What is wrong with capitalism?

  • Thread starter Thread starter carn
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
  1. I agree human vice is at the root of all evil.
  2. These are the vices I think are particular to Capitalism:
"rampant deregulation and the commodifcation of everything and the monetizing of everything; we are on the brink of financial and economic collapse. Globalization, huge multinationals, rampant banks and “investment” houses, toxic debt, the McEducating and McJobbing of our kids are serious threats to our future. "

An example of commodification: where a sick person is a client, their illness a market need, and the treatment a commodity.
 
Here’s my position:

I am a capitalist. Not rich or anything, just a guy who runs his own business, serves his clients, and hopes to end up with a profit at the end of the day.

I believe that I can be modestly wealthy and still a follower of Christ. Though even modestly wealthy today puts me above more than 99% of the population of the world, and many in the world are starving due to “structural sin” as John Paul II called it. So, right now I have a challenge - am I part of the solution or part of the problem? And so I have to seek and find answers.

Secondly: I don’t think Jesus prefers this kind of Capitalism above all other economic systems, especially the system we have today.

Today our world is run by multinationals bigger than most countries, and we know the power and influence they have wielded.

The Church itself has taught distributism, solidarity, preferential option for the poor.

Thirdly: if you think the Parable of the Unjust Steward has anything to do with capitalism, then you think the Parable of the Foolish Virgins has to do with being clever enough to buy oil from the market, and the Parable of the Sower exhorts farmers to buy better seeding equipment, and Parable of the House Built on Sand means you should check the Better Business Bureau before you find a builder!

In fact IF you do believe that the Parable of the Unjust Steward supports capitalism then you had better follow this one to the letter too: **The Parable of the Laborers in the Vineyard **- where Jesus pays the last hired laborers who only worked an hour in the cool of the evening first and as much as the laborers he hired in the morning and who worked through the heat of the day!
 
These are the vices I think are particular to Capitalism:

"rampant deregulation and the commodifcation of everything and the monetizing of everything; we are on the brink of financial and economic collapse. Globalization, huge multinationals, rampant banks and “investment” houses, toxic debt, the McEducating and McJobbing of our kids are serious threats to our future. "
Capitalism would deregulate by its nature. So that is not a vice but the nature of the economic system. Communism and socialism by their nature regulate. I dont think that government regulation is by its very nature good. It could try to achieve a good end but it is not inherently good.

If we are on the brink of collapse it is not due to an unregulated free market. The US and Western countries are highly regulated markets. They are not the extreme of Soviet communism. But they are also nowhere near the ideal of free markets.

Multinationals are the creation of the state. It is the state that defines the corporation. Over the last fifty years the state has been giving the corporation more power and absolving it from more responsibility. That is not the free market.

Education is completely run by the state. If education is bad it is entirely the state’s fault and not the free market. For the $20,000 a year many school districts spend per student the private sector could do a much better job. A family of five could hire a very good full time tutor for their kids for the $100,000 that is spent on teaching them in the terrible government schools.
An example of commodification: where a sick person is a client, their illness a market need, and the treatment a commodity.
You use the term commodity as if it is bad. According to Wikipedia a commodity is:

In economics, a commodity is the generic term for any marketable item produced to satisfy wants or needs. Economic commodities comprise goods and services.

Health care is a commodity under any economic system. The question is how does one provide health care and how does one acquire it.

In the free market we allow prices to accurately reflect their true cost and individuals to decide what to purchase. In a controlled market we rig prices (thus hiding their true cost) and allocate provision and consumption by fiat. Why is it you think the controlled market is better? It suffers the obvious problem of those whose political will is imposed not knowing what it truly costs to produce the product their are distributing and thus making inefficient decisions. If health care is provided by fiat then the providers are mere slaves to the will of those with political power. I dont see how that is a noble system at all.
 
Secondly: I don’t think Jesus prefers this kind of Capitalism above all other economic systems, especially the system we have today.
You seem to use the definition many people do for capitalism. You are defining capitalism as the current economic system of the United States or Western nations. That definition does not care how many laws and regulations we have. That definition does not care that we have social insurance or government owned corporations. That definition proclaims America is always the epitome of capitalism.

