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

[stinkcat_14]

It’s being used to increase short term consumption without a view to the long term. To quote the Apostolic Exhortation, “Today’s economic mechanisms promote inordinate consumption.”

Is that a supply thing or a demand thing? I mean capital flows to wherever it can get the best return. Our materialistic society values stuff now over wellbeing in the long run. But that is because consumers want and are willing to pay for this stuff. If we bought less stuff, less capital would be used to produce it.

 

[Carlan]

Sometimes it seems that our work is fruitless, but mission is not like a business transaction or investment, or even a humanitarian activity…it is something much deeper, which escapes all measurement. - Evangelii Gaudium 279

I listen to Papa Francisco and believe in his wisdom for he is the Vicar of Christ on this earth. Peace, Carlan

 

[CrossofChrist]

Is that a supply thing or a demand thing? I mean capital flows to wherever it can get the best return. Our materialistic society values stuff now over wellbeing in the long run. But that is because consumers want and are willing to pay for this stuff. If we bought less stuff, less capital would be used to produce it.

It’s a cultural thing. If we better followed Jesus’ example we wouldn’t have this problem.

Perhaps we should listen to the insight of Keynes:

“I see men free to go back to some of the most solid and true principles of religion and traditional virtues such as these: the love of money is despicable and some … really walking on the path of virtue and deep wisdom … will prefer the good to the useful. We shall honor those who can appreciate the lilies of the field that they do not sow nor spin. The commitment to do to others will continue to have a reason, even when it has ceased to have the right to do to their own advantage”

 

[CrossofChrist]

I listen to Papa Francisco and believe in his wisdom for he is the Vicar of Christ on this earth. Peace, Carlan

 

[Peebo]

Unfortunately there are Catholics (and others) on the extreme right of politics in this country who show more religious belief in the Constitution and how it should be interpreted and applied that it has become their Holy Bible…I doubt if Catholics in other countries have the same problems as some do here in accepting certain social issues the church promulgates without making it a political issue…

 

[dmelosi]

Are you including abortion in that?

 

[gnjsdad]

HERE is the “controversial” section in context. It is in the middle of the Pope’s document. Not at the top. But the “trickle-down” reference seems to be an aside comment on a greater issue.

vatican.va/holy_father/francesco/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20131124_evangelii-gaudium_en.html

If it is aimed at a Government in power at this time – I’m not sure which country that would be.

While the Pope would never direct such a comment at one country in particluar (in this case, there IS no one particular country; the Pope is attacking the ideology of capitalism and globalization), might there be at least an infinitesimally small chance that he is referring to the beating heart of predatory capitalism, aka Wall Street, nourished and breast fed by the “socialist” Obama, housed in the United States of America?

CaptFun:

Our personal responsibility to care for others is delegated rather than accepted. While the “trickle-down” adjective seems to throw all the light on one economic world view in section 54, “the excluded are still waiting …” would seem to throw a more immediate challenge toward those non-trickle-down economies that are in power NOW and still have the same problems.

The Pope didn’t refer to “non-trickle down economies” as constituting a major issue, perhaps because such economies are being exploited by the type he DOES name.

CaptFun:

But the Pope’s message is only incidentally an economic one (though it gives counsel there).

“Incidentally” economic???

Other than that, Mrs Lincoln, how was the play?

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

There have been several responses to Pope Francis recent letter but this is one of the best so far:

nationalreview.com/corner/365004/pope-francis-and-poverty-samuel-gregg

Perhaps the simplest criticism is of his naive treatment of Islam:

Some, for example, will single out the pope’s remark that “authentic Islam and the proper reading of the Koran are opposed to every form of violence” (253). As one of the most authoritative Catholic commentators on Islam, Pope Francis’s fellow Jesuit Samir Khalil Samir (who is no knee-jerk anti-Muslim), writes in his 111 Questions on Islam (2002), Westerners who assert that groups like the Taliban are acting in a manner contrary to the spirit of Islam “usually know little about Islam.” In the Egyptian-born Jesuit’s view, “On the sociohistorical level, from the Qur’an onward, the ordinary meaning of jihad is unequivocal. [It] indicates the Muslim war in the name of God to defend Islam.” Later in the same book, Father Samir underscores that, alongside one tradition in Islam of somewhat limited tolerance towards Jews and Christians (polytheists and atheists aren’t extended the same consideration), there is an equally valid tradition that “prefers the verses” in the Koran and the sunna “that encourage violence.” Both, the Beirut-resident priest adds, are legitimate Muslim readings of Islam’s view of violence. Ergo, we — and Islam — have a problem.

