Pope Francis denounces ‘trickle-down’ economic theories in critique of inequality

  • Thread starter Thread starter Birdpreacher
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Brendan said:
I think that, when implemented, you will find a lot of objections from both sides. Cut backs in ‘Green Energy’ subsidies and Ethanol subsidies will be opposed by the Left (and farmers) and other, like Defense research, will be opposed by the Right.

You will have people on the left decrying that wind and solar should be subsidized to reduce green house gasses and our dependence on foreign oil

On the right, cuts in defense R&D will be decried as reducing our military’s ability to remain powerful.

Central states will object to the elimination of farm subsidies

Everybody has their favorite issue and like to see it subsidized.
Click to expand...
And therein lies the problem… it’s the good old “would somebody think of the children?!?”
 
Elizabeth502;. said:
Dear Elizabeth: Oh how perceptive. You have hit the nail on the head. I think most of our so-called liberals and progressives are people who are quite well off. A friend once asserted to me that the democrats were the “party of the working class”. But for charity, I could have laughed him to scorn. The people wearing the blue shirts are far more likely to be center or right or center. It is more than common to find the Obama signs on the spacious front lawns of the well to do. It would make an interesting sociological study. Is it due to the left-leaning influence of the education establishment? Is it some vague sense of guilt for having been born to money? Or, is it just human nature? The French Revolution was not started by the common people but by their betters in the urban professional class. The Sans Culottes were just used as needed to storm the Bastille and so on.
Click to expand...
 
Brendan said:
Given that this term relates directly to an Argentine economic incident that more directly relates to potential negative effects of globalization, this priest felt that it was HIGHLY unlikely that the Pope was referring to 'Reganomics".
Click to expand...
The question of mistranslation has been raised before and, at a minimum, the inclusion of an American idiom into the translation of a document written in Spanish by a person not intimately familiar with American economic debates is … suspect. There is good reason to believe this is merely a minor example of a major problem, which is the English translations of church documents.

Here is the relevant passage and the “official” Vatican translation:54. In this context, some people continue to defend trickle-down theories which assume that economic growth, encouraged by a free market, will inevitably succeed in bringing about greater justice and inclusiveness in the world. This opinion, which has never been confirmed by the facts, expresses a crude and naïve trust in the goodness of those wielding economic power and in the sacralized workings of the prevailing economic system.
Here is the same passage translated by someone who actually works as a Spanish-English translator and has done this sort of thing before (for documents written by Abp Bergoglio).54. In this context, some defend “spillover” theories which suppose that all economic growth, for which a free market is [most] favorable, by itself brings about greater equity and social inclusion in the world. This opinion, which has never been confirmed by the facts, expresses a crude and naïve confidence in the generosity of those [people] who wield economic power and in the sacralized mechanisms of that ruling economic system.
It is worth noting that using “trickle down” for “spillover” is hardly the only significant difference. The phrase used in the official version is “encouraged by a free market” while in the translator’s version it is “*for which a free market is [most] favorable”. *The discrepancy between those two clauses indicates one of two things: either one of the translators is grossly incompetent or the mistranslation is deliberate. Note also that the words “by itself” which appear in the unofficial version are simply missing from the official one. Anyone who speaks Spanish should be able to go to the Spanish version of the pope’s document and see for himself weather that phrase is or is not in the original … and decide for himself which translation is more accurate.

I don’t speak a word of Spanish so this is an opportunity for anyone to demolish my argument simply by checking the original (Spanish) document.

For those interested in the complete (unauthorized) translation (which is not complete because it’s a really long document) can find it here: jmgarciaiii.blogspot.com/

Ender
 
Crossbones said:
“Corporations are people, my friend.” Great quote from a great candidate.

If there wasn’t significant benefits to being a corporation,then there wouldn’t be corporations. So taxing them seems appropriate, as there is a societal cost to these benefits.
Click to expand...
By definition though, a corporation doesn’t really pay any taxes, it simply acts as a tax collector by passing the costs on the consumer.

