Should salaries be capped?

[vern_humphrey]

1937 These differences belong to God’s plan, who wills that each receive what he needs from others, and that those endowed with particular “talents” share the benefits with those who need them. These differences encourage and often oblige persons to practice generosity, kindness, and sharing of goods; they foster the mutual enrichment of cultures:

I distribute the virtues quite diversely; I do not give all of them to each person, but some to one, some to others. . . . I shall give principally charity to one; justice to another; humility to this one, a living faith to that one. . . . And so I have given many gifts and graces, both spiritual and temporal, with such diversity that I have not given everything to one single person, so that you may be constrained to practice charity towards one another. . . . I have willed that one should need another and that all should be my ministers in distributing the graces and gifts they have received from me.43

1938 There exist also sinful inequalities that affect millions of men and women. These are in open contradiction of the Gospel:

Their equal dignity as persons demands that we strive for fairer and more humane conditions. **Excessive economic and social disparity between individuals and peoples of the one human race is a source of scandal and militates against social justice, equity, human dignity, as well as social and international peace.***44

None of which is on point here – the Catechism does not say salaries should be capped. The Catechism obliges us to do what works – not to adopt the first cockamamie scheme that comes down the pike.

If we want to do something about high CEO salaries – have Congress repeal the laws that allow the corporate officers to over-rule the shareholders.

so is Greed

Glad you brought that up. The greed is not amongst us. The envy is. I seem to remember someone saying “cast the beam out of your own eye.”

 

[goofyjim]

Here we see the politics of envy at work – those who will not do the work to gain wealth are consumed with envy of those hard-working people who have earned more than they have, and demand their wealth be taken from them.

I think it’s a problem of inadequate catechesis – they have never learned that envy is one of the Deadly Sins.

Are you really saying that the executive at Circuit City works any harder than the sales guy on the floor? I don’t think so.

Yet there are the wealthy who are envious of the fact that the poor don’t pay taxes when it is in their legal and moral right to do so if their income is low enough.

 

[vern_humphrey]

This is getting to be quite an old Canard.

How many times have i said I like my job, and I get paid well enough?

But you envy those who make more – else why come down on the side that salaries should be capped?

I’m officially labeling this one a Red Herring.

And I’m officially labeling that as a tap-dance.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Are you really saying that the executive at Circuit City works any harder than the sales guy on the floor? I don’t think so.

“Hard work” is work I can’t do.

Roping and branding cattle takes a lot of muscle, but it isn’t “hard work” because I can do it. Hauling hay is miserable work, but it isn’t “hard work” because I can do it.

Running Microsoft may not take much muscle, nor be done in hot weather – but it’s “hard work” because neither you nor I can do it.

Yet there are the wealthy who are envious of the fact that the poor don’t pay taxes when it is in their legal and moral right to do so if their income is low enough.

Can you translate that into English?

 

[goofyjim]

“Hard work” is work I can’t do.

Roping and branding cattle takes a lot of muscle, but it isn’t “hard work” because I can do it. Hauling hay is miserable work, but it isn’t “hard work” because I can do it.

Running Microsoft may not take much muscle, nor be done in hot weather – but it’s “hard work” because neither you nor I can do it.

Can you translate that into English?

And you don’t think it is hard work to put up with the bs from customers on the sales floor who take their every frustration out on you? And then be told from the exec what company policies you have to follow in handling the situation? These guys get the short end of the stick from both creeps. Yes that’s right the average retail customer is a stuck up creep.

As for translating, envy goes both ways. It is a constant compalint here that some don’t pay their fair share of taxes. Yet those who don’t are often struggling just to pay the bills off a low income. So why complain?

 

[mapleoak]

Yes that’s right the average retail customer is a stuck up creep.

You just called everyone a creep!

 

[vern_humphrey]

And you don’t think it is hard work to put up with the bs from customers on the sales floor who take their every frustration out on you? And then be told from the exec what company policies you have to follow in handling the situation? These guys get the short end of the stick from both creeps. Yes that’s right the average retail customer is a stuck up creep.

If virtually anyone can do it, it isn’t “hard work.” If only a few people are able (or willing) to do it, that’s “Hard work.”

As for translating, envy goes both ways. It is a constant compalint here that some don’t pay their fair share of taxes.

Which has nothing to do with envy – it has to do with simple fairness.

Yet those who don’t are often struggling just to pay the bills off a low income. So why complain?

Because we can see that most of those people could be more productive if they were willing. They are taking some of their compensation in leisure, freedom from the cares of running a business and so on.

 

[goofyjim]

If virtually anyone can do it, it isn’t “hard work.” If only a few people are able (or willing) to do it, that’s “Hard work.”

Which has nothing to do with envy – it has to do with simple fairness.

Because we can see that most of those people could be more productive if they were willing. They are taking some of their compensation in leisure, freedom from the cares of running a business and so on.

You’ll never get it Vern.

 

[vern_humphrey]

You’ll never get it Vern.

No, you’ll never get it, Jim.

You’ll never understand that people are, by and large, paid for their abilities and accomplishments. If you or I could run a business like Circuit City or Microsoft, we would run such a business – and be compensated accordingly.

You’ll never understand that interference in the marketplace doesn’t automatically make things better for anyone.

You’ll never understand that as bad as you think your commercial bosses are, they can never do as much damage as your political bosses if you turn the economy over to them.

 

[steveandersen]

None of which is on point here – the Catechism does not say salaries should be capped.

Agreed.
I don’t think that the Church will ever advocate a specific regulation. That is not Her place.
She will just remind us to treat each other in a matter that recognizes the individual’s dignity and worth. (this applies to both the poor man and the CEO)

How that applies to social realities is up to us to figure out.

I provided the text from the CCC not to advocate a position but to point out that it is a complex matter.
We are obligated to recognize that inequalities are both a natural part of human existence but that they can also sometimes be sinful.

The Catechism obliges us to do what works

I thought it obligated us to do what is good

– not to adopt the first cockamamie scheme that comes down the pike.

Much of what we take for granted today in labor laws were once though of as cockamamie schemes. So personal incredulity at a specific regulation may not be the best way to oppose it.

Personally I think it is a bad idea. Things like this are best regulated by social and market pressures than regulations IMHO.

But there has to be some middle ground between a “comrade” CEO being paid the same as the mail boy and a robber Baron.

If we want to do something about high CEO salaries – have Congress repeal the laws that allow the corporate officers to over-rule the shareholders.

That might be good idea

Although wouldn’t that be a more matter for corporate by-laws though?

Glad you brought that up. The greed is not amongst us. The envy is. I seem to remember someone saying “cast the beam out of your own eye.”

I think we have ample supplies of both greed and envy.

I don’t think Jesus’ words were meant to stop us from offering criticism until we were personally flawless. That would take a while.

I own a business. I like to pay myself what I think I’m worth (or more accurately what the market will bear) but when times are tight the employees get paid before me. (Of course when times get good they don’t all get raises)
So yes there is a beam in my eye too
I just like to think that I’m trying to keep it small

 

[vern_humphrey]

And you don’t think it is hard work to put up with the bs from customers on the sales floor who take their every frustration out on you?

Been there, done that, so nope. I can do it, so it isn’t “hard.”

And then be told from the exec what company policies you have to follow in handling the situation?

Been there, done that, so nope. I can do it, so it isn’t “hard.”

These guys get the short end of the stick from both creeps. Yes that’s right the average retail customer is a stuck up creep.

Jim, you sound like a misanthrope. Stop hating. Give your fellow man the respect he deserves.

As for translating, envy goes both ways. It is a constant compalint here that some don’t pay their fair share of taxes. Yet those who don’t are often struggling just to pay the bills off a low income. So why complain?

It isn’t envy to say some people don’t work hard enough, don’t save enough, don’t invest enough. It isn’t envy to say many who could not only pay their own way, but contribute a bit to those who cannot, simply won’t shoulder their share of the burden.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Agreed.
I don’t think that the Church will ever advocate a specific regulation. That is not Her place.
She will just remind us to treat each other in a matter that recognizes the individual’s dignity and worth. (this applies to both the poor man and the CEO)

How that applies to social realities is up to us to figure out.

I provided the text from the CCC not to advocate a position but to point out that it is a complex matter.

As is economics a complex matter – and things like “soak the rich” or “cap salaries” or “set price controls” just don’t work.

We are obligated to recognize that inequalities are both a natural part of human existence but that they can also sometimes be sinful.

And the greatest sin is to allow poor children to be under-educated in second- and third-rate schools.

Much of what we take for granted today in labor laws were once though of as cockamamie schemes. So personal incredulity at a specific regulation may not be the best way to oppose it.

Many labor laws turned out very badly indeed. For example, shipyard workers get double workman’s compensation – which is why you see so few American-built ships on the high seas these days – and American ships once dominated the merchant trade.

Personally I think it is a bad idea. Things like this are best regulated by social and market pressures than regulations IMHO.

That is exactly my point – we don’t need to introduce** new **regulations, we need to scrap some old regulations – most specifically those that allow corporate officers to over-ride the shareholders.

But there has to be some middle ground between a “comrade” CEO being paid the same as the mail boy and a robber Baron.

Get rid of the law that allows corporate officers to hold off “hostile takeover artists” and the share holders will be able to do that.

That might be good idea

Although wouldn’t that be a more matter for corporate by-laws though?

It is federal law that allows corporate officers to over-ride the shareholders. We need to at least repeal that law.

If we still have the “problem” of CEOs being paid “too much,” then call the share holder’s attention to their responsibilities.

I think we have ample supplies of both greed and envy.

I don’t think Jesus’ words were meant to stop us from offering criticism until we were personally flawless. That would take a while.

But He never said, “Use government force to make others whom you envy do as you want them to do.”

I own a business. I like to pay myself what I think I’m worth (or more accurately what the market will bear) but when times are tight the employees get paid before me. (Of course when times get good they don’t all get raises)
So yes there is a beam in my eye too
I just like to think that I’m trying to keep it small

Which is what we should all do.

But the title of this thread, “Should salaries be capped?” indicates someone with a very big beam trying to deal with a very small mote.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

This is getting to be quite an old Canard.

How many times have i said I like my job, and I get paid well enough?

I’m officially labeling this one a Red Herring.

It’s the usual right-wing tactic. Label any questioning of their ideology as communist, class-warfare or class-envy. It’s a straw man argument.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

None of which is on point here – the Catechism does not say salaries should be capped. The Catechism obliges us to do what works – not to adopt the first cockamamie scheme that comes down the pike.

So, the Catechism calls for untilitarianism and the notion that the ends justify the means. Got it.

If we want to do something about high CEO salaries – have Congress repeal the laws that allow the corporate officers to over-rule the shareholders.

I have a better way…apply the principle of subsidiarity to the corporate world as well as to the government. Break up the corporations, entities that are created by charter issued by the state governments, so they can operate in only one state and/or do only one thing.

Glad you brought that up. The greed is not amongst us. The envy is. I seem to remember someone saying “cast the beam out of your own eye.”

ROFLOL!!! Greed is not among us?

 

[vern_humphrey]

So, the Catechism calls for untilitarianism and the notion that the ends justify the means. Got it.

Wow! You do have some strange ideas! And you couple that with a willingness to attack other people for your own imagination.

I have a better way…apply the principle of subsidiarity to the corporate world as well as to the government. Break up the corporations, entities that are created by charter issued by the state governments, so they can operate in only one state and/or do only one thing.

That’s a terrific idea! Let’s kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.

ROFLOL!!! Greed is not among us?

About like child molesting is not among us.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

Wow! You do have some strange ideas! And you couple that with a willingness to attack other people for your own imagination.

How is taking your own words and pulling out the essence a personal attack?

That’s a terrific idea! Let’s kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.

So, it’s more about what works (utilitarianism) than what the Church teaches (principle of subsidiarity).