Simply put, our pope is demonstrably and gavely wrong on this matter as even a cursory review will reveal. The most generous interpretation is that the pope is expressing a wish or preferene or seating himself as the supreme imam of Islam and thereby issuing an authoritative teaching.

His pronouncements on economics are more complicated but equally troubling insofar as they advance a straw man argument: that unfettered capitalism is anywhere to be found. It is sad, indeed, to see the supreme teacher of the world advancing an argument by means of fallacy.

Prominent among these is the pope’s condemnation of the “absolute autonomy of markets” (202). This, he firmly believes, is at the root of many of our contemporary problems, not least because it helps rationalize an unwillingness to assist those in need.

If, however, we follow Evangelii Gaudium’s injunction (231–233) to look at the realities of the world today, we will soon discover that there is literally no country in which markets operate with “absolute autonomy.” In most Western European countries, for instance, governments routinely control an average of 40 percent of their nations’ GDP. In many developing countries, the percentage is even higher. How much more of the economy do we really want to put into the state’s hands? Is there no upper limit? In private correspondence with the British-Australian economist Colin Clark, for example, even John Maynard Keynes suggested that the figure of “25 percent [of GDP] as the maximum tolerable proportion of taxation may be exceedingly near the truth.”

Nor does there appear to be any consciousness in Evangelii Gaudium of just how regulated most of the world’s economies are. The rules and regulations that apply, for instance, to economic life in North America and Western Europe are fast approaching the status of beyond counting. The situation in most developing countries is hardly any better. So extensive is the range and scope of regulation that, as I’ve argued elsewhere, it is now creating genuine rule-of-law problems in many countries. The amount of regulation affecting developed Western economies is now so great that it is likely that even good judges with no interest in judicial activism are issuing rulings that are ad hoc and arbitrary in nature.

 

[DlandFan06]

I guess someone should contrast what Pope John Paul II said to what Pope Francis on Capitalism. Pope John Paul II had a different view on it than Francis does.

 

[alexandratm]

Much of the poverty in the U.S. is not a lack of food and housing, but instead cultural and spiritual poverty.

If you look at neighborhoods in the U.S. that are considered impoverished, such as housing projects, you’ll see a breakdown of the family and morals, single parenthood, gang violence, functional illiteracy, drugs, and lack of personal sanitation.

You generally won’t see hunger. And, the housing by world standards is enviable, in many cases. It’s the neighbors that most of us wouldn’t want to live with.

1 in 5 children go to bed hungry each day in America.

16 million children in America do not get the food they need.

62% of America’s teachers see some of their students come to school hungry each day.

Urban areas are termed food deserts, because there is no real food to be found. Some charities have repurposed ice cream trucks to bring produce into these areas, because there are kids that can’t even identify an apple.

You may not see hunger, but it exists. It may even be in your neighborhood. There’s a reason food pantries are struggling to keep up with demand right now.

 

[dmelosi]

1 in 5 children go to bed hungry each day in America.

16 million children in America do not get the food they need.

62% of America’s teachers see some of their students come to school hungry each day.

Urban areas are termed food deserts, because there is no real food to be found. Some charities have repurposed ice cream trucks to bring produce into these areas, because there are kids that can’t even identify an apple.

You may not see hunger, but it exists. It may even be in your neighborhood. There’s a reason food pantries are struggling to keep up with demand right now.

I think hunger in the U.S. has a completely different meaning than in 3rd world countries.

 

[CrossofChrist]

Pope John Paul II had a different view on it than Francis does.

Not really.

 

[Country_Gal]

1 in 5 children go to bed hungry each day in America.

16 million children in America do not get the food they need.

62% of America’s teachers see some of their students come to school hungry each day.

Urban areas are termed food deserts, because there is no real food to be found. Some charities have repurposed ice cream trucks to bring produce into these areas, because there are kids that can’t even identify an apple.