The real benefit to the government is that of hiding the taxes from public view.

An example is the Obamacare tax on medical supplies. That tax is collected by the medical supply companies in the form of higher prices for their products on the hospitals, who in turn, pass that on as higher overall medical costs.
 
Brendan said:
By definition though, a corporation doesn’t really pay any taxes, it simply acts as a tax collector by passing the costs on the consumer.
Click to expand...
Actually, there are three possible ways that corporations pay taxes. They could pass the cost onto the consumer, the investors could end up with a lower rate of return than without the tax, or workers might get paid less, or some combination of the three. It is a particularly perplexing questions as to who pays the corporate income tax.
 
Brendan said:
Already been done with the last Farm Bill. An end to the farm subsidies would effectively double the price of milk.

thehill.com/homenews/house/321731-dems-farm-bill-strategy-threaten-to-double-milk-prices-
Click to expand...
And isn’t that free markets at work? Perhaps doubling the price of milk is not necessarily a bad thing. Yes, groceries for the poor would be more expensive, but that might be a short term thing as demand and supply even out.

There will be other affects, such as on the price of corn and sugar as well. Our agricultural policies haven’t lead to the best outcomes for healthy food anyway. Perhaps we should subsidize rice more.
 
Ender said:
The question of mistranslation has been raised before and, at a minimum, the inclusion of an American idiom into the translation of a document written in Spanish by a person not intimately familiar with American economic debates is … suspect. There is good reason to believe this is merely a minor example of a major problem, which is the English translations of church documents.

Here is the relevant passage and the “official” Vatican translation:54. In this context, some people continue to defend trickle-down theories which assume that economic growth, encouraged by a free market, will inevitably succeed in bringing about greater justice and inclusiveness in the world. This opinion, which has never been confirmed by the facts, expresses a crude and naïve trust in the goodness of those wielding economic power and in the sacralized workings of the prevailing economic system.
Here is the same passage translated by someone who actually works as a Spanish-English translator and has done this sort of thing before (for documents written by Abp Bergoglio).54. In this context, some defend “spillover” theories which suppose that all economic growth, for which a free market is [most] favorable, by itself brings about greater equity and social inclusion in the world. This opinion, which has never been confirmed by the facts, expresses a crude and naïve confidence in the generosity of those [people] who wield economic power and in the sacralized mechanisms of that ruling economic system.
It is worth noting that using “trickle down” for “spillover” is hardly the only significant difference. The phrase used in the official version is “encouraged by a free market” while in the translator’s version it is “*for which a free market is [most] favorable”. *The discrepancy between those two clauses indicates one of two things: either one of the translators is grossly incompetent or the mistranslation is deliberate. Note also that the words “by itself” which appear in the unofficial version are simply missing from the official one. Anyone who speaks Spanish should be able to go to the Spanish version of the pope’s document and see for himself weather that phrase is or is not in the original … and decide for himself which translation is more accurate.

I don’t speak a word of Spanish so this is an opportunity for anyone to demolish my argument simply by checking the original (Spanish) document.

For those interested in the complete (unauthorized) translation (which is not complete because it’s a really long document) can find it here: jmgarciaiii.blogspot.com/

Ender
Click to expand...
As the Italians say, “traduttore, traditore” (loosely meaning “The translator is a traitor.”)
 