I believe, and am backed up by the probably millions of pages of laws and regulations, that the US is a highly regulated economy. I agree that the current economic system is not good. But I dont see how giving more power to politicians is the solution. I think more economic freedom is the solution. If I had more money and the government less I’d give far more money to charitable efforts. My share of the pot that goes to destroy foreign nations (which is a significant percentage) would be entirely redirected to promoting life.
 
Well in Canada we didn’t deregulate our banks and guess what, we’ve still got a viable banking system, and our economy is not on the brink of collapse (unlike some of our other friends in the G8) !

Rampant deregulation that allows multi-nationals to ride roughshod over local laws and industries is what I’m talking about.

I’m also against socialism for the the multi-nationals too - corporate bailouts, government handouts for banks and industry.

Also I didn’t say that commodities are bad, just that if you do commodify health treatments for instance, then what’s the next step for an entrepreneurial doctor in order to make more money? Scarcity! Scarcity of resources drives up prices!
 
There are also significant differences between the European “understanding” or definition of capitalism versus the American “understanding” or definition of capitalism.

In Europe the government is in “cahoots” with industry … heavy government requirements for permits, licenses, examinations, regulatory compliance, all kinds of taxes and fees. The idea is to minimize competition and to minimize new entrants.

In the United States, while the government has lately had an increasingly powerful control over industry and business at all levels, the “traditional” American understanding of capitalism is free-market competitive economics with freedom of entry for new participants and minimal permissions needed for new entrants into the marketplace. We see small businesses starting on a home-business basis and expanding, if market needs are met, into large enterprises.

In the United States, when additional capital is needed, it is common to sell shares of ownership on the open market to small individual investors. And it is common to manage ownership of those shares by use of mutual funds of various designs. You can look up the numbers, but there are somewhere around 10,000 companies with shares outstanding in the U.S.marketplace. And there are probably around 10,000 mutual funds that manage various combinations of share portfolios. Tens of millions of U.S. individuals own shares. So, in a sense, participation in American capitalism is a form of populism.
 
You seem to use the definition many people do for capitalism. You are defining capitalism as the current economic system of the United States or Western nations. That definition does not care how many laws and regulations we have. That definition does not care that we have social insurance or government owned corporations. That definition proclaims America is always the epitome of capitalism.

I believe, and am backed up by the probably millions of pages of laws and regulations, that the US is a highly regulated economy. I agree that the current economic system is not good. But I dont see how giving more power to politicians is the solution. I think more economic freedom is the solution. If I had more money and the government less I’d give far more money to charitable efforts. My share of the pot that goes to destroy foreign nations (which is a significant percentage) would be entirely redirected to promoting life.
I agree with all this! I wouldn’t trust a politician as far as I could throw him, however in Canada at least there are independent third party regulators than run very well - for the banking industry, for the insurance and securities industries for instance.
 
I guess I need to get a copy of the capitalist bible where Jesus preaches trickle down economics and Ronald Reagan is sitting beside Jesus in heaven.
Jesus worked as a skilled artisan with wood … the ultimate in trickle down economics. He owned tools … his form of wealth … and probably had access to a “pickup truck” [or the equivalent in his time] so he could pick up materials and deliver furniture.

Jesus’ friends owned major capitalist items … fishing boats and nets. And they had to get help when they managed a big catch … fish had to be cleaned and sold before they spoiled … no refrigeration in those days.

And he had to pay taxes to the Romans.
 
