Is the redistribution of wealth and resources just to alleviate poverty?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Robert_Sock
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I would tend to agree bureaucracies unintentially keep people from achieving and giving ina way that cripples rather than help.

I remember…our first vocation is to enter into the life of the Holy Trinity, and the other is to live out the corporal and spiritual works of mercy in Christ’s name, not through any government.

If anything, we are supposed to render our taxes that are due.
 
Robert_Sock said:
Why do so many people favor the well to do, and remain rather uncaring about the poor? I find this to be odd, and I would have thought that most people would naturally stick up for the poor, given they are so powerless, and are forced to work like dogs. I pray for them.

Gal 5:13 (Douay Rheims)
For you, brethren, have been called unto liberty: only make not liberty an occasion to the flesh, but by charity of the spirit serve one another.

LOVE! ❤️
Click to expand...
Rewards for excellence and achievement make sense. The more rewards achievers get the more people want to achieve. Rewards for failure leads to more failure. If I can get money for failure, why would I want to do anythng else?

Do we want our communities to sink into the morass of universal failure? That will happen if there is no incentive to do otherwise. We see that happening on government subsidized Indian Reservations. As long as they get something for nothing, why would they want anything else?
 
nmgauss said:
Do we want our communities to sink into the morass of universal failure? That will happen if there is no incentive to do otherwise. We see that happening on government subsidized Indian Reservations. As long as they get something for nothing, why would they want anything else?
Click to expand...
The Indians did have a rich self-sufficient culture that rewarded hard work. Then western society took away their land, dismantled their society, and forced them to either give up being who they were or join in the unnatural stunted parody of a society we call the Reservation. It is hardly fair to blame the social ills of that structure we imposed on them on the Indians’ lack of initiative.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
The Indians did have a rich self-sufficient culture that rewarded hard work. Then western society took away their land, dismantled their society, and forced them to either give up being who they were or join in the unnatural stunted parody of a society we call the Reservation. It is hardly fair to blame the social ills of that structure we imposed on them on the Indians’ lack of initiative.
Click to expand...
The Indians also engaged in theft and wars. Stealing horses was popular in the West. Several western tribes had wars over hunting grounds. The history of New England reveals wars between the tribes. The pilgrims in Massachusetts helped the local tribe in its dispute with a neighboring tribe. Young men were encouraged and trained to become warriors.
Some tribes were wiped out by warfare.

Then there is effect that alcohol has had. A substantial portion of men in Indian Reservations are alcoholics.

Then there are the stable Indian Nations in the West, such as the Hopi and Navajo.
 
nmgauss said:
Rewards for excellence and achievement make sense. The more rewards achievers get the more people want to achieve. Rewards for failure leads to more failure. If I can get money for failure, why would I want to do anythng else?

Do we want our communities to sink into the morass of universal failure? That will happen if there is no incentive to do otherwise. We see that happening on government subsidized Indian Reservations. As long as they get something for nothing, why would they want anything else?
Click to expand...
Yeah, if you want to live a society governed by greed and competition! People are not naturally inclined to either of these vices, and they are bad for one’s health. They breed stress, and who wants to live in a very stressful society?

LOVE! ❤️
 
Robert_Sock said:
Yeah, if you want to live a society governed by greed and competition! People are not naturally inclined to either of these vices, and they are bad for one’s health.
Click to expand...
I think people are probably naturally inclined to both greed and competition. After all, would we have amateur softball leagues if people weren’t inclined towards competition?
They breed stress, and who wants to live in a very stressful society?
Click to expand...
LOVE! ❤️
Click to expand...
If people don’t want to live in a competitive stressful society, then how come we have so many people crawling under the fence to get in?
 
stinkcat_14 said:
I think people are probably naturally inclined to both greed and competition. After all, would we have amateur softball leagues if people weren’t inclined towards competition?
Click to expand...
Competition is taught and encouraged. It does not occur naturally.
stinkcat_14 said:
If people don’t want to live in a competitive stressful society, then how come we have so many people crawling under the fence to get in?
Click to expand...
I think you know the reason for that.

LOVE! ❤️
 
nmgauss said:
The Indians also engaged in theft and wars. Stealing horses was popular in the West. Several western tribes had wars over hunting grounds. The history of New England reveals wars between the tribes. The pilgrims in Massachusetts helped the local tribe in its dispute with a neighboring tribe. Young men were encouraged and trained to become warriors.
Some tribes were wiped out by warfare.