You may not see hunger, but it exists. It may even be in your neighborhood. There’s a reason food pantries are struggling to keep up with demand right now.

frac.org/initiatives/hunger-and-obesity/are-low-income-people-at-greater-risk-for-overweight-or-obesity/

Childhood Poverty and Obesity

The Relationship Based on General Trends

Obesity rates increased by 10 percent for all U.S. children 10- to 17-years old between 2003 and 2007, but by 23 percent during the same time period for low-income children (Singh et al., 2010a). This national study of more than 40,000 children also found that in 2007, children from lower income households had more than two times higher odds of being obese than children from higher income households.

Rates of severe obesity were approximately 1.7 times higher among poor children and adolescents in a nationally representative sample of more than 12,000 children aged 2 to 19 years (Skelton et al., 2009).

In California, higher community poverty rates were strongly associated with higher childhood overweight rates (Drewnowski et al., 2009).

 

[Luigi_Daniele]

The bottom 50% of this country pay little to no taxes and are the ones who make-up the vast amounts receiving government benefits. Just how much does the Holy Father suggest we should raise the tax level to prevent the middle class/wealthy from living comfortably while maximizing the amount given to those who do not contribute? Ever since Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty, this country has spent over 16 *trillion *dollars and the poverty rate has only decreased marginally.

France, Italy, Spain and Greece have been spending money like drunken sailors on social programs and now that the bill has come due, cannot afford to pay it. Is this what the Holy Father recommends? We were told that in the past 20 years, the extreme poverty rate in the world was cut in half because of a thriving economy. Apparently, a rising tide *does *raise all ships. Like it or not, rich people are the ones with the capital and the means to make things work. Hitting them with crippling taxes is not going to be the solution to eliminating poverty in the world. And I think it naive of the Holy Father to think that governments, who are the reason for the economic troubles of recent, are the ones to make things right. Pope Francis should keep in mind that his experiences with massively corrupt third-rate South American countries doesn’t extend to the entire world.

Perfect post. With all due respect to the Holy Father, unless he is speaking of Latin American oligarchies only, it seems (note that: seems) that he is absolutely mistaken and rejecting the papal teachings of the last 125+ years.

 

[alexandratm]

frac.org/initiatives/hunger-and-obesity/are-low-income-people-at-greater-risk-for-overweight-or-obesity/

Yes, and? My response was to your assertion that people are not going hungry in America. I am well aware of the correlation between poverty and obesity. The food desert issue is but one facet of that problem.

The fact that we have an obesity problem in America does not mean that people are not going hungry.

 

[Country_Gal]

Yes, and? My response was to your assertion that people are not going hungry in America. I am well aware of the correlation between poverty and obesity. The food desert issue is but one facet of that problem.

The fact that we have an obesity problem in America does not mean that people are not going hungry.

Yes, the root of the problem in the projects is not hunger, as I’ve already said. The problem is now partially fueled by the culture of dependency, entitlement, immorality, indolence, and incompetent parenting.

 

[alexandratm]

Yes, the root of the problem in the projects is not hunger, as I’ve already said. The problem is now partially fueled by the culture of dependency, entitlement, immorality, indolence, and incompetent parenting.

Okay, so those 16 million children going hungry each day in America, their problem isn’t a lack of food, it’s a lack of pull themselves up by their bootstraps. Got it.

 

[Luigi_Daniele]

Yes, the root of the problem in the projects is not hunger, as I’ve already said. The problem is now partially fueled by the culture of dependency, entitlement, immorality, indolence, and incompetent parenting.

And single parent homes. The rate of poverty in single parent homes is much, much higher than in married households.

 

[Luigi_Daniele]

Okay, so those 16 million children going hungry each day in America, their problem isn’t a lack of food, it’s a lack of pull themselves up by their bootstraps. Got it.

Source of that statistic, please?

 

[alexandratm]

Source of that statistic, please?

Various charities like Feeding America and No Kid Hungry cite to it. I believe the underlying source comes from Coleman-Jensen, A., Nord, M., & Singh, A. (2013). Household Food Security in the United States in 2012. Table 1B.USDA ERS.

Edited to add: Here’s the link to the entire report. Lots of statistics there regarding not only childhood hunger, but all hunger in America.

ers.usda.gov/publications/err-economic-research-report/err155.aspx#.UpZCveIhO6g