What is wrong with capitalism?

[Kathryn_Ann]

Well, perhaps nothing at all, but it does seem that anything done to extremes can be harmful if left unchecked, as in unbridled greed. We do have very generous people with great wealth, who give to others quite generously. Then their are whole industries who do not police themselves and who pollute the earth and pay people less than fair wages, wreaking havoc among poor nations. One could ask, what is the alternative? Socialism, per se, may not be bad, but often the leaders have been known to live lavishly and the rest of the people are the ones forced to share. I’m sure others on the forum know much more about economics than do I, but my feeling is that in a perfect world, with Christ as our example, there would be more sharing, more compassion. God is great, and will always call out people from different cultures to show us the way to relieve the widows and orphans among us, the hungry, the thirsty, the imprisoned. He is great enough to work within any system, yet I wonder if there isn’t a better way than that found in our present system of capitalism. :heaven:

 

[Abu]

sedonaman #145
has anyone defined capitalism?

Bl John Paul II covers this quite comprehensively in Centesimus Annus, 199, #42:
‘Is this the model which ought to be proposed to the countries of the Third World which are searching for the path to true economic and civil progress?
‘The answer is obviously complex. If by “capitalism” is meant an economic system which recognizes the fundamental and positive role of business, the market, private property and the resulting responsibility for the means of production, as well as free human creativity in the economic sector, then the answer is certainly in the affirmative, even though it would perhaps be more appropriate to speak of a “business economy”, “market economy” or simply “free economy”.

Bl JPII dislikes it as a term, preferring “business economy”, “market economy” or simply “free economy”. He teaches also the ‘fundamental human “right to freedom of economic initiative.” ’ (Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (On Human Concerns), Encyclical, 1987, #42).

 

[Abu]

Kathryn Ann #161
Socialism, per se, may not be bad,

Socialism is rotten:
Pius XI declared emphatically in Quadragesimo Anno, 1931, #120:
“We have also summoned Communism and Socialism again to judgment and have found all their forms, even the most modified, to wander far from the precepts of the Gospel.”

yet I wonder if there isn’t a better way than that found in our present system of capitalism.

“Capitalism” is a derogatory term coined by Karl Marx, and that’s perhaps why Bl John Paul II dislikes it, as he makes clear as he emphatically affirms free enterprise in Centesimus Annus.

There is a solid basis of economic Catholic thought from the fourteenth century. In the fifteenth century the Late Scholastics who were Thomists (followers of St Thomas) “writing and teaching at the University of Salamanca in Spain, sought to explain the full range of human action and social; organization.” They “observed the existence of economic law, inexorable forces of cause and effect that operate very much as other natural laws. Over the course of several generations, they discovered and explained the laws of supply and demand, the cause of inflation, the operation of foreign exchange rates, and the subjective nature of economic value… it is they who come nearer than any other group to having been ‘founders’ of scientific economics.’ ” (Thomas E Woods Jr, The Church And The Market, Lexington Books, 2005, p 8).

The immense difference, considering Catholic Social Teaching, is that Communism, Socialism and the Welfare State have all been condemned, while free enterprise and entrepreneurship have been lauded first by Christ in the Parables of the Dishonest Steward and The Talents, and by the Fathers of the Church, and by Popes.

 

[WinterLight]

Socialism is rotten:
Pius XI declared emphatically in Quadragesimo Anno, 1931, #120:
“We have also summoned Communism and Socialism again to judgment and have found all their forms, even the most modified, to wander far from the precepts of the Gospel.”
“Capitalism” is a derogatory term coined by Karl Marx, and that’s perhaps why Bl John Paul II dislikes it, as he makes clear as he emphatically affirms free enterprise in Centesimus Annus.

There is a solid basis of economic Catholic thought from the fourteenth century. In the fifteenth century the Late Scholastics who were Thomists (followers of St Thomas) “writing and teaching at the University of Salamanca in Spain, sought to explain the full range of human action and social; organization.” They “observed the existence of economic law, inexorable forces of cause and effect that operate very much as other natural laws. Over the course of several generations, they discovered and explained the laws of supply and demand, the cause of inflation, the operation of foreign exchange rates, and the subjective nature of economic value… it is they who come nearer than any other group to having been ‘founders’ of scientific economics.’ ” (Thomas E Woods Jr, The Church And The Market, Lexington Books, 2005, p 8).