Then there is effect that alcohol has had. A substantial portion of men in Indian Reservations are alcoholics.

Then there are the stable Indian Nations in the West, such as the Hopi and Navajo.
Click to expand...
…none of which refutes my point about the unfairness of criticizing lack of initiative on the Reservation.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
…none of which refutes my point about the unfairness of criticizing lack of initiative on the Reservation.
Click to expand...
Several years ago, I drove through the two reservations of the Northern Cheyenne and the Crow which are located adjacent to each other in Montana. The contrast between the two was striking. The Northern Cheyenne had attractive houses brightly colored and there was evidence of sawmill activity. The Crow had substandard housing with trash strewn about. Somehow I got the impression that being indolent was not popular in the Northern Cheyenne, but was tolerated in the Crow.
 
LOVE should pervade in all our social dealings, not competition.

LOVE! ❤️
 
nmgauss said:
Several years ago, I drove through the two reservations of the Northern Cheyenne and the Crow which are located adjacent to each other in Montana. The contrast between the two was striking. The Northern Cheyenne had attractive houses brightly colored and there was evidence of sawmill activity. The Crow had substandard housing with trash strewn about. Somehow I got the impression that being indolent was not popular in the Northern Cheyenne, but was tolerated in the Crow.
Click to expand...
Sorry, you are still not addressing my point.
 
stinkcat_14 said:
One can compete and still have love. There is nothing wrong with honest competition.
Click to expand...
Except those, like me, who hate the stress that competition creates. Can you imagine a society that is relatively cooperative? I can.

LOVE! ❤️
 
LeafByNiggle said:
…made in post #202, last sentence, and repeated in post #207. You really should read the postings you are replying to.
Click to expand...
Since you don’t want to be specific, I have to surmise that your point is about the effects of being put on a reservation in stunting initiative. I agree that that may put restrictions on a society that was not successful in resisting pressure from outside powers, but that should not stifle initiative. It would certainly change the rules of the game. A resilient people when being given lemons would look to make lemonade. But if your tradition is to not be inventive, then you pretend that you can make a living in your new surroundings in the same way as in your old surroundings.

My father’s forbears came from the steppes of Russia where cabbage and wheat were the mainstays. Then whole communities moved to California. In their new home, they could not survive on growing cabbage and wheat, so they learned how grow grapes on irrigated land. Most who stayed were eventually sent to Siberia where they died out.

My mother’s forbears came from a small Atlantic island where fishing was the mainstay. Then her father moved to the West and learned how to be a sheep herder and a dairyman.
 
nmgauss said:
Since you don’t want to be specific, I have to surmise that your point is about the effects of being put on a reservation in stunting initiative. I agree that that may put restrictions on a society that was not successful in resisting pressure from outside powers, but that should not stifle initiative. It would certainly change the rules of the game. A resilient people when being given lemons would look to make lemonade. But if your tradition is to not be inventive, then you pretend that you can make a living in your new surroundings in the same way as in your old surroundings.

My father’s forbears came from the steppes of Russia where cabbage and wheat were the mainstays. Then whole communities moved to California. In their new home, they could not survive on growing cabbage and wheat, so they learned how grow grapes on irrigated land. Most who stayed were eventually sent to Siberia where they died out.

My mother’s forbears came from a small Atlantic island where fishing was the mainstay. Then her father moved to the West and learned how to be a sheep herder and a dairyman.
Click to expand...
The “hardships” you describe are nothing compared to having your country invaded, your culture forceably dismantled and all the best resources your people used to have taken away from them. And then when the conquering people give back a few crumbs to the vanquished, you have the temerity to call it a government subsidy and to blame them for their inability to thrive in such an artificial culture. The problem is not the few crumbs given back to the vanquished. The problem is that they were vanquished in the first place. The victors created the problem, so they have at least some minimal moral responsibility to mitigate the damage that they did.

The Nazis did something similar when they confined the Jews to ghettos and then used the resulting degradation that they themselves had caused to show how the Jews were a filthy race.
 
stinkcat_14 said:
If people don’t want to live in a competitive stressful society, then how come we have so many people crawling under the fence to get in?
Click to expand...
Because the alternative is not between the competitive stressful society and something else, but between one where you compete stressfully to get ahead, versus doing so just to survive.

ICXC NIKA.
 
John Paul II considered the free market with a strong moral voice the best economic system.

I am now beginning to read GK Chesterton’s series on ‘Distributism’ that falls within Catholic social teaching.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top