appears to be an impressive amount of wealth - but, ran into unexpected difficulties trying to get more via taxation.*

A good reading of the Old Testament reveals support for distribution of wealth. That was one of the purposes of the Jubilee Year. Wealth while earned and created through work doesn’t mean that one can hoard wealth or use it for self-promotion which alas is all to often “the American way”.

*In the interst of clarity, Tpw,I think it would be appropriate to define what it is you mean “hord wealth”. For example, those who save money in a bank or credit union make that money available for those who want to borrow it. Those who buy stocks and bonds give businesses necessary money to advance in their chosen field. Those who dig a hole and bury their money (Matt 25:26) are wicked and slothful - and probably guilty of hording. But, to the best of my knowledge, there does not seem much of that going on.

I’m a bit fuzzy on what you have in mind when you say, “… the American way…”. I was under the impression it was the ability to have the opportunity to* improve one’s living by one’s own merity - hard work. The fruits of this effort may be things like home ownership, paying one’s bills on time, having a comfortable retirement, having resources for the ‘rainy day’, and providing for the education of one’s children

Government’s role in re-distributing wealth doesn’t mean it’s communism. How could taxes be used to build roads, create a postal system, establish social security, support for public projects, etc. be conducted without there- distribution of wealth.

*True. But, the previous posts were not on how government provides for the common good by doing such things as building roads, providing to for the common defense, insuring public safety, etc. We are talking about how government engages in markety place activities with the distinctly heavy hand it has to bully others.

Here is a small example: a small airline recently announced that it was charging for people bringing on carry-on luggage when they few with this carrier. (Here is the link: miamiherald.com/2010/04/07/1566553/spirit-airlines-to-charge-for.html* ). It is probably a foolish business decision - but, the US Senate rose to the occasion to threaten this airline (and anyone foolish enough to follow suit) that there would be an increase in taxes to more then offset any income derived from this straight forward business decision. This proposed action by the US Senate was not strictly income redistibution (sorry if I have wandered from the topic) but, just the heavy hand of the government. We will just see what happens. If the airline was in danger of going broke - and they come up with this as a means of keeping themselves and their employees aflaot - would this be bad (I really do not know the carrier’s motivation)?

Here is a more complex example: government action to increase the federal minimum wage. A sacred cow of income distribution if ever there was one! Now, reflect back the history of what we used to have: Mom stayed home and raised the kids, Dad went to work or raised crops and all lived. Today, few can affort to stay home - and even with both parents working, the costs are tremendous. Add children and the cost of their education - well, soon that bubble will break because most can not afford the price tag. People look for cheaper prices - and with their ‘dollar votes’ purchase less expensive items. Because foreign workers are paid less, we consumers pay less for the item. This is no glorificaiton of ‘foreigh sweat shops’ while American Labor has priced itself out of a market in a global economy. Now, is all of this due to incrasing minimum wage? No. But, you really can not answer the question of why these events have taken place without addressing expanding costs which would explain the costs of Labor.

Communism is when the government owns all property and means of production. It’s not communist to re-distribute wealth.

*And, just how do you think Government came to acquire this wealth to re-distribute?

God bless

Tom*

 

[portarica]

…and can stifle any ambition to change.

Here’s a new one on me. Is this considered social justice too? (under the “new” norms)

sayanythingblog.com/entry/safelink_wireless_a_government_welfare_program_for_cell_phones/

Actually that Reagan era program is helpful to low income .safelinkwireless.com/EnrollmentPublic/benefits.aspx

Its not government run or sponsored.

But like the welfare dependency statement, the facts are not appealing as the made up conclusions.

Peace

 

[portarica]

When the original minimum wage laws went into effect, it was a small fraction of the average manufacturing wage.

Now the minimum wage bumps up against manufacturing wages even though adjusted for inflation it is less than in the 70’s.

In the meantime, good paying manufacturing jobs have been shipped overseas by wall street and CEO salaries and bonuses have absolutely sky rocketed.

Like what Jesus taught about the least, it is critical to keep everything in context.

If you don’t want to help the least, just say it. Or try to use what Jesus taught to justify it.

Peace

 

[Tom_Qualey]

*Hi, Portarica,

Maybe we are just not being clear here - no one has tried to justify ‘sweat shops’ or outrageous CEO salaries/bonuses - what is trying to be justified is wealth re-distribution in and effor to be socially just. The problem with what you are proposing is that what Christ said in Matt 25:45 had nothing to do with income re-distribuiton. What was addressed was caring for the poor, hungry and neglected. Providing charity, education, work and areas where all can be the best they can be - through encouragement and their own initiative - is what is being addressed. No head of a socialist (hard or ‘soft’) government has been declared a saint for any reason - much less their economic policies or view to wealth re-distribuiton. *

When the original minimum wage laws went into effect, it was a small fraction of the average manufacturing wage.

Now the minimum wage bumps up against manufacturing wages even though adjusted for inflation it is less than in the 70’s.

In the meantime, good paying manufacturing jobs have been shipped overseas by wall street and CEO salaries and bonuses have absolutely sky rocketed.

*This is going to be difficult to believe - people create wealth - not governments. It is people who go out and invent and make things that others want to buy. At one time Henry Ford was a poor kid with a dream…as was the case for many of America’s famous 'movers ‘n shakers’ in industry. Now, it is easy to point to the excesses of most of these guys (they earned the title Robber Barron) and government had a role in stepping in to established safe working conditions and prohibit child labor. But, stop and think - if you income was redistributed to others - even though through merit you earned what you have - and someone told you how much you could keep - because after paying the cost of government doing all this work of figuring out you were worth and how much others should get … well… there was not all that much left!

You know, there are no written accounts, at least to the best of my knowledge, of a Profit/Loss Statement from St. Joseph’s Carpentry Shop. The assumption is that Jesus took over the shop upon the death of Joseph - but, we now are looking at the Son of God as a Tradesman - and having to buy raw materials and turn them into finished goods by using His skills and human tools. Since He was like us in all things (Heb 4:15), He had to make a living for Himself and His Mother. Did He make a profit? Of course He did - He had to buy food and supplies, and to pay taxes both to the government and to the Temple. *

Like what Jesus taught about the least, it is critical to keep everything in context.

If you don’t want to help the least, just say it. Or try to use what Jesus taught to justify it.

• Portarica, I think the burnden is on you to justify wealth re-distribuiton. The ‘least’ can be helped without this mis-step down the road to government going further out of control.

God bless

Tom*

Peace

 

[royal_archer]

This is false. Americans had these jobs until companies started hiring illegal immegrants for less than half the wages amercians were earning. There are plenty of hard jobs still being performed by Amercians - like Roofing, Masonry, etc. These jobs aren’t easier than picking fruit, landscaping, or meat packing. However the former are paying an equitable wage that allows Amercians to participate in the middle class. That’s the difference and the reason.

Americans are taking those jobs because they are semi-skilled and pay over the welfare threshold. If those jobs paid below the welfare threshold, then many of those workers would quit and go on welfare.

 

[cynic]

Americans are taking those jobs because they are semi-skilled and pay over the welfare threshold. If those jobs paid below the welfare threshold, then many of those workers would quit and go on welfare.

Didn’t welfare policy change in the U.S during the 90s? I didn’t think it was possible to sit on a benefit indefinitely. Time limits exist now.

 

[tafan]

This is false. Americans had these jobs until companies started hiring illegal immegrants for less than half the wages amercians were earning. There are plenty of hard jobs still being performed by Amercians - like Roofing, Masonry, etc. These jobs aren’t easier than picking fruit, landscaping, or meat packing. However the former are paying an equitable wage that allows Amercians to participate in the middle class. That’s the difference and the reason.

Sounds good, but there is very little historical or present evidence to support this view. Americans quit “picking fruit” during WWII and never went back. They only did it during the depression due to great distress. The Bracero Program was put in place after the war because Americans did not do this.

 

[royal_archer]

Didn’t welfare policy change in the U.S during the 90s? I didn’t think it was possible to sit on a benefit indefinitely. Time limits exist now.

It depends on which aspect of welfare there are many different welfare programs. Even with time limits, when you can earn more money on welfare than working, it is hard to resist. sorta like eve and that fruit.

 

[cynic]

It depends on which aspect of welfare there are many different welfare programs. Even with time limits, when you can earn more money on welfare than working, it is hard to resist. sorta like eve and that fruit.

In many states it’s probably impossible for there to exist a permanent “welfare class” that you keep banging on about.

 

[cdeterma]

Sounds good, but there is very little historical or present evidence to support this view. Americans quit “picking fruit” during WWII and never went back. They only did it during the depression due to great distress. The Bracero Program was put in place after the war because Americans did not do this.

