Socialism and Catholicism

[StudentMI]

Though I know he’ll be too extreme for many in his advocacy of free markets, I came across this quote from Hans Hermann Hoppe yesterday and wanted to share.

Declaring everybody a co-owner of everything solves the problem of differences in ownership only nominally. It does not solve the real underlying problem: differences in the power to control.

 

[HarryStotle]

Though I know he’ll be too extreme for many in his advocacy of free markets, I came across this quote from Hans Hermann Hoppe yesterday and wanted to share.

Declaring everybody a co-owner of everything solves the problem of differences in ownership only nominally. It does not solve the real underlying problem: differences in the power to control.

You mean all the people in China do not co-own all assets nor equally share in the power to control?

Whodda thunk it?

I must admit something seemed suspicious when it was reported that there were more billionaires in China than in the US, by a large margin.

Perhaps if Bernie Sanders wants to redistribute the wealth of billionaires he ought to do so in China, where the supposed Communist/Socialist leadership are ostensibly totally on board with the distribution of wealth. Perhaps Bernie could teach Xi J(name removed by moderator)ing a thing or two about socialism. Maybe something was missed in the translation of Das Kapital into Chinese?

 

[Metis1]

Some seem to rather conveniently forget that I posted that ALL countries today have what we call a “mixed economy”, thus NO country today is totally capitalistic or socialistic. Sweden has more of the latter versus us here in the States, and it has served them quite well as my relatives will tell ya. However, there will always be complaints about how X should be done better or more efficiently.

To put it another way, I have studied their overall system over many years, and I much prefer theirs over ours any day of the week. However, my immediate family is all here, thus I have no intention of moving there with my extended family.

It’s a highly compassionate system that offers much security with its cradle to grave protection, and I do accept the fact that higher taxes are the price one has to pay living there. They could have become like us here in the States, but they have chosen not to. Money, to me, was never a high priority because, if it was, I certainly wouldn’t have gone into education.

 

[Metis1]

BTW, when the former finance minister in Sweden was asked how they managed to get out of the 80’s-90’s recession, his answer was two words: :Higher taxes". If one has studied macro-economics, one should be able to understand how and why that worked for them.

 

[NoelFitz]

At present it seems the state in the US will contribute trillions in tax payers’ money to save failing companies owned mainly by a handful of wealthy individuals. In the final analysis do the people govern, (government of the people by the people), not a handful of very rich oligarchs?

Where the free market has failed again, can capitalism or socialism support the people?

Both Republicans and Democrats agree the state needs to interfere to save America, the Republicans by giving multimillionaires and billionaires vast amounts of money and the Democrats by supporting ordinary US workers.

Which is closer to Catholicism?

… I saw the prosperity of the wicked. For they suffer no pain; their bodies are healthy and sleek. They are free of the burdens of life; they are not afflicted like others. (Ps 73:3b-5)

For the scripture says, “You shall not muzzle an ox when it is threshing,” and, “A worker deserves his pay.” (1 Tim 5:18)

 

[StudentMI]

If one has studied macro-economics, one should be able to understand how and why that worked for them.

I’ve read a lot about macro and micro. To simply say high taxes brought them out of it is way too simplistic. If he said that it showed a misunderstanding on his part as well.

 

[Metis1]

Since he was the economic minister who was the main organizer for the recovery, I think he well knew what he was talking about and why.

Some people tend to think that tax money simply floats off into thin air, or something like that, whereas tax money well spent may actually be more effective than private investing since it can be p(name removed by moderator)ointed to places that get more bang for the busk, such as infrastructure spending for example. Also, benefits for the poor tend to be more effective than for the wealthy because the poor tend to spend a higher percentage of their money locally, which is where we would want most growth to occur as it works its way up the supply chain. Etc.

 

[Metis1]

Which is closer to Catholicism?

Since Jesus in the Sermon On the Mount, for just one example, emphasized sharing and helping those in need, it certainly isn’t the social Darwinism that precipitated laissez faire capitalism. Matter of fact, this is why the Church did not endorse capitalism back in the 17-1800’s because there were pretty much no safety nets. It took these and the development of trade unions to finally get the Church’s conditional approval of capitalism.

 

[StudentMI]

You’re committing the fallacy Frederic Bastiat pointed out almost two hundred years ago, of ‘that which is seen and that which is not seen.’ In short, one sees the immediate effect of redistribution but you don’t see the jobs that weren’t created due to the initial taxation, the investments that never took place, the capital formation that never took place etc.

 

[Metis1]

Nice try but that simply is not the case as business is created by investment money whether it comes from the private or public sector, and tax money becomes investment money if spent properly.

I hate to use this as an example, but if fits the point: Because of the Treaty of Versailles, Germany was in terrible financial shape, but what the NAZI’s ended up doing is to pump money into their economy through massive government spending, which ended up ramping up employment and making Germany the #1 economic and military power in all of Europe, and we know what that led to.

We also here in the States saw the Obama administration’s stimulus package help bring us out of the Great Recession, and now we see the Trump administration using basically the exact same technique right now to counter the rising economic crisis. Yes, this is deficit spending, which can create its own problems down the line, but like the Swedes proved, increases in taxes can and have helped recovery and provide more potential benefits.

The reality is in the results, and we have seen what the Swedes, the Germans, and what American administrations have done that also have a proven record.

Anyhow, this is the last word for me as I have other things to take care of.

 

[StudentMI]

That addresses none of Bastiat’s argument. The only way your point holds up is if you take into account deficit spending under the context of modern monetary theory (MMT), and not as redistribution through taxes. Which unfortunately comes with its own problems.

 

[HarryStotle]

At present it seems the state in the US will contribute trillions in tax payers’ money to save failing companies owned mainly by a handful of wealthy individuals. In the final analysis do the people govern, (government of the people by the people), not a handful of very rich oligarchs?

You forgot a couple of points.

1. Those large companies employ — and therefore provide gainful employment and earned incomes to — hundreds of thousands of people. Sure, let’s just cut all of those jobs in the economy and let all those hundreds of thousands return to hunting and foraging.
2. A great deal of that money is going to small and medium sized companies that make up the largest proportion of the economy.

Sure, it is very simple to depict in simplest terms part truths with emotionally charged rhetoric, but, it seems to me, pragmatic wisdom requires that we look at issues fully and without prejudice — even prejudice against large corporations.

I am fully on board with looking into where and how large corporations use their wealth and power to manipulate the political system in their favour — crony capitalism — but again, I suspect those same wealthy elites would salivate at the opportunity to manipulate a socialistic political system where those with much more centralized power would be very easy to identify and manipulate.

Socialism (centralization of power) is a disaster waiting to happen because of the potential for consolidating control that information technologies provide to those in power. The best we can do as “the people” is find ways to decentralize power as much as possible while remaining viable as a nation and economy.

I would be happy with looking at how inordinately large corporations can be viably broken into less powerful entities without losing jobs for people, but that would require politicians to be for the people and not for the interests of those large corporations.

And please don’t feed me that the Democrats are that party. The Democrats are paid and manipulated by the largest of the global corporations precisely because the Democrats are fully on board with globalism — which is just another name for removing all barriers to the mega-wealthy to completely dominate the economies of every nation by dismantling national sovereignty.

 

[NoelFitz]

Hi Harry,

Many thanks for your long and balanced reply to me.

My views are changing now. I did see the individualism and greed of multimillionaires and billionaires and the poverty of many in the new gig economy. But since Covid-19 emerged, when I am more isolated at home and looking at media from all around the world, I am hugely impressed with the fellowship of so many in so many different countries, bringing food and support to isolated elderly and sick people, and generally supporting the common good.

In the past, over 50 years ago, I worked in NJ with an international company and have very happy memories of my time in the US.

On balance both extreme capitalism and extreme socialism are condemned by the church. When I was in school learning about the social teaching of the church atheistic socialism was condemned, but the emphasis was on condemning the atheistic tendencies.

In the past large corporations were split, such as Standard Oil, A T & T and General Motors-DuPOnt. Perhaps it is time for more huge corporations to be split.

I am grateful for all participating in this thread, as it has been robust, but fair and courteous. Some have disagreed with my views, but I have not been personally attacked.

Thanks and may CAF continue to discuss Catholic values, while allowing freedom of opinion within Catholicism.

God bless us all.