Are these scriptures in support of a free market or otherwise:confused:
Neither in my mind. I Pointed to Our Lord as to what is really important. Living a Christian life with an eye on Salvation and Virtuousness as opposed to an eye on economic systems and wealth generation. Bending Our Lords words to justify man made systems is an abhoration, and imho a sacrelige.

from The Gospel of Saint John; ch 18
“Jesus answered: My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would certainly strive that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now my kingdom is not from hence. [37] Pilate therefore said to him: Art thou a king then? Jesus answered: Thou sayest that I am a king. For this was I born, and for this came I into the world; that I should give testimony to the truth. Every one that is of the truth, heareth my voice.”
scripture from drbo.org/index.htm
 
triumphguy #122
In fact IF you do believe that the Parable of the Unjust Steward supports capitalism then you had better follow this one to the letter too: The Parable of the Laborers in the Vineyard - where Jesus pays the last hired laborers who only worked an hour in the cool of the evening first and as much as the laborers he hired in the morning and who worked through the heat of the day!
Jumping to conclusions helps no one, however well meant.

Just as Christ’s Parable of the Talents most strikingly acknowledges Christ’s respect for the work of business, so does the parable of the Dishonest Steward – the steward is dishonest, “but the nature of his work is not. In fact by praising his shrewdness, Christ admires his opportunism. While the steward abuses the trust his master extends to him, it must be recognised that the nature of the work that is entrusted to him is fundamentally good. The sin of the steward is his misuse of his master’s business, not the work of business itself.” Entrepreneurship in the Catholic Tradition, Fr Anthony G Percy, Lexington Books, 2010, p 47].

St Jerome understands Christ’s intent:
“Why, even shopkeepers who are particularly frugal, and slaves who are not wasteful, and the care-takers who made our childhood a burden to us and even thieves when they are particularly clever, we speak of as diligent; and so the conduct of the unjust steward in the Gospel is spoken of as wise.” [St Jerome, Jerome’s apology for himself against the book of Rufinus, Book 1, 24, in: Schaff, Theodoret, Jerome, 495].

“If the import of the parable is that Christians should have the ‘shrewdness to recognise and seize the opportunity that exists’ in the person of Christ, then clearly the work and remedial action of the steward is foundational to the functioning of the parable. [Joseph a Fitzmyer, *The Gospel According to Luke: Introduction, Translation, and Notes, The Anchor Bible, Doubleday, 1985, 1098]. The steward, his work and his remedial action – his shrewdness and opportune behaviour – is clearly most fitting to highlight the way the believer should act in relation to Christ.” [Fr Percy, op. cit., p 48].

In the Parable of the Talents, Jesus is teaching that the true servant must be faithful, prudent and industrious. Of the three, two doubled the master’s money after some considerable time, while the third servant only buries the money and throws the responsibility on the master, very much like some on this DB who fault “capitalists” for everything – as the master has no share in the operations but expects a profit. The master unmasks the charade to uncover the true motive for the third’s conduct – sloth. The faithful servants are well-rewarded by being faithful, prudent and industrious with the master’s money. “For to everyone who has, more will be given, and he will have abundance; but from him who does not have, even what he has will be taken away. And cast the unprofitable servant into the outer darkness. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” (Mt 25: 14-30).
The parable primarily teaches that God’s gifts, of nature and especially of grace, are held in stewardship and must not be allowed to lie idle. They are to be used to further His kingdom.
[See *A Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture, Ed. Dom Bernard Orchard, Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1951].

Dr Chafuen notes that “many people close to Jesus were quite wealthy for their times. Joseph seems to have had his own business and perhaps a donkey; Peter owned a fishing boat, and Matthew was a tax collector. Jesus praised the rich man Zaccheus. It was the wealthy Joseph of Arimathea who kept faith even when the Apostles were beset by doubt (Mt 27:57). Jesus does not condemn the possession of riches but, rather disordered attachment to them.” Notice also that Jesus did not ask His Apostles to renounce their property. Christians For Freedom, Ignatius 1986, p 45].
 
I agree however that one shouldn’t jump to conclusions!

But I totally disagree with you in this: The Parable of the Talents and the Parable of the Unjust Steward uses every day commonplace events and turns them into stories about the salvation of SOULS not a recipe on a quick way to make a buck or avoid a lawsuit!😃

Of the biblical commentators you quote Fitzmeyer hits the nail on the head.

“If the import of the parable is that Christians should have the ‘shrewdness to recognise and seize the opportunity that exists’ in the person of Christ, then clearly the work and remedial action of the steward is foundational to the functioning of the parable. [Joseph a Fitzmyer, The Gospel According to Luke: Introduction, Translation, and Notes, The Anchor Bible, Doubleday, 1985, 1098]

With regard to the Unjust Steward, when you face the termination of your mortal contract, you’d better be talking to all those sub-contractors you wronged in life and make things right!

Or get right with the people around you before you face the judgement day!
 
Well in Canada we didn’t deregulate our banks and guess what, we’ve still got a viable banking system, and our economy is not on the brink of collapse (unlike some of our other friends in the G8) !

Rampant deregulation that allows multi-nationals to ride roughshod over local laws and industries is what I’m talking about.

I’m also against socialism for the the multi-nationals too - corporate bailouts, government handouts for banks and industry.

Also I didn’t say that commodities are bad, just that if you do commodify health treatments for instance, then what’s the next step for an entrepreneurial doctor in order to make more money? Scarcity! Scarcity of resources drives up prices!
As far as business goes, Canada is less regulated than the U.S.; this is the reason they have not been hit real hard durring this recession.
 
One perspective:

lucianne.com/thread/?artnum=656504

Hayek Vindicated Again

PowerLine, by Steven Hayward

Original Article

powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/12/hayek-vindicated-again.php

Posted 12/20/2011

Way back on the Federal Page of today’s Washington Post is an article that ought to be on the front page above the fold, and its deep placement on the boutique page of the bureaucracy shows how the Post, like most everyone else, doesn’t understand what a big story it is. And it is clinical study of Hayek’s “knowledge problem”—the impossibility of centralizing fundamentally dispersed knowledge in a timely and accurate way—that we’ve discussed at various times here over the past few months.
 
One perspective:

lucianne.com/thread/?artnum=656504

Hayek Vindicated Again

PowerLine, by Steven Hayward

Original Article

Posted 12/20/2011

Way back on the Federal Page of today’s Washington Post is an article that ought to be on the front page above the fold, and its deep placement on the boutique page of the bureaucracy shows how the Post, like most everyone else, doesn’t understand what a big story it is. And it is clinical study of Hayek’s “knowledge problem”—the impossibility of centralizing fundamentally dispersed knowledge in a timely and accurate way—that we’ve discussed at various times here over the past few months.
Versus:

lucianne.com/thread/?artnum=656600

Frances Fox Piven: #Occupy
Movement Must Bring About
‘Upheaval of Historic Dimensions’

Big Government, by Joel B. Pollak

Original Article

biggovernment.com/jpollak/2011/12/20/frances-fox-piven-occupy-movement-must-bring-about-upheaval-of-historic-dimensions/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BigGovernment+%28Big+Government%29

Posted 12/20/2011

Frances Fox Piven, one of the co-authors of the Cloward-Piven strategy to overwhelm the state with millions of additional welfare claimants, has published an article in the Nation calling for the Occupy Wall Street movement to re-invigorate itself by recruiting the poor. In a telling admission that Occupy does not, in fact, represent the poor, Piven criticizes both liberals and unions for their repeated use of the term “middle class” in their political campaigns. Instead, she said, Occupy must appeal to issues that poor Americans care about:
 
Jumping to conclusions helps no one, however well meant.

Just as Christ’s Parable of the Talents most strikingly acknowledges Christ’s respect for the work of business, so does the parable of the Dishonest Steward – the steward is dishonest, “but the nature of his work is not. In fact by praising his shrewdness, Christ admires his opportunism. While the steward abuses the trust his master extends to him, it must be recognised that the nature of the work that is entrusted to him is fundamentally good. The sin of the steward is his misuse of his master’s business, not the work of business itself.” Entrepreneurship in the Catholic Tradition, Fr Anthony G Percy, Lexington Books, 2010, p 47].

St Jerome understands Christ’s intent:
“Why, even shopkeepers who are particularly frugal, and slaves who are not wasteful, and the care-takers who made our childhood a burden to us and even thieves when they are particularly clever, we speak of as diligent; and so the conduct of the unjust steward in the Gospel is spoken of as wise.” [St Jerome, Jerome’s apology for himself against the book of Rufinus, Book 1, 24, in: Schaff, Theodoret, Jerome, 495].

“If the import of the parable is that Christians should have the ‘shrewdness to recognise and seize the opportunity that exists’ in the person of Christ, then clearly the work and remedial action of the steward is foundational to the functioning of the parable. [Joseph a Fitzmyer, *The Gospel According to Luke: Introduction, Translation, and Notes
, The Anchor Bible, Doubleday, 1985, 1098]. The steward, his work and his remedial action – his shrewdness and opportune behaviour – is clearly most fitting to highlight the way the believer should act in relation to Christ.” [Fr Percy, op. cit., p 48].

In the Parable of the Talents, Jesus is teaching that the true servant must be faithful, prudent and industrious. Of the three, two doubled the master’s money after some considerable time, while the third servant only buries the money and throws the responsibility on the master, very much like some on this DB who fault “capitalists” for everything – as the master has no share in the operations but expects a profit. The master unmasks the charade to uncover the true motive for the third’s conduct – sloth. The faithful servants are well-rewarded by being faithful, prudent and industrious with the master’s money. “For to everyone who has, more will be given, and he will have abundance; but from him who does not have, even what he has will be taken away. And cast the unprofitable servant into the outer darkness. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” (Mt 25: 14-30).
The parable primarily teaches that God’s gifts, of nature and especially of grace, are held in stewardship and must not be allowed to lie idle. They are to be used to further His kingdom.
[See *A Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture, Ed. Dom Bernard Orchard, Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1951].

Dr Chafuen notes that “many people close to Jesus were quite wealthy for their times. Joseph seems to have had his own business and perhaps a donkey; Peter owned a fishing boat, and Matthew was a tax collector. Jesus praised the rich man Zaccheus. It was the wealthy Joseph of Arimathea who kept faith even when the Apostles were beset by doubt (Mt 27:57). Jesus does not condemn the possession of riches but, rather disordered attachment to them.” Notice also that Jesus did not ask His Apostles to renounce their property. Christians For Freedom, Ignatius 1986, p 45].

At the miracle of the loaves and fishes, one of the disciples comments that it would cost six months income to feed all those people. You do the math.

5000 men plus all their wives and kids. $20 bucks a head for catering and driving from town to their remote location and set up a buffet. Maybe more. Maybe 20,000 people in all. THAT is a LOT of money … and he said it was six months income. These fishermen, accountants and tentmakers were not poor people!
 
Anyone can make up figures!

Where does it cost $20 for a sardine and a slice of bread served out of a basket!😃

Say a dollar for a can of sardine, which feeds 2, and $2 for a loaf of bread, which feeds 5 people.

So 15,000 people
= 7,000 cans of sardine = $7,000
= 3,000 loaves of bread @ $2 = $6,000

Total = 13,000 for 6 months work. Not so hot!

These Disciples were broke!😛
 
Anyone can make up figures!

Where does it cost $20 for a sardine and a slice of bread served out of a basket!😃

Say a dollar for a can of sardine, which feeds 2, and $2 for a loaf of bread, which feeds 5 people.

So 15,000 people
= 7,000 cans of sardine = $7,000
= 3,000 loaves of bread @ $2 = $6,000

Total = 13,000 for 6 months work. Not so hot!

These Disciples were broke!😛
Well, try catering for all those folks out in the desert, and price might go a tad higher.

[p.s. I omitted drinks. Tubs of soda and water with ice.]

Consider: everyone ate until THEY WERE FULL.

More than a sardine.

AND they ended up with a HUGE amount of leftovers.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feeding_the_multitude

Since the young lad had five loaves and two fish JUST FOR HIMSELF, then each person might need roughly the same or more.

And Jesus had a reputation for setting a FINE table. Just look back to the wine miracle at Cana. The finest wine.

So, we would expect that the fish and the bread would be gourmet fish and bread.

And there were no nearby towns … so the food would have had to be brought in a far distance.

Lots of catering trucks.

Probably much more than $20 per person.

[Tell me that you researched all this and didn’t just make stuff up.]
 
They didn’t have soda, they sent their kid to the lake to fill up their water bottles!

I’m not really arguing against you, what I am arguing against is using any of Jesus teachings as doctrine to uphold my lifestyle.

Whatever economic system, time in history, personal profession/trade or lifestyle I live I think Christ challenges it.

To the rich young man who knew the answers Jesus was looking for Jesus didn’t say, tell me, did you use fair and ethical practices to create your wealth? He said sell and give everything to the poor. To the pharisees who were pulling faces when Mary anointed his feet with oil and her kisses, he said “The poor you will have with you always.” To Simon, James and John he said, “come you will be fishers of men,” and they left their boats. He also warned that once you set your hand on the plow you had better not look back. Another time he told the disciples to go and preach with no haversack, no purse, and another time to take a sword.

You can’t find an economic system in his teachings. He called the poor blessed. He constantly warned the rich not to set store by earthly goods but to store up treasure in heaven.

If there’s anything Jesus wants us to do it’s to love God above all things, and to love our neighbor as ourselves.

The question in social justice, in social anthropology, in politics is “Who is my neighbor?”
 
They didn’t have soda, they sent their kid to the lake to fill up their water bottles!

I’m not really arguing against you, what I am arguing against is using any of Jesus teachings as doctrine to uphold my lifestyle.

Whatever economic system, time in history, personal profession/trade or lifestyle I live I think Christ challenges it.

To the rich young man who knew the answers Jesus was looking for Jesus didn’t say, tell me, did you use fair and ethical practices to create your wealth? He said sell and give everything to the poor. To the pharisees who were pulling faces when Mary anointed his feet with oil and her kisses, he said “The poor you will have with you always.” To Simon, James and John he said, “come you will be fishers of men,” and they left their boats. He also warned that once you set your hand on the plow you had better not look back. Another time he told the disciples to go and preach with no haversack, no purse, and another time to take a sword.

You can’t find an economic system in his teachings. He called the poor blessed. He constantly warned the rich not to set store by earthly goods but to store up treasure in heaven.

If there’s anything Jesus wants us to do it’s to love God above all things, and to love our neighbor as ourselves.

The question in social justice, in social anthropology, in politics is “Who is my neighbor?”
In addition to the other criteria, the meal had also to be Kosher.

But, anyway, back to the point: Jesus associated himself with people whose occupations paid well.

Poor people are not people who get paid well.

The owner of the vineyard who hired all the men hanging around in the town square and paying each of them a full day’s wage. “Am I not free to do what I want with my own money?”

The father of the prodigal son. Wealthy man.

The centurion whose servant he healed. Jesus was well known to the wealthy.

People who visited Jesus at his “tavern ministry” and bought lavish perfumes for his feet.

The point is that you can live any life style that you choose.

But not to knock people who do well.
 
They didn’t have soda, they sent their kid to the lake to fill up their water bottles!

I’m not really arguing against you, what I am arguing against is using any of Jesus teachings as doctrine to uphold my lifestyle.

Whatever economic system, time in history, personal profession/trade or lifestyle I live I think Christ challenges it.

To the rich young man who knew the answers Jesus was looking for Jesus didn’t say, tell me, did you use fair and ethical practices to create your wealth? He said sell and give everything to the poor. To the pharisees who were pulling faces when Mary anointed his feet with oil and her kisses, he said “The poor you will have with you always.” To Simon, James and John he said, “come you will be fishers of men,” and they left their boats. He also warned that once you set your hand on the plow you had better not look back. Another time he told the disciples to go and preach with no haversack, no purse, and another time to take a sword.

You can’t find an economic system in his teachings. He called the poor blessed. He constantly warned the rich not to set store by earthly goods but to store up treasure in heaven.

If there’s anything Jesus wants us to do it’s to love God above all things, and to love our neighbor as ourselves.

The question in social justice, in social anthropology, in politics is “Who is my neighbor?”
👍
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top