Oh, stop it, Jim. If He earned a living at His earthly father’s side, using tools (the means of production) which they owned, and selling His products in a competitive environment, He was a capitalist.
Monopolies, of course, are anti-capitalist.
Did I say that?
Now let me ask you this – suppose you had the heart attack? What would you pay for a helicopter to take you to the emergency room? (Hint: They’ll charge a lot more than $200.)
Let’s bring up what you said:
I was not putting words in your mouth, so don’t accuse me of such. You said what a willing buyer and a willing seller agree to is fair. I provided an example of a willing buyer and seller, now you are saying you are wrong?
While he lived and worked in a capitalist society he would not subscribe to any earthly ideals which is waht all these are, capitalism, socialism, communism, they are all limited earthly viewpoints. Jesus could fill any of them but I prefer simply to see him as my savior. I suppose your view is that he taught the only way into the kingdom is through capitalism. Wellthat would be wrong.
The example you provided was a monopoly. In light of this statement…
I’m not sure what you are trying to prove, stinkcat_14.
If you see an example of fiscal conservatism in real life, point it out to me and I’ll tell you if it’s Christian or not. I haven’t seen a fiscal conservative in years.
The point was, that I wasn’t putting words in is mouth. His initial statement was that any deal between a willing buyer and a willing seller is considered fair. I came up with a transaction which according to his original comments would have been considered fair. If he would have been clearer in the first place, he could have accused me of putting words in his mouth. But he said that whatever a buyer and seller agree on is fair. He said nothing about market structure. I was the one who had to correct him on that.
A generosity-committed fiscal conservative would require only one thing of those who pass well-intentioned laws for the poor, viz. accountability. This means that (1) the funds dispensed to the truly needy reach their intended recipients and (2) that the funds to those recipients be used for addressing the true needs of those .
Please do not misrepresent Government Responsibility. Charities and charity furnish only partial needs of those in true need. Food stamps are essential for those without adequate food, like myself. My foodstamps have been cut to $20 to $137 monthly, because of current federal administration. Can of Pork and Beans supper, instead of $1 TV dinner. “Health Care” of USA is universally ranked one of worst in world of advanced countries, in results, because is focused on subsidizing thousands of for profit ‘healthcare’ businesses with tax dollars. Yet Americans pay twice as much per capita for healthcare as any other country in world, with terrible results. USA infant mortality survivability has dropped to only about 43rd in world. Best healthcare systems in world, without bias, are National Health care systems like France at half the per capita cost. And are millions more uninsured now, than 8 years ago, with vastly higher spending on HMO’s and the like. Charity can cover very small percent of misnomered “social” needs essentials like Life, Health, Food, Housing. True Christianity like Catholic Church teach the principal that Government is for those essentials that individuals and groups can not furnish. Such as National comprehensive health care, with copayments appropriate, instead of more than twice as expensive very heaviliy beaurocratic controlling healthcare businesses, now subsidized. Please do not distort or misrepresent the roll of govermnent. Vivat JesuNo.
The responsibility to help the poor and sick lies with the individual and voluntary organizations through charity.
Charity has 5 major advantages over government programs: 1) It give graces to the donor 2) It is more efficient/less waste and bureaucracy 3) the government can’t impose its ideology on the programs (i.e. funding for planned parenthood). 4) Taxes have a distortionary effect and make the economy less efficient, while charity does not, 5) charities can screen out those who are not truly in need, but are only taking advantage.
God Bless
The government is not responsible for the healthcare of it’s citizens. The US Constitution clearly lists the powers and responsibilities of the federal government. National healthcare is not one of them.
The Catholic Church has no official teaching on any form of government.
No, I’m saying you are wrong – because you did not provide an example of a willing buyer and seller. You provided an example of a buyer **under threat of death **in an unlikely situation.
What you prefer is irrelevant. He was a carpenter, and hence both a capitalist and an entrepreneur.
And he left that business to become a preacher of the good news. So much for being a capitalist.
A poor man, with no hope of escaping his situation, could not afford healthcare, nor afford insurance… So, he applied to the government for free healthcare and thus he had his healthcare put on the government’s tab. Socialist view right?
(1) Why are you denying the "Social Responsibility" taught by the Catholic Church? Was Initiated by Our Lord himself: feed the starving, cure the ill, help widows, those in jail. (2) I studied the Constitution in Catholic schools. Is General Agenda of government masterpiece. Responsibility cited is To Ensure the Right to Life, Liberty, persuit of happiness. Where is subsidizing businesses, wealthiest in the Constitution? It is not the Form of Government, but what Government Does. Pls see above on Social Responsibility teaching of Our Lord and His ChurchGoofyjim, I think you are showing symptoms of OSAS.