If you are a free marketeer offended by Pope Francis’s Evangelii Gaudium (“The Joy of the Gospel”) — in which he critiqued “deified” market capitalism and attacked income inequality — ask yourself: What should the leader of the worldwide Catholic Church say about economics in 2013? Should he take a victory lap over free enterprise’s defeat of Communism as if it were 1993?
Click to expand...
Pope Francis offers his sharp challenge in the wake of a deep global recession whose aftermath continues to plague advanced economies. At the same time, globalization and technology have created both amazing wealth and growing inequality within nations around the world. A recent Goldman Sachs analysis, for instance, finds a long-term “hollowing out” in the U.S. labor market: The past three recessions brought deep cuts in middle-wage jobs that weren’t made up during subsequent recoveries. Nor was the pope’s message directed just — or even primarily — at the U.S., not when South America is afflicted by crony capitalism, Europe by youth unemployment, Asia by income extremes, and Africa by deep poverty.
Click to expand...
nationalreview.com/article/365192/what-should-pope-say-about-capitalism-james-pethokoukis
 
Thanks Abyssinia, that’s what I’ve been saying all along: the Pope is saying nothing new.

Our misuse of certain common terminology (like Marxist), contributes to the problem. The ideological divide is so marked these days, I doubt the Pope could even say “good morning” without that becoming an argument between right and left about who is 100% right and who is 100% wrong. Of course, nothing he ever says is directed as a correction to “my side” 😉
 
seekerz said:
Thanks Abyssinia, that’s what I’ve been saying all along: the Pope is saying nothing new.

Our misuse of certain common terminology (like Marxist), contributes to the problem. The ideological divide is so marked these days, I doubt the Pope could even say “good morning” without that becoming an argument between right and left about who is 100% right and who is 100% wrong. Of course, nothing he ever says is directed as a correction to “my side” 😉
Click to expand...
Seekerz, it is totally appropriate to discuss what the Pope meant by his words, what or where “unfettered capitalism” is in the world (if anywhere). Also, its fair and appropriate to raise the question of the translation of the Pope’s words into the loaded phrase of the American left: “trickle down” economics. The ideological divide is marked indeed - and I notice that you are often occupy the same place on that divide while complaining about how marked it is.

Ishii
 
seekerz said:
Thanks Abyssinia, that’s what I’ve been saying all along: the Pope is saying nothing new. …
Click to expand...
To what are you referring, the near-Marxist English mistranslation or his actual words?

If the latter, you are correct. If the former, you are dead wrong.
 
The posts from the left from the very beginning of this thread took the words of the pope to mean that he was at war with capitalism. Everything that has happened since follows from those kind of posts.
 
KSU said:
Elizabeth, did Jimmy Aiken mention the mistranslation of the Pope’s statement?
Click to expand...
Unfortunately my listening was interrupted. (I was driving to and fro.) He may well have; I just didn’t hear that part. Or perhaps some reference to that is on his blog.
 
ishii said:
Seekerz, it is totally appropriate to discuss what the Pope meant by his words, what or where “unfettered capitalism” is in the world (if anywhere). Also, its fair and appropriate to raise the question of the translation of the Pope’s words into the loaded phrase of the American left: “trickle down” economics. The ideological divide is marked indeed - and I notice that you are often occupy the same place on that divide while complaining about how marked it is.

Ishii
Click to expand...
You are correct. It is totally appropriate to discuss whether all recent Popes have been taking the time to comment on something (unfettered capitalism) that might not even exist in the world…I personally find that a very intriguing question.
 
KSU said:
To what are you referring, the near-Marxist English mistranslation or his actual words?

If the latter, you are correct. If the former, you are dead wrong.
Click to expand...
It is interesting to see, after a line of (how many?) popes, that in the 21st century, translation of the pontiffs words has become such a quandary! Well, Jesus spoke Aramaic, which was then translated into…Greek/Latin…English - so how can we KNOW what he said about the poor and our attitudes to possessions? Hah, methinks that’s why we have been given a Church and a pope…
 
Darryl1958 said:
The posts from the left from the very beginning of this thread took the words of the pope to mean that he was at war with capitalism. Everything that has happened since follows from those kind of posts.
Click to expand...
There is simply no doubt that the pope’s words were mistranslated in English, and only slight doubt that it was deliberate. You get a more accurate version of the document by entering the passages into Google Translate than by reading the “official” translation.

Ender
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top