The Wealth-Cap Economic System

  • Thread starter Thread starter IWantGod
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I

IWantGod

Guest
I’m not absolutely sure what would be the best Moral or Practical alternative to Capitalism. I’m not saying that all competition is wrong, i am just saying that it should not determine whether or not you live in poverty. Given that principle i think we should think of alternatives. Lets attempt to conceive of what a Christian utopia would be like in economic terms. What system would best represent a Christian worldview?

I think a Christian economic system first and foremost ought to recognize that God is the owner of all things and that we are custodians of natural resources only in relation to God’s authority. God created natural resources for all of us and thus the common good in any economic system cannot be ignored. In other words profit, ownership, or competition really shouldn’t ever outweigh the common good. It is not negotiable.

Thus i have been thinking about what a Christian economic system ought to look like.

I have one idea at the moment. And you can tell me what you think.

Wealth Cap.

This means you can only earn a certain amount of wealth (i have no suggestions for how much that would be). Anything beyond that automatically goes to the common good, which means the creation of government funded jobs for those who fail to compete in the market. Also, universal health care. and other functions that contribute to the infrastructure of society.

A Wealth Cap Approach would function as a middle ground between Capitalism and Socialism. Taking the best of both, but being neither at the same time. The common good is upheld and a limited right to property is upheld also.
 
Last edited:
I’d support distributism where land ownership is a fundamental right… second I would support a universal living wage for all people where every person and every family is granted a wage sufficiently above the poverty line so that no person struggles for necessities. The world has more than enough wealth to accomdate everyone.

I think raising the lowest end of the system is the better way to solve the problem of an unjust system. I do support a cap.
 
The wealth cap sounds like socialism.

“universal health care” has not happened. It’s mandated health insurance. Our burdan for insurance went from around $3,000 a year for my family to $15,000 or more.

See how a limited right to property is doing in China. Not so good.

Even with a wealth cap you’re still going to have poverty. You can’t fully distribute it down.

Why?

For the same reason you can’t find Doritos on food stamp day.

You can give people all the money you want, but you can’t change the poverty mindset without people wanting that change.

Universal income has been proven to be a bad idea.
 
Tough call. I have no problem with people making money provided that it’s done ethically. If society were a lot tougher on the unethical people, e.g. imprisoning those who brought about the last recession, I’m not sure that we’d see income inequality to the extent that we do today.

But the problem has existed for centuries. As Aesop quipped, “We hang the petty thieves and elect the great ones to office.”
 

I’ve found some articles on beating it. Basically, it’s the idea that you will never have enough so you should treat yourself when you have the opportunity regardless of future consequences.

That’s why it’s common to see fancy TV’s, electronics, and clothing at the residence of those below the poverty line. The middle class actually purchases most of the generic products while those in poverty and the upper class choose name brands.
godisgood77 said:
Cite a source? I do not believe it has been proven to be a bad idea.
Click to expand...
This is a good article because it also discusses other attempts.

www.investors.com

Finnish Failure: Guaranteed Basic Income Punishes Work, Subsidizes Sloth

The latest "big idea" in the U.S. is the Universal Basic Income — a guaranteed income for all. Progressives of course like the idea, but even some conservatives and libertarians do, too. Only one problem: it doesn't work.
www.investors.com www.investors.com
 
IWantGod said:
I have one idea at the moment. And you can tell me what you think.
Click to expand...
This really takes the private sector out of the “Big Ideas” that have really increased the world’s wealth and raised everyone’s living standards.

Things like railroads, steel buildings, electrical grids and the computer revolution were all risky and brought to completion in the capitalist system over the past 2 centuries. Everyone knows who the winners were, but there were a lot of losers as well, whose ideas on these things didn’t work out.

Relying on the government or other overseeing authority to dictate what projects to do, isn’t likely to work out as well. I don’t think a bureaucrat would have been able to move things forward like the so-called “robber barons”.
 
blackforest said:
40.png
Xanthippe_Voorhees:
For the same reason you can’t find Doritos on food stamp day.
Click to expand...
Something tells me that I’m going to have a busy day on CAF. 🙂

Are you claiming that the poor use their SNAP benefits to load up on junk food? If so, that claim is false. https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/ops/SNAPFoodsTypicallyPurchased-Summary.pdf
Click to expand...
I’m talking about someone who worked retail. Whether or not individuals purchased a larger amount as their general budget, we knew what to stock the night before food stamps came out. Soda and chips. 20 cents on the dollar is HUGE.