The immense difference, considering Catholic Social Teaching, is that Communism, Socialism and the Welfare State have all been condemned, while free enterprise and entrepreneurship have been lauded first by Christ in the Parables of the Dishonest Steward and The Talents, and by the Fathers of the Church, and by Popes.

Everything you’ve said is correct. I’ll only add that we take not to succumb to worship of the market, that is, we shouldn’t let the market decide everything for us. To put it another way, the market is made for man, not man for the market.

 

[Abu]

WinterLight #164
Everything you’ve said is correct. I’ll only add that we take not to succumb to worship of the market, that is, we shouldn’t let the market decide everything for us. To put it another way, the market is made for man, not man for the market.

Spot on, which is precisely why Pope Benedict XVI emphatically affirmed: “Society does not have to protect itself from the market, as if the development of the latter were ipso facto to entail the death of authentically human relations…Therefore it is not the instrument that must be called to account, but individuals, their moral conscience and their personal and social responsibility.” (Caritas in Veritate, Benedict XVI, 2009, #36).

It is PEOPLE who have to be prudent, just, have fortitude and temperance. The Catholic way: free enterprise, sound laws, and the morals that maketh the man. That’s why we have laws to seek and punish those who steal, cheat, swindle, and to ensure competition. It is people who commit crimes.

 

[sedonaman]

Spot on, which is precisely why Pope Benedict XVI emphatically affirmed: “Society does not have to protect itself from the market, as if the development of the latter were ipso facto to entail the death of authentically human relations…Therefore it is not the instrument that must be called to account, but individuals, their moral conscience and their personal and social responsibility.” (Caritas in Veritate, Benedict XVI, 2009, #36).

It is PEOPLE who have to be prudent, just, have fortitude and temperance. The Catholic way: free enterprise, sound laws, and the morals that maketh the man. That’s why we have laws to seek and punish those who steal, cheat, swindle, and to ensure competition. It is people who commit crimes.

This is illustrated in Radford’s study “Economic Activity of a Prisoner of War Camp.” facstaff.uww.edu/kashianr/POWCampRadford.pdf. This study shows how people, left to their own devices, engage in trade to better their condition. A socialist injected into this camp would decry the “inequality” of one prisoner having two chocolate bars while another has none. It would not matter to the socialist that the one with none traded his for something else that he valued more than chocolate bars. The socialist would immediately set out to “right” the “wrongs” that resulted by the “oppression” of free exchange of the prisoners and their preferences.

 

[Dirt]

Bl John Paul II covers this quite comprehensively in Centesimus Annus, 199, #42:
‘Is this the model which ought to be proposed to the countries of the Third World which are searching for the path to true economic and civil progress?
‘The answer is obviously complex. If by “capitalism” is meant an economic system which recognizes the fundamental and positive role of business, the market, private property and the resulting responsibility for the means of production, as well as free human creativity in the economic sector, then the answer is certainly in the affirmative, even though it would perhaps be more appropriate to speak of a “business economy”, “market economy” or simply “free economy”.

Bl JPII dislikes it as a term, preferring “business economy”, “market economy” or simply “free economy”. He teaches also the ‘fundamental human “right to freedom of economic initiative.” ’ (Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (On Human Concerns), Encyclical, 1987, #42).

Abu His Holiness also said:
“The Church acknowledges the legitimate role of profit as an indication that a business is functioning well. When a firm makes a profit, this means that productive factors have been properly employed and corresponding human needs have been duly satisfied. But profitability is not the only indicator of a firm’s condition. It is possible for the financial accounts to be in order, and yet for the people — who make up the firm’s most valuable asset — to be humiliated and their dignity offended. Besides being morally inadmissible, this will eventually have negative repercussions on the firm’s economic efficiency. In fact, the purpose of a business firm is not simply to make a profit, but is to be found in its very existence as a community of persons who in various ways are endeavouring to satisfy their basic needs, and who form a particular group at the service of the whole of society. Profit is a regulator of the life of a business, but it is not the only one; other human and moral factors must also be considered which, in the long term, are at least equally important for the life of a business.” Centisimus Annus IV

“We have seen that it is unacceptable to say that the defeat of so-called “Real Socialism” leaves capitalism as the only model of economic organization.”

“It is not wrong to want to live better; what is wrong is a style of life which is presumed to be better when it is directed towards “having” rather than “being”, and which wants to have more, not in order to be more but in order to spend life in enjoyment as an end in itself.”

