Is Capitalism God-Ordained?

[Abu]

meme1961 #18
Communism, for instance, is not anathema in a purely economic, voluntary form (many monasteries and convents are functioning communes)

False.

Voluntary sharing and communal living in a religious community have nothing to do with Communism or other such forced appropriations and destruction of freedom.

We see in Acts 4:34-35, A Catholic Commentary On Holy Scripture, Thomas Nelson and Sons, 1953:
(This) shows “that property was sold, from time to time, by the owners of it, according as the Church’s need dictated. The sharing of goods was always voluntary. The story of Ananias and Saphira, cf. 5:4, makes it clear that they were not bound to sell, and that after they had, the price was still theirs. When Barnabas gave all his property, such exceptional generosity was chronicled. There are examples of houses held privately in Jerusalem, !2:12; 21:16. St James, in his Epistle, reveals the existence of rich and poor there. The community of goods does not seem to have been very successful, 6:1, and other churches had continually to send alms, voluntarily, ‘each man according to his ability’, to Jerusalem, 11:29.”

“In Acts 2:44-47, so-called “Apostolics” were condemned by St Thomas and the Late Scholastics, who quote St Augustine. Why?
In his Summa, II-II, Q. 66, art. 2, resp., St Thomas quotes St Augustine: “Augustine says: ‘The people styled apostolic are those who arrogantly claimed this title for themselves because they refused to admit married folk or property owners to their fellowship, arguing from the model of the many monks and clerics in the Catholic Church (De Haeresibus 40).’ But such people are heretics because they cut themselves off from the Church by alleging that those who, unlike themselves, marry and own property have no hope of salvation.” Christians For Freedom, Dr Alejandro Chafuen, Ignatius 1986, p 46].

those who claim that a market may truly only be free if government does not regulate it in any way do not truly understand the structure of a free, civil society. A free market requires government regulation precisely because, and as much as, it is necessary to protect that freedom. This protection includes such things as a justice system empowered to adjudicate contracts, for example.

Absolutely correct.

 

[Zoltan_Cobalt]

There are others who have posted comments that clearly demonstrate the confusion inherent in the terminology. A “free market” is probably a better term than “capitalism”, but those who claim that a market may truly only be free if government does not regulate it in any way do not truly understand the structure of a free, civil society. A free market requires government regulation precisely because, and as much as, it is necessary to protect that freedom. This protection includes such things as a justice system empowered to adjudicate contracts, for example.

That “capitalism” can be used in an evil fashion is self-evident: in a purely free market, one can find offered goods and services that should not be traded; one can find both slaves and prostitutes in a totally unregulated market. While one could make the amoral libertarian argument that a person should be allowed to sell themselves into slavery, or that persons should be allowed to offer any service, I sincerely hope most Catholics would agree that such goods and services should not be traded, and that it is government who is tasked with using its coercive power to prevent such exchanges.

A Free Market does not require government REGULATIONS. All that is necessary in a “free, civil society” are objective laws that apply to all equally and (as you correctly state) “a justice system empowered to adjudicate contracts”.

When the first regulation is leveled, a Free Market ceases to be Free and becomes a Mixed Market. The first government regulation breeds corruption. One person, company or corporation now has the ability to influence government to regulate a competitor out of business. This was the real purpose of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act.

The Free Market cannot work with slave labor. It was the agrarian, feudal South that maintained slavery. It was the industrial, Capitalistic North that wiped it out—as Capitalism wiped out slavery and serfdom in the whole civilized world of the nineteenth century.

Laissez-faire Capitalism is the only social system based on the recognition and protection of of individual rights and, therefore, the only system that bans force from social relationships. Slavery simply cannot exist in a Free Market society.

 

[Zoltan_Cobalt]

God did not ordain capitalism, communism, feudalism, or any other economic system or practice not found in the Bible. When Christ returns to physically establish the Kingdom of God on earth we will know what will be God-ordained and what will not. I suspect the system then will more closely related to the practices of the primitive church than what is permitted or obligatory today.

As such, I believe the following may be introduced:

1. A minimum standard of living will be guaranteed for everyone in the Kingdom.
2. Employment will be guaranteed for those able to work.
3. A lifetime limitation will be placed on the accumulation of wealth by any individual.
4. Equal pay for equal work will be mandatory.
5. The free flow of capital or anything of economic value between nations will be subject to restrictions.

Maintaining human life at a decent level will be much more important than unrestrained wealth creation.

The trouble with this concept is that it goes against man’s nature.

Man seeks what is best for him and his family. If a man can provide more for his family and make their life better…he will.

Man has to sustain his life by his own effort. The man who produces while others dispose of his product, is a slave.

1. A minimum standard of living will be guaranteed for everyone in the Kingdom.

Who sets the standard? Big Brother from “1984”

1. Employment will be guaranteed for those able to work.

Who will do the employing?

1. A lifetime limitation will be placed on the accumulation of wealth by any individual.

Then why try to do better than the common denominator? Human nature seeks rewards.

1. Equal pay for equal work will be mandatory.

Janitors and doctors at the same salary? Why be a doctor?

1. The free flow of capital or anything of economic value between nations will be subject to restrictions.

There goes the Third World.

 

[Seraphim73]

God did not ordain capitalism, communism, feudalism, or any other economic system or practice not found in the Bible. When Christ returns to physically establish the Kingdom of God on earth we will know what will be God-ordained and what will not. I suspect the system then will more closely related to the practices of the primitive church than what is permitted or obligatory today.

As such, I believe the following may be introduced:

1. A minimum standard of living will be guaranteed for everyone in the Kingdom.
2. Employment will be guaranteed for those able to work.
3. A lifetime limitation will be placed on the accumulation of wealth by any individual.
4. Equal pay for equal work will be mandatory.
5. The free flow of capital or anything of economic value between nations will be subject to restrictions.

Maintaining human life at a decent level will be much more important than unrestrained wealth creation.

Those things are impossible practically speaking. But beyond that in order to attempt to achieve them you have to be committed to the use of force.

1. If you are going to insure a minimum standard of living you can’t do that without first using force to take the means for that standard of living from someone and giving it to another.

2)You can’t guarantee employment unless you use force to coerce someone to hire another.

1. You can’t mandate equal pay without using force to coerce someone to pay more for labor than the laborer produces.
2. Restriction is by it’s very definition is coercion by force.

Socialism is by it’s very definition committed to the use of force. It doesn’t view individuals as independent persons with their own ideas, beliefs and aspirations. Individuals to be respected. It views them as objects to be forcefully manipulated to the detriment of one and the gain of another. There is nothing moral about it.

 

[andrewstx]

I generally refrain from using the term “capitalism” as it has become, thanks to many liberals who like to ban certain words, a very loaded term. I prefer to defend the concept of a free market. As Milton Friedman said, underlying the lack of belief in a free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. Any institution, government, Church, is subject to the influence of greed because its’ members are subject to the influence of greed.

Why do some people blame a corporation for seeking more profit when EVERY SINGLE MEMBER of that organization is seeking more of their own personal profit? How do you and your coworkers expect to get paid more if the company doesn’t make more?

Income inequality? really people? I don’t think the janitor at the hospital deserves to make as much as the doctor, that’s just my 2 cents.

We are called as individuals to support the needy, not called to send in a SWAT team to force someone to pay income tax to the IRS to support the needy. Early Christians volunteered their possessions to help the needy, they weren’t forced.

Income inequality is no good thing at all.
I have a friend who works at a hospital and the harder and more work someone does the less they earn. She started out as a CNA making little money and doing the lions share of the work. She got more education and worked her way up to technician. Every step the work goes down and the pay goes up. The CEO would not dream of touching a patient, let alone a bedpan.

He is paid a half million a year, for what? Hobnobbing with his fellow CEOs and searching ways to cut costs even if that means (and it does) worsening patient care.

Something is radically wrong there to say the least.

But on the bright side, it is not a Catholic hospital.

 

[Gold_Star]

Of course, none of these things are possible through human initiative alone. But we are not
talking about the limitations of human nature, or mutual toleration between believers and non-believers, in producing economic goods and services.

Christ will come as a law-giver at His second coming, and the laws He will reveal may be as new and unheard of as the laws of Moses were at Mount Sinai. The future Kingdom of God on earth has always been quite mysterious, probably because it has been beyond human imagination, just as Christianity was beyond the imagination of Judaism before the time of Christ.

 

[Zoltan_Cobalt]

Income inequality is no good thing at all.
I have a friend who works at a hospital and the harder and more work someone does the less they earn. She started out as a CNA making little money and doing the lions share of the work. She got more education and worked her way up to technician. Every step the work goes down and the pay goes up. The CEO would not dream of touching a patient, let alone a bedpan.

He is paid a half million a year, for what? Hobnobbing with his fellow CEOs and searching ways to cut costs even if that means (and it does) worsening patient care.

Something is radically wrong there to say the least.

But on the bright side, it is not a Catholic hospital.

I have a great idea…

Lets fire the CEO and give you friend his job at half his salary. That would cut costs by $250,000.00 and give your friend a nice raise.

 

[stinkcat_14]

I have a great idea…

Lets fire the CEO and give you friend his job at half his salary. That would cut costs by $250,000.00 and give your friend a nice raise.

That may very we’ll be an excellent idea. After all nobody really knows the marginal value of many CEOs.

 

[ThomasJMullally]

Brothers and sisters, I would like to point out an important problem that divides people of faith. It is the concept of that there are good guys and bad guys in economic and material issues. So we go around in circles blaming as “evil” either the government or the successful capitalists/ big corporations.

I think we can close the case, that they are both evil, and they are intertwined. Concentrations of power in the state and in the private sector are equally perverse and evil. While horrible wars, dislocations, degradation of the environment, financial calamities etc ar being put into motion and sold by an integral and compliant media, you have both the government and the titans of the private sector, happily sitting around the same table.

 

[Zoltan_Cobalt]

That may very we’ll be an excellent idea. After all nobody really knows the marginal value of many CEOs.

Being a bit more realistic…

Do you really think Andrewstx"s friend could handle the CEO job?

She started out as a CNA and worked her way up to technician. Could she handle a high level finance meeting? Can she be a good leader/manager? Would she know how to cut costs without impacting patient care…???

Andrewstx is suggesting that his friend be paid a salary equal to the CEO’s. In truth she is not worth $250,000.00 as a CEO. Her marginal value is exactly what she is being paid.

A CEO’s marginal value is also exactly what they are paid. A good CEO who can reduce costs and increase profits is worth every penny he earns. A marginal CEO who is not producing does not last long.

 

[Zoltan_Cobalt]

Brothers and sisters, I would like to point out an important problem that divides people of faith. It is the concept of that there are good guys and bad guys in economic and material issues. So we go around in circles blaming as “evil” either the government or the successful capitalists/ big corporations.

I think we can close the case, that they are both evil, and they are intertwined. Concentrations of power in the state and in the private sector are equally perverse and evil. While horrible wars, dislocations, degradation of the environment, financial calamities etc ar being put into motion and sold by an integral and compliant media, you have both the government and the titans of the private sector, happily sitting around the same table.

That would not happen in a true, pure Capitalist Society.

 

[stinkcat_14]

Being a bit more realistic…

Do you really think Andrewstx"s friend could handle the CEO job?

I don’t know the friend so I couldn’t say.

She started out as a CNA and worked her way up to technician. Could she handle a high level finance meeting? Can she be a good leader/manager? Would she know how to cut costs without impacting patient care…???

Most CEOs in the nonprofit sector cannot do these things either.

Andrewstx is suggesting that his friend be paid a salary equal to the CEO’s. In truth she is not worth $250,000.00 as a CEO. Her marginal value is exactly what she is being paid.

Is everyone always paid their marginal value? If everyone was always paid their marginal value then nobody would ever change jobs. We don’t know if she would be worth $250k as a CEO because we don’t know her skill set.

A CEO’s marginal value is also exactly what they are paid. A good CEO who can reduce costs and increase profits is worth every penny he earns. A marginal CEO who is not producing does not last long.

I agree that a good CEO is usually worth what he or she earns. But in a nonprofit where there are not financial returns it can be hard to distinguish a good CEO from a mediocre CEO.

For example, the president of our university system was paid $450k, was his marginal value $450k to the taxpayers. The truth is nobody really knows. We may well be better off without a system and having independent universities. He got the $450k because he knew how to play the game and hire the right compensation consultants.

 

[Seraphim73]

Income inequality is no good thing at all.

Why is it not a good thing?

He is paid a half million a year, for what? Hobnobbing with his fellow CEOs and searching ways to cut costs even if that means (and it does) worsening patient care.

Something is radically wrong there to say the least.

What’s wrong with it?

 

[Seraphim73]

I generally refrain from using the term “capitalism” as it has become, thanks to many liberals who like to ban certain words, a very loaded term. I prefer to defend the concept of a free market. As Milton Friedman said, underlying the lack of belief in a free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. Any institution, government, Church, is subject to the influence of greed because its’ members are subject to the influence of greed.

100 points for mentioning Milton Friedman! My hero!

http://www.worddesign.biz/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/milton-friedman-quotes-50002.jpg

 

[Seraphim73]

Brothers and sisters, I would like to point out an important problem that divides people of faith. It is the concept of that there are good guys and bad guys in economic and material issues. So we go around in circles blaming as “evil” either the government or the successful capitalists/ big corporations.

I think we can close the case, that they are both evil, and they are intertwined. Concentrations of power in the state and in the private sector are equally perverse and evil. While horrible wars, dislocations, degradation of the environment, financial calamities etc ar being put into motion and sold by an integral and compliant media, you have both the government and the titans of the private sector, happily sitting around the same table.

Corporations are not evil and neither is the government. A corporation can no more be evil than the keyboard I’m typing on now. What is a corporation? What is government? A corporation can’t be evil, only people can be evil. The problem is people are the product of the incentives created under whatever system they are operating under. Government incentivizes people to be inefficient and big government incentivizes corporations to pay to utilize that government to its’ advantage. People and people whether in the private sector or public sector and people will always as a group pursue their own individual interest.

 

[Seraphim73]

Being a bit more realistic…

Do you really think Andrewstx"s friend could handle the CEO job?

She started out as a CNA and worked her way up to technician. Could she handle a high level finance meeting? Can she be a good leader/manager? Would she know how to cut costs without impacting patient care…???

Andrewstx is suggesting that his friend be paid a salary equal to the CEO’s. In truth she is not worth $250,000.00 as a CEO. Her marginal value is exactly what she is being paid.

A CEO’s marginal value is also exactly what they are paid. A good CEO who can reduce costs and increase profits is worth every penny he earns. A marginal CEO who is not producing does not last long.

Let’s be totally honest. CEOs are paid as much as they are because that’s the market price for their services. The reason it is high is there are not a lot of people who can do they job and they produce enough wealth for their company to justify the salary. It’s basic high school economics, the law of supply and demand.

 

[stinkcat_14]

Let’s be totally honest. CEOs are paid as much as they are because that’s the market price for their services. The reason it is high is there are not a lot of people who can do they job and they produce enough wealth for their company to justify the salary. It’s basic high school economics, the law of supply and demand.

Actually to understand executive compensation you need a more advanced understanding of economics. It would be nice to think that perfect competition exists in the market for executives, but it actually does not. For example, one assumption of perfect competition is homogeneity of products or resources. The problem is that executives are not homogeneous, some are more competent than others. And it is not clear a priori who is competent and who is not. Even after hiring, determining the true marginal value of a CEO is difficult. Second, there is not perfect information in the market. Take the case of my buddy who ran the university system for $450k, that salary was based on a compensation consultant study that he recommended be done. It was called a “salary equity study” and guess what it found out he was underpaid. Of course, the study ignored data from a couple of neighboring states that had much lower salaries.

So just the working of competitive markets? Not always.

 

[ThomasJMullally]

I would like to say, “Defintely Not”. I do not think a human system for the distribution of goods and labor can be ordained. After all in the New Testament greed, envy, ambition, labor expoitation issues etc were all of paramount concern to Jesus. Not much has changed… how was the world portrayed in New Testament different than ours? Only in our power to physically destroy it.

The right-left divide is a distraction for people of faith, the concept that there are good guys and bad guys in economic and material issues. So we go around in circles blaming as “evil” either the government, or the successful capitalists/ big corporations. I think we can close the case, that there is evil in both, and they are intertwined. Concentrations of power in the state and in the private sector are equally perverse and evil. While horrible wars, dislocations, degradation of the environment, financial calamities etc are being put into motion (and sold to the lambs of society by an integral and compliant media), you have the politicians and bureaucrats and the titans of the private sector too, happily sitting around the same table.

 

[ThomasJMullally]

That would not happen in a true, pure Capitalist Society.

There is no pure society, it hasn’t happened since garden of Eden. The more you try to design one, the more you cause human suffering. Laws cause suffering. “Incentives” cause suffering. Some people are greedy, some are generous. You can’t make systems to compensate… only to exacerbate!

 

[Zoltan_Cobalt]

There is no pure society, it hasn’t happened since garden of Eden. The more you try to design one, the more you cause human suffering. Laws cause suffering. “Incentives” cause suffering. Some people are greedy, some are generous. You can’t make systems to compensate… only to exacerbate!

Then pick the one with the best track record, and go with that.

Pure Capitalism did more good for the human race than any other economic system…until it was corrupted by government and collectivism.