Here is an article on meat packing. alternet.org/economy/41076/ You get to the middle of article and it says: In 1970 the typical American meatpacking worker earned about 20 percent more than the typical factory worker. Today he or she earns about 20 percent less. Enormous changes have swept through the industry over the past thirty years, as big companies swallowed up small ones, moved slaughterhouses from urban areas (where unions were strong) to rural areas (where unions were weak), **imported poor immigrants from Mexico **and ruthlessly cut wages by as much as 50 percent.

Here is article on the fruit picking. sdcoe.k12.ca.us/score/mice/migartcl.html basically the same story. We did have a program during the war to bring in mexicans to pick fruit but they didn’t overtake the worker population until the 1980’s (amenesty 1.0 under Reagan?).

I am not trying to pick a fight but I’ve done the hard jobs and I feel insulted when people say Amercians won’t do them. We will, but not at cut-throat wages. Which is one of the things Caritas in Veritate is speaking about. When one nation has the ability to improve its standard of living far above another, the worker protections of the first nation are undermined by the importation of cheap labor or the exportation of jobs to the underdeveloped nation. We need a meaningful solution.

 

[Tom_Qualey]

Hi, Cdeterma,

You’re right - we do not have a meaningful and significant solution - and, we really do not have one. Actually, I have yet to hear any US politician come up with such a solution.

On another topic, welcome to CAF! I think you will find this list a thoughtful and dynamic place to refresh your soul. It does that for me…

God Bless

Tom

Here is an article on meat packing. alternet.org/economy/41076/ You get to the middle of article and it says: In 1970 the typical American meatpacking worker earned about 20 percent more than the typical factory worker. Today he or she earns about 20 percent less. Enormous changes have swept through the industry over the past thirty years, as big companies swallowed up small ones, moved slaughterhouses from urban areas (where unions were strong) to rural areas (where unions were weak), **imported poor immigrants from Mexico **and ruthlessly cut wages by as much as 50 percent.

Here is article on the fruit picking. sdcoe.k12.ca.us/score/mice/migartcl.html basically the same story. We did have a program during the war to bring in mexicans to pick fruit but they didn’t overtake the worker population until the 1980’s (amenesty 1.0 under Reagan?).

I am not trying to pick a fight but I’ve done the hard jobs and I feel insulted when people say Amercians won’t do them. We will, but not at cut-throat wages. Which is one of the things Caritas in Veritate is speaking about. When one nation has the ability to improve its standard of living far above another, the worker protections of the first nation are undermined by the importation of cheap labor or the exportation of jobs to the underdeveloped nation. We need a meaningful solution.

 

[tpw]

You’re interpretation is interesting…however I’m not sure it makes much sense when unemployment rates are above 9-10% and the number of people who have stopped looking for work may add anyother 4-5% to real unemployment.

You also assume the biblical mandate for work is directly related to the contemporary economy which has spun off jobs - outsourcing; globalized others and left Americans high and dry…a move which began in the late 1970’s and increased during the 80’s and 90’s.

As we were taught in grad school theology - taking texts out of context especially to make political hay - is verboten. Context, context, context matters…

May we develop an economy which provides living wage jobs for all…

Tom

Genesis Chapter 3:
17 To the man he said, ‘Because you listened to the voice of your wife and ate from the tree of which I had forbidden you to eat, Accursed be the soil because of you! Painfully will you get your food from it as long as you live.
18 It will yield you brambles and thistles, as you eat the produce of the land.
19 By the sweat of your face will you earn your food, until you return to the ground, as you were taken from it. For dust you are and to dust you shall return.’

My interpretation: God Will provide but we will have to make an effort and it will not be easy. Today many want something for nothing and think that somehow they are owed it.

 

[tpw]

And when jobs no longer exist those who want to work…what is your constructive alternative? I’ve yet to hear either party come up with a meaninful solution to the current economic mess…started by the way by the “big boys” who claim everyone should work and then find every way under the sun to ensure that jobs which pay a living wage in fact don’t exist…

And the so-called free market solution hasn’t worked and in fact is partially to blame for the absence of jobs…outsourcing it’s called…

tpw

Didn’t welfare policy change in the U.S during the 90s? I didn’t think it was possible to sit on a benefit indefinitely. Time limits exist now.

 

[tpw]

And what about the “choices” made by - you name the corporation - which thinks nothing about outsourcing, or following the interests of investors - to disinvest - because they can’t make enough money in - you name the country…

.What happens to those who want to work, but can find nothing…

Until one addresses the fundamental injustices hidden in the global economy all the moralizing about work - needs be turned on its head and deeper questions asked about the responsibilities of those who invest, make corporate decisions about employment…and funny how those questions aren’t asked? I wonder why?

Recall Dom Helder Camara’s (Archbishop of Reife, Brazil) observation years ago: When I feed the poor they call me a saint; when I ask why the poor are poor they call me a communist.

Authentic Catholicism should never be meshed with an absolutist positions on the glories of free market capitalism. We’ve a long history 110 years to be exact calling the wonders of the free market as the ultimate distributor of goods into question.

Blessings,
tpw

First , thank you for all of your replies. This concept is a huge struggle for me.

Secondly, the reason it is a huge struggle is that the social justice I read about in the catechism is about ending abuse and hatred. Where as the social justice that political and now my faith formation group is talking about is redistribution of wealth by the government. That kind of social justice only leads to a totalitarian state. That’s not acceptable.

I think the best distribution of wealth happens when people work for it, risk their fortunes, and otherwise make an effort for it. Then when they are successful a voluntary charitable donation to help others. There should be no reward for laziness, or bad choices as some continue to make. There should be help for those who want to change or begin a new life. The gov’t never makes that distinction.

 

[tpw]

You’re right! The rich get socialism and the poor get capitalism!

tpw

Both of the two big parties had a hand in giving away billions in corporate welfare. (In exchange for contributions to their respective campaign funds.)

 

[royal_archer]

You’re interpretation is interesting…however I’m not sure it makes much sense when unemployment rates are above 9-10% and the number of people who have stopped looking for work may add anyother 4-5% to real unemployment.

You also assume the biblical mandate for work is directly related to the contemporary economy which has spun off jobs - outsourcing; globalized others and left Americans high and dry…a move which began in the late 1970’s and increased during the 80’s and 90’s.

As we were taught in grad school theology - taking texts out of context especially to make political hay - is verboten. Context, context, context matters…

May we develop an economy which provides living wage jobs for all…

Tom

You don’t have to have a job to work.

If someone is out of a job they need to be spending 12-14 hours a day looking for a new job.

Un employment is so high because people, as you mentioned, have stopped looking.

 

[royal_archer]

And when jobs no longer exist those who want to work…what is your constructive alternative? I’ve yet to hear either party come up with a meaninful solution to the current economic mess…started by the way by the “big boys” who claim everyone should work and then find every way under the sun to ensure that jobs which pay a living wage in fact don’t exist…

And the so-called free market solution hasn’t worked and in fact is partially to blame for the absence of jobs…outsourcing it’s called…

tpw

Outsourcing does not cause an absense of jobs, it simply creates a movement of jobs. It just seems that people overseas have a different idea of what a good job is.

By the way, here is a solution, significantly reduce welfare, then replace it with a guaranteed jobs program, then phase that out. Bottom line is that people only work about half of their lives. and during that time over 10% are unemployed, and then there are the stay at home spouses. all this results in about 1/3rd of the people supporting the other 2/3rds. We need to change that ratio and get more productive people working. That will improve the standard of living and the requirements for new workers and then more job opportunities.

 

[royal_archer]

And what about the “choices” made by - you name the corporation - which thinks nothing about outsourcing, or following the interests of investors - to disinvest - because they can’t make enough money in - you name the country…

.What happens to those who want to work, but can find nothing…

The great thing about a free market is that there is nothing stopping you from forming your own company/business.

 

[athair_siochain]

I nearly left the church last week at confirmation class. I’m older and am taking classes to get confirmed since I have returned to the church. The issue was social justice. The class leader said that their Faith Formation Minister class put on by the diocese said that social and distributive justice is necessary to live the christian life. That class she was tought in said, “as wealth accumulates in a community it is the government’s job to equitably distribute that wealth.” This is communism! Wealth doesn’t accumulate, it is earned and created through effort and work. If the catholic church is about that then either I’ll find a new church or some changes need to be made.

What would you have said?if you were told to go out and purchase a property, then find a hardworking American to pay rent , that covers mortgage re/payments, insurance ,taxes and repairs, that ensures your pleasurable lifestyle is paid for by a tenant,

Wealth is created-- not out of hard work/sweat/tears,

CREATED OUT OF THIN AIR equity on property is not worked for , equity is created because greedy landlords force rents up, this forces up property values benefiting those people blinded by greed… tenants do not get exta comforts when rents increase, high rents ensure a high price on the investment property, I suggest you search the net to find out the top ten richest property owners in the world,

You should not take for granted what is said by a individual in a class,

Communism is no different than Capitalism when it comes to sharing, the people from the top end of town always come out on top,