The Government of Distributism

  • Thread starter Thread starter alcuin18
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
tafan2 said:
That would not work. What you are saying is that we would simply live with inflation (very high inflation) and every so often reduce the money supply drastically. Even if we could, very painfully, get through those few years of inflation, it would actually make inflation worse, as no one would have any incentive to save.
Click to expand...
Just imagine all the loopholes that would be created for special interests
then exploited.
 
Theo520 said:
Ridiculous, many people can’t work or work at full capacity. The govt programs work and are generally targeted at people in need of assistance.
Click to expand...
Then, maybe the issue is an economy that doesn’t pay enough for workers (relative to living costs as well as being able to save for emergencies/retirement) nor provide plentiful opportunities (actually we do have record openings but rather a mismatch between workers and openings but even then, what about the fact that number of openings despite highs pales the number of those in poverty (6-7 million vs 30-40 million in poverty (granted some are children, disabled and elderly but even then, that’s a large number that looks more intimidating considering the poverty line might not even cover the monthly rent in many areas)?
 
I asked in another topic about this, but this one seems more active so I’ll try here also. I’ve noticed an uptick in discussion of distributism lately (not just here). Did something happen recently to put it into larger focus?
 
Something to consider: people who are not looking for work and are not working are not counted as unemployed.
 
Last edited:
JSRG said:
I asked in another topic about this, but this one seems more active so I’ll try here also. I’ve noticed an uptick in discussion of distributism lately (not just here). Did something happen recently to put it into larger focus?
Click to expand...
Never before has so much, been held in the hands of so few, and some are seeing a tipping point, the result of which, is terrifying.
 
hvizsgyak said:
As I said before, a third party entity would keep things in check and make sure companies don’t abuse their payroll system.
Click to expand...
This “third party entity” of which you speak is what concerns me.

Will this be a person? A committee? WHO decides who gets to be the “third party entity”? Will every city and town have their own “third party entity” who understand what life is like in that area of the country and what the people’s hopes and dreams are? Or is the “TPE” a federal entity at the highest level of government? Or is the “TPE” a document like the U.S. Constitution that requires a plethora of lawyer-types to interpret it and a federal police force to enforce it?

I am really really hesitant to allow someone who has no connection to a workplace/company to dole out the money based on “worth of the person.” At least with a company, if workers don’t like what they’re receiving from the company, they can organize and protest, unionize, start a public campaign against the Scrooge-like CEO and the company’s Board of Directors, and/or QUIT and find another company, at the same time excoriating the company to everyone they have contact with so that the company will suffer the consequences of being a bad place to work. It happens all the time–we can see companies, especially small companies, start up, treat people poorly, and fail!

Also, frankly, not everyone IS equal. I’m guessing that everyone here knows someone (possibly a close relative) who is shiftless and lazy in spite of having good mental and physical health, good parents, and enough education to qualify them for a trade or a profession.

What will happen to those people? Will a distributist economic system pay them anyway, even though they manage to sit on their butts and literally do nothing to earn their keep?

Finally, I have a problem with any system of economics that is managed by the system of government. There are too many examples, including the U.S., of government-run economies that are disasters. Certainly basic safety regulations and penalties are needed, and certainly companies must obey the nation’s laws (no murder of employees allowed!). But to let our government control every company–not sure that will work out well for anyone except government opportunists. Not sure this will even work with our current system of government as defined by the U.S. Constitution.

I think that people who are in need should be helped to achieve their highest potential lifestyles through churches and secular charities, not a system of economics that doesn’t reward human initiative and competition. I do not resent the wealthy–I admire them for working so hard and accomplishing so much! I admit that I simply do not want to work that hard just to have more money.

As for those wealthy people who don’t seem to ever work–I think that idea is a myth. And I think that the “lazy person” who complains about not having money but isn’t willing to work is a reality in the U.S. and we would do well to recognize this reality before we start messing around with an economic system that works well for so many of us.
 
Last edited:
Yes, I admit I am not an economist. There are many factors that will need to be ironed out in this economic plan. Hopefully, an economist who is sympathetic to the needs and struggles of the poor (and even the middle class) would help make it work better. For this reason, this is why I get frustrated with our economic and political system. The people who the system is working great don’t want to do anything to help others in need by correcting/fixing the system (they have their happiness, everybody is just being lazy and they need to work harder). Sorry, that’s not the case for many people struggling here. Many run into many problems that were not foreseen. You have to be poor and struggling to appreciate the poor’s life.

I’ve got more to say but got to go for now. But for now stop being a naysayer, you sound like the climate control people who think the can predict what the weather will be if we don’t do this or this or this. Work around the inflation problem. Only God knows what will happen tomorrow.
 
This economic system was thought with the person in mind who is working a minimum wage job and trying to live on their own with dignity. The person would need a place to stay (we’ll say an apartment) $350 - $750 a month average. The person would need transportation (we’ll go with a car) initial car payment, gas, maintenance, state taxes (this varies so I can’t give even an estimate). Health Insurance $250 - $500 a month. Car Insurance $100 - $300 a month. Food/Necessities for Living $250 - $400 a month. Electric, Gas, Water, Sewage Bill (this varies so I can’t give even an estimate).