About like child molesting is not among us.

So, you’re in denial. Remember, it’s not just a long river in Africa.

 

[rlg94086]

Originally Posted by vern humphrey forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons/viewpost.gif
None of which is on point here – the Catechism does not say salaries should be capped. The Catechism obliges us to do what works – not to adopt the first cockamamie scheme that comes down the pike.

LCMS_No_More:

So, the Catechism calls for untilitarianism and the notion that the ends justify the means. Got it.

You are mischaracterizing Vern’s argument. Capping salaries is an acceptable response to the Catechism, but it is not the only response. This is not a matter of the “the ends justify the means.” It is a matter of determining which good ‘means’ will result in a good ‘end.’

 

[BamaRider]

Yanno I’ve been on here lurking this thread for a couple of days, had most of my say a few pages back, but I keep getting one impression- some folks are so full of doom and gloom and pessimissim I dunno how they getta outta bed in the mornings.

“The man” is keeping me down, CEO make too much money at the expense of the “little guy” blah, blah. The current rallying cry is “the gap is getting wider between the haves and have nots, we gotta do more to give everyone a chance.” That always seems to be some kinda of govt handout, at the expense of punishing successs with a brutal tax code. Some people look at the pie as only so big, I look at as infinitely growing, and we all get the chance to jump in for a slice.

Before I joined the fire dept I lived my life in a world of pessimistic squalor, but when I listend to God and followed his path, my life was full of blessings and optimism. Dang I love gettin up in the mornings.

I was just a firefighter for 26 years, so none of the rich stuff applies to me, but God blessed me EVERYDAY and still does. I did something I loved for a job, I couldn’t wait to go to work, heck I’da done it for free, the paycheck was just something to keep my wife happy.

I now live off my pension, and my wife is a sales clerk, togther we do ok, but some (the dems) think us rich?? LOL

I help my fellow citizens in my way, I don’t need the govt passin laws and regulations to make me comply to redistribute as it sees fit.

I retired at age 49, with a lifetime pension check. The biggest decesions I make each day is where I’m gonna ride my motorcycles, when I’m gonna run, and where I’m gonna eat lunch.:extrahappy: I got my piece of the pie, for sure with God’s help. I don’t take it for granted. Now I dunno about y’all, but I ain’t got time to sit around and moan and groan about what the CEO at Dupont is makin, I don’t care, I just want the govt to leave me alone, just like I want it to leave Bill Gates alone, we are in this together.

 

[vern_humphrey]

How is taking your own words and pulling out the essence a personal attack?

Never again can you complain about someone “taking your own words and pulling out the essence.”

So, it’s more about what works (utilitarianism) than what the Church teaches (principle of subsidiarity).

Never again can you complain about someone “taking your own words and pulling out the essence.”

The Church does not object to the Hippocratic Oath, “First of all, do no harm.” The means do not justify the end.

So, you’re in denial. Remember, it’s not just a long river in Africa.

I’ve traveled on that river, all the way to the First Cataract.

But using the idea that we are not perfect to accuse everyone of every possible sin is hardly an honest debating tactic.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

Never again can you complain about someone “taking your own words and pulling out the essence.”

Never again can you complain about someone “taking your own words and pulling out the essence.”

How quaint.

The ends do not justify the means is the same as the means do not justify the end. You do know that…it’s akin to mathematics…you know: a+b=b+a

I’ve traveled on that river, all the way to the First Cataract.

Sounds interesting. I’ve been on the short version in Anaheim. The one with the two scariest animals in all the jungle: the African bull elephant and his scarier mother-in-law. (Points given to the first person who gets the reference)

But using the idea that we are not perfect to accuse everyone of every possible sin is hardly an honest debating tactic.

While I have misinterpreted a fact in the past (the USCCB vs the Church refusing to accept CA’s voter guide), you posted an obvious and intentional non-truth (dare I say lie?) by insinuating that people who dare to bring up issues other than abortion are doing so to justify a pro-choice-on-abortion-vote.

[/QUOTE]