In general I’m speaking to when it is spent vs how it is spent. That graph does not show it, but general shoppers tend to buy similar “carts” despite pay days, whereas SNAP and those who cash their checks and buy groceries tend to junk out at first then survive on rice and beans later in the month.
 
Xanthippe_Voorhees said:
This is a good article because it also discusses other attempts
Click to expand...
Pretty thin article relative to facts or stats.

Ideally, no new action would be needed because individual citizens would volunteer to help their brothers and sisters. Ideally, Christian virtue would prevail. We are our brother’s keepers!

Unfortunately, the reality is that Christian charity from individual citizens falls well short of the need. So the system tries to fill that gap…

There is more than enough wealth and resources to accomdate everyone… no good excuse for why a child or family needs to go without
 
Your link sounds more like the middle class and wasn’t targeted toward the poor.

For whatever it’s worthy, Doritos are actually, (and unfortunately), a lot cheaper than fresh produce . . .
 
If you eliminate capitalism from consideration, you don’t have much of a discussion.

There is a reason why atheist governments are always socialist or communists.
 
One of my friends lived with her family in a car when she was a child. Suffice to say, cooking beans and rice got a little tricky . . .

I would strongly suggest that you watch Food Stamped, in which a middle class couple attempts to live on nutritious foods using a SNAP budget. They end up digging out of bakery dumpsters . . .http://www.foodstamped.com/
 
godisgood77 said:
40.png
Xanthippe_Voorhees:
This is a good article because it also discusses other attempts
Click to expand...
Pretty thin article relative to facts or stats.

Ideally, no new action would be needed because individual citizens would volunteer to help their brothers and sisters. Ideally, Christian virtue would prevail. We are our brother’s keepers!

Unfortunately, the reality is that Christian charity from individual citizens falls well short of the need. So the system tries to fill that gap…

There is more than enough wealth and resources to accomdate everyone… no good excuse for why a child or family needs to go without
Click to expand...
Just…no

People have different value systems. My brother makes as much as my husband. However, they like going on vacations, they like fancy beer and other things. My sister in law works and her parents provide free childcare.

I work part-time. My husband and I like to stay home. We work on our house. Our relatives are not close and could not provide childcare even if they were.

So should he give up his normative lifestyle? If there was an income cap my SIL simply wouldn’t work.
 
blackforest said:
One of my friends lived with her family in a car when she was a child. Suffice to say, cooking beans and rice got a little tricky . . .

I would strongly suggest that you watch Food Stamped, in which a middle class couple attempts to live on nutritious foods using a SNAP budget. They end up digging out of bakery dumpsters . . .http://www.foodstamped.com/
Click to expand...
Look, I come from poverty. I get it. And I escaped it.

I also feed my family for about half of a food stamp budget on a regular basis in a HCOL area. I put my money where my mouth is.
 
Junk food is just cheaper than the fresh and healthy stuff. It’s unfortunate but true. 😦 That’s all I’m trying to say.
 
blackforest said:
Junk food is just cheaper than the fresh and healthy stuff. It’s unfortunate but true. 😦 That’s all I’m trying to say.
Click to expand...
Not if you know how to cook…or what you can eat raw and be fine.

Doritos are freaking $3+ for a bag. That’s literally a meal for my entire family…maybe more.
 
Last edited:
I’d like to get back to the original post about a wealth cap.

The focus needs to be on blaming the unethically wealthy, not blaming the poor for being poor.

A cap may not be necessary after we first go after the people who play dirty in order to get and stay wealthy. Ways of going after them may include making them pay the same kind of taxes that we do, getting them out of Congress and the lobbyist circle (Gates and Bezos pretty much wrote the tax laws for Washington State), weaning them from the corporate welfare teat, and compelling them to treat their workers justly with living wages, safe working conditions, and public transparency, (esp. with oversees factories).

I’m open-minded to the idea of a cap but think we need to try the aforementioned first.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top