All that on minimum wage. That tough to do that’s why people are saying the minimum wage needs to be even higher. As soon as you say that though you get the naysayers who will say “we’ll be paying $30 for a hamburger” or “nobody will be able to afford even the simplest things in life”. That is why we have to disconnect workers’ pay from company’s earnings.

The “tpe” would be made up of a large group of peers made up of executives, blue collar workers from many different fields, white collar workers from many different fields, slower workers, faster workers, liberal people and conservative people. It could be similar to the size of the House of Representatives.

You say not everyone has equal working capacity. You are right but if a person just wants to sharpen 500 pencils a day and then call it a day who are we to question that that’s all he can do? Pay them a just wage and move on. Are we envious of that this person who is working (to himself/herself hard but to others not at all) and getting paid a decent wage. If you want to be a pencil sharpener and make that wage, go ahead. People work, people get paid. Nobody dictates to you how much you should be doing.

In this day and age, its not that easy going from job to job. If you have a family you have many factors you have to take into consideration. One is health insurance. Another is how much debt you may have. Another is work scheduling. Companies know this so they can be very demanding. So if you have a decent job, you usually stick with it. But where’s the ability to try another form of work that is better for oneself.
 
hvizsgyak said:
But for now stop being a naysayer, you sound like the climate control people who think the can predict what the weather will be if we don’t do this or this or this.
Click to expand...
Ok, can you show me any economists who.are proposing a system such as this? You admit to not being an economist, come up with your own idea of a new economic system, and when someone explains the problems they are just a naysayer?
 
hvizsgyak said:
Work around the inflation problem. Only God knows what will happen tomorrow.
Click to expand...
There is no work-around for the inflation problem. It is an inherent part of what your are proposing. The fact that only God knows exactly how things will play out in fact does not mean rational humans cannot draw logical connections.
 
Yes. I have to make this ten characters long to be accepted as a post but yes, you are a naysayer because you are sticking with the status quo because it works for you.
 
So we just let it go because no one has thought of a better idea. The poor will continue to be poor with no chance of making a life for themselves and not depending on others to help them. Lets stop beating around the bush; lets start to solve these problems. Its 2020, we can all enjoy prosperity that God has given to all.
 
Two thoughts: “The poor you will always have with you” (John 12:8) and “First, do no harm.” (which can apply to any field with grave wide-reaching consequences such as revolutionary change of the entire economic landscape like you are proposing)
 
Yes, we will always have the poor but we should always continue to improve ourselves and the society we live in. What I’m proposing is to help the poor and those struggling to makes ends meet in our society. If you are not struggling and are happy with your pay, it should not affect you but the poor will be helped to live in dignity.
 
When did I say I wanted to stick with the status quo. Just because I disagree with your poorly thought out idea by no means I agree with the status quo. You have flawed reasoning.
 
@(name removed by moderator), it is you and many, many families like yours who work hard and are more than an inspiring example to the best of us. You are intelligent, have a good sense of humor. You love your family and hope that what you are doing will be the best for them.

It is you that is suffering for, and carrying the burden, for the rest of the country, which tax system is “squeezing every last drop of blood out of a stone.” You feel the pressure, and need to realize what has been going on for the last 40 years of tax cuts to the rich, and tax switch over to you, and families like yours.

Families need income to survive; taxes are the “family income” that the country receives to provide for the legitimate needs of its members. For 40 years this head of the family has been lavishing wealth on a few while depriving the many, and most tragically turning some of that number into pariahs in their hopelessness.

Repeated enacting of bills to reduce taxes on high incomes (shifting the burden to those on low incomes) has not been successful in providing sufficient income and its attendant dignity for all. It doesn’t work, the trajectory of current policies point to disaster.

Too many people in the middle (not you) are ok in their financial positions, see no need for a different outlook. This is a time if ever there was, for “people of good will” to think critically and work together on solutions to very obvious problems.

All the best of God’s blessings to you and your family this new year.
 
hvizsgyak said:
Yes, we will always have the poor but we should always continue to improve ourselves and the society we live in. What I’m proposing is to help the poor and those struggling to makes ends meet in our society. If you are not struggling and are happy with your pay, it should not affect you but the poor will be helped to live in dignity.
Click to expand...
What you are proposing is the the Govt fix everything, not that we as individual take responsibility. The govt has a very poor track record of success.
 
I’m sure you are tired of this topic but I want to insure you that the government doesn’t need to play a big roll in this. They would need to make sure that the economic system is not abused (like companies paying their workers more than they are suppose to or not paying their workers enough). The group that assigns the amount a worker/manager/boss would get paid would be made up of honest working Americans from all parts of the work force. There are probably a lot more holes that need to be thought about and taken care of. This is just an initial blueprint. More experienced people in economics would need to share their thoughts except for tafan2 (just kidding tafan2) so it can be made better. And this is a suggestion of an economic system, I all ears to hear better suggestion but the bottom line has to be that the lowest paid among us should be able to afford the things I mentioned above (without government help because we don’t need the government involved except in special cases).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top