“These criticisms are directed not so much against an economic system as against an ethical and cultural system. The economy in fact is only one aspect and one dimension of the whole of human activity. If economic life is absolutized, if the production and consumption of goods become the centre of social life and society’s only value, not subject to any other value, the reason is to be found not so much in the economic system itself as in the fact that the entire socio-cultural system, by ignoring the ethical and religious dimension, has been weakened, and ends by limiting itself to the production of goods and services alone.”

One would do well to READ the entire encyclical in context, rather than parsing out one or two sentances that support an opinion.

vatican.va/edocs/ENG0214/__P6.HTM

 

[ProVobis]

What’s the difference between capitalism and communism?

Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism the reverse is true.

• some Anglophone philosophy

 

[Dirt]

This has nothing to do with any assumed wrongs of free enterprise, but with people who need to be prudent, just and temperate rather than avaricious and uncaring.
Mt 19:16-21 refers to the rich young man becoming an Apostle “come follow Me”. Nowhere does Christ require him or mankind to give up all their possessions either to be good followers or to be able to enter heaven. If all were poor, how could anyone be helped?

From the Haydock Commentary on Matthew Ch. 19 ver 21-22;
Ver. 21. If thou wilt be perfect. This shews there is a difference betwixt things that are of precept, and those that are of counsel only, which they aim at, that aspire to the greatest perfection. (Witham) — Evangelical perfection essentially consists in the perfect observance of God’s commandments, which is greatly assisted by embracing not only voluntary poverty, but also the other counsels given to us in the gospels, such as perpetual chastity, and entire obedience. — Follow me. Thus to follow Christ, is to be without wife and care of children, to have no property, and to live in community; this state of life hath a great reward in heaven. This state, we learn from St. Augustine, the apostles followed; and he himself not only embraced it, but exhorted as many others as he possibly could to embrace it. (St. Augustine, ep. lxxxix, in fine, and in Ps. ciii. conc. 3. post. med.) (Bristow) — The whole perfection of a Christian life consists in following Christ, by an imitation of his virtues. So that he who possesses poverty and chastity, does not immediately become perfect, but only enters upon the way of perfection, by facilitating his progress to perfection, removing hindrances, and laying aside all care of temporal concerns. (Nicholas of Lyra.) — In this chapter Jesus Christ delivers the evangelical counsels. In ver. 12, he recommends continency—here he proposes voluntary poverty, and immediately adds that of obedience, follow me. St. Augustine teaches, that the apostles bound themselves by vow to the observance of these three counsels. (De civit. Dei. Book xvii. chap. 4.)

Ver. 22. Sorrowful. I know not how it happens, that when superfluous and earthly things are loved, we are more attached to what we possess in effect than in desire. For, why did this young man depart sad, but because he had great riches? It is one thing not to wish for, and another to part with them, when once we have them. They become incorporated, and, as it were, a part of ourselves, like food; and, when taken, are changed into our own members. No one easily suffers a member of his body to be cut off. (St. Augustine, ep. xxxi. ad Paul.)

The problem with finding commentary that supports one opinion is that it may be refuted with other Commentary, especially by those who seek to save Souls as opposed to supporting an economic theory.

Haydock Commentary from; haydock1859.tripod.com/index.html

 

[Dirt]

Haydock Commentary on the Parable of the Talents; Matthew ch 25:

"Ver. 15. In the parable of the talents, the master is God, talents, graces, &c. (Witham) — From this, it appears, we can do no good of ourselves, but only by means of God’s grace, though he requires our co-operation; since the servants could only make use of the talents given them to gain others. (A talent is £187 10s.) It is also worthy of remark, that both he who received five and he who received only two talents, received an equal reward of entering into the joy of our Lord; which shews, that only an account will be taken according to what we have received, and that however mean and despicable our abilities may be, we still have an equal facility with the most learned of entering heaven. (Jansenius) — The servant to whom this treasure was delivered, is allegorically explained of the faithful adorers of God, in the Jewish law, who departing from it, became followers of Christ, and therefore deserving of a double recompense. … The servant to whom the two talents were delivered, is understood of the Gentiles, who were justified in the faith and confession of the Father and the Son, and confessed our Lord Jesus Christ, God and man, composed of body and soul; and as the people of the Jews doubled the five talents they received, so the Gentