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

[Ridgerunner]

So what if the Pope did say “trickle-down”? Politics and ideology are dispensable - faith, on the other hand is not.

I would still stand with the Pope, because I am yet to see “trickle-down” economics work to substantially change poverty levels anywhere. Human beings, perhaps by virtue of being human, will not voluntarily give up significant amounts of their possessions to other human beings unless they predict some personal gain from doing so, OR they actually strive to live a faith that demands that sort of giving.

One thing is for sure; he didn’t say the words “trickle down”. That’s an American idiomatic political expression, and I imagine the word or expression he actually used was in Latin; perhaps Spanish. Eventually we’ll know what the various interpretations are. Might be the same in meaning, might not be.

If the translation intended for American readers is incorrect in the use of that term, the writer has done the Pope a great disservice.

Being an American, as I am, I have never actually seen “trickle-down” economics tried until recently. If by that term the left (being the only consistent users of the idiom) means not taxing the middle class much more than at present, and pursuing policies that benefit billionaires almost exclusively. I have not seen that until the current administration.

 

[seekerz]

It is really clear from this thread that a lot of mass attending Catholics in the western world are very detached to what the Holy Father is saying and doing. Pope Francis spends most of his time with the unfortunate and advocating for them, while it seems that many on this forum prefer to spend all the time arguing against the Pope’s views, complaining about everything, and defending themselves. In short, exactly what the Pope was targeting in his extortion.

To actually hear somebody say something like “I wish the Pope would stick to spiritual matters and forget all this stuff” is a frightening amount of arrogance.

Some of The Church’s faithful in the west are so absorbed into Americanized ways of doing things, and general wordiness, that they are almost doing more harm than good.

It’s not only that, some people I listen to seem to identify an absolute “right to prosper economically” regardless of what’s happening to people in the same system. An economic system that enriches everyone seems to be the goal - you know - one that multiplies the loaves and the fishes, so everyone can have as much as they need without anyone having to give up their share. Problem is, if you read the account of that miracle (John 6) carefully, it began with one boy *giving all that he had *in the face of apparently overwhelming need, at a time when the disciples were suggesting that the only way to meet the need was for the people in crowd to go fend for themselves. Ah, the faith of a child…

 

[SMGS127]

How about everybody chip in instead of nearly half the populace paying nothing?

The majority of that 47% are seniors, disabled, and military veterans. In addition, everyone still pays sales tax, SSI tax, and Medicare tax. The 47% stat is one of the most abused falsehood statistics in the country.

 

[Crossbones]

I don’t have any suggestions.Just pointing out that the idea the rich don’t pay their fair share is rather specious considering 47% pay nothing at all

Of course, that’s not true. Most pay local sales tax, local income tax, property taxes, state income taxes, states sales tax, federal social security tax, federal medicare tax, federal gasoline taxes, etc., etc.

 

[catholictiger]

question for you guys why does it seem like every time a pope makes a statement on economics he is seen as anti-freemarket, anti-capistist, and a liberal. It can be hard to be a Catholic and try to defend the views of the Pope when he is so misinterpreted.

 

[seekerz]

One thing is for sure; he didn’t say the words “trickle down”. That’s an American idiomatic political expression, and I imagine the word or expression he actually used was in Latin; perhaps Spanish. Eventually we’ll know what the various interpretations are. Might be the same in meaning, might not be.

If the translation intended for American readers is incorrect in the use of that term, the writer has done the Pope a great disservice.

Being an American, as I am, I have never actually seen “trickle-down” economics tried until recently. If by that term the left (being the only consistent users of the idiom) means not taxing the middle class much more than at present, and pursuing policies that benefit billionaires almost exclusively. I have not seen that until the current administration.

Guess what’s needed then, is not catch phrases but actual descriptions, so we all are talking the same language - and using that same language to discuss the Pope’s comments.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Just how do those of us in the top 50% have a stranglehold on the wealth?

You don’t.

Every last one of them dies. His/her estate is then divided among a number of people, then they die and it’s further divided, and so on. The Walton heirs are all very wealthy people, but not one of them is anywhere near as wealthy as Sam Walton was. And the Walton heirs’ heirs won’t be nearly as wealthy as Sam’s children, and so on.

Is Bill Gates still the world’s richest man? He’ll die too. Before he dies, he will give a lot to foundations that promote the causes he believes in. His wife will inherit his fortune without paying any taxes, but then his heirs will get walloped.

People on the left seem to think “the rich” take it to their tombs like some pharoah burying gold. But even most of the pharoahs got looted.

 

[Country_Gal]

The majority of that 47% are seniors, disabled, and military veterans. In addition, everyone still pays sales tax, SSI tax, and Medicare tax. The 47% stat is one of the most abused falsehood statistics in the country.

LOL, no Welfare mamas, gangbangers, baby daddies, slack jaw potheads, or meth head crazy people then?

 

[irishpatrick]

Two words can be used to describe the current state of material disorder in the USA:
**
BLACK FRIDAY**

There is nothing wrong with Capitalism, unless it is taken to its extreme, which we in the USA have done. Creating/buying goods, and then selling those goods for a profit, is a very good thing for both sides of the deal. It is when we seek insanely high profits, or when we do not care about anything but the bottom line, or when we do not allow human concerns to enter into the equation–that is when the Capitalism train leaves the track.

Capitalism, when used properly, increases personal freedom, increases personal dignity, increases the height of a nation’s economic engine that drives a push for more jobs, etc. Capitalism, when used improperly, leads to a loss of freedom, loss of dignity, and a loss of jobs. This is why companies and corporations (and this very nation) needs to permanently focus on God–only in that can we keep a healthy Capitalism on the tracks safely offering hope and help to all who would avail themselves of its produce.

Black Friday, especially its newest version of starting on Thanksgiving, is a symptom of a greater sickness–a nation devoid of real morals that only come from God/Jesus.

 

[catholictiger]

I completely agree with this

 

[Ridgerunner]

Guess what’s needed then, is not catch phrases but actual descriptions, so we all are talking the same language - and using that same language to discuss the Pope’s comments.

It seems that term has drawn the most attention in the U.S., and precisely because it’s a pejorative political idiomatic expression. But the whole context of what the Pope said is not in the same vein as the expression is usually taken in this country when uttered.

There will be further explanations, further translations. Then we’ll know better perhaps. In the meantime, as I said, if some translator of the original picked that term as a substitute for a less pejorative, less partisan original, then the translator has done the Pope, and the Church as a whole, a huge disservice.

Frankly, it is a bit difficult for me to believe a Pope who is very much into evangelization would deliberately choose what is almost a swear word in the U.S. against some people. Maybe he really did ask the translator “What’s a word the left in the U.S. uses as a slur against economic conservatives; a word they never use themselves? I would like to throw an insult like that at them. Who cares about evangelizing those people? I would just as soon alienate them”.

Now, maybe the Pope doesn’t care about converting people like Rush Limbaugh or the people who listen to him, or the people who don’t listen to Limbaugh but don’t like having that term thrown at them like the insult it really is. But I profoundly doubt that.

 

[Ridgerunner]

The majority of that 47% are seniors, disabled, and military veterans. In addition, everyone still pays sales tax, SSI tax, and Medicare tax. The 47% stat is one of the most abused falsehood statistics in the country.

The elderly are by far the wealthiest single demographic group in this country; mostly because they own their own homes and have some savings. So, what do you want to do about them?

 

[stinkcat_14]

The elderly are by far the wealthiest single demographic group in this country; mostly because they own their own homes and have some savings. So, what do you want to do about them?

I would start by taxing their imputed rent.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imputed_rent

I also would take away the larger standard deduction they get. And make Social Security benefits fully taxable.

 

[Vasian]

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.

A most excellent post!

 

[SuperLuigi]

Just how do those of us in the top 50% have a stranglehold on the wealth?

You’re not being “fair”.

 

[stinkcat_14]

You’re not being “fair”.

I would argue that there are countries where the wealthy do seem to have a stranglehold on the wealth, but the US is not one of them.

 

[SuperLuigi]

So with corporations posting record earnings and profits; where are all of these jobs you speak of,

We ask the democrats that all the time. Remember the “summer of recovery” and “shovel-ready” jobs?

Whatever happened to those blue states spending 80 million dollars to create a couple hundred temporary jobs?

Obama’s in office and Harry Reid leads the Senate. The treasury is buying bonds at $ 85 billion a month.

Investors won’t invest unless there is confidence in the market.

There is no confidence—literally—with democrats running the country and with ObamaCare.

why hasn’t any link ever been shown between coddling the rich and job creation, and why hasn’t there been any movement of wealth except even greater consolidation of it in the top 50%? The

Coolidge and Reagen showed it works.

economic golden age under Clinton proved that you can tax the rich at higher rates

Rates weren’t that high under Clinton, who governed from the center. I remember the democrat media making a stink because he wanted to work with the GOP (unlike Obama) to end the era of big government. Clinton also got a boost from the dot.com bubble.

and still create an astounding number of new jobs with greater wealth distribution to boot. That has never been shown to be the case with tax cuts for the rich and corporate welfare.

Easy. Reagen cut the marginal tax rates from 70% to around 20%. He created 16 million new jobs.

That is a tough sell when describing a society which defines prosperity largely by how much debt a person can incur before drowning in red ink rather than how much money they earn.

I don’t know of anyone or any society other than the left-wing Keyesnians who believe you can spend your way out of a debt problem.

We could talk about reforming the system in terms of tort law and having universities dump fluff and losing money sending people to bowl games, as well as cutting government programs that are often useless and corrupt and closing military bases instead of being the world police, but there are too many whiny, spoiled, pampered Americans who think they are entitled to everything.

And that would mean less votes for the DNC and the RINOs of the world who “bring home the bacon”.

 

[SuperLuigi]

I would argue that there are countries where the wealthy do seem to have a stranglehold on the wealth, but the US is not one of them.

You got that right!

Of course, because progressive philosophy is based on personal selfishness, they have to advance the narrative that America is a mean, rotten place and only advanced itself by stepping on others and stealing the resources of the world.

 

[billcu1]

You got that right!

Of course, because progressive philosophy is based on personal selfishness, they have to advance the narrative that America is a mean, rotten place and only advanced itself by stepping on others and stealing the resources of the world.

I prefer the term “regressive” to progressive myself.

 

[billcu1]

You got that right!

Of course, because progressive philosophy is based on personal selfishness, they have to advance the narrative that America is a mean, rotten place and only advanced itself by stepping on others and stealing the resources of the world.

The government seems to be getting more and more of a hold. I have read that some have said from sources I am not sure of that we incarcerate more persons than any other country. Maybe because there’s so many laws and everything now is against the law and criminal prosecution is big business. Some people love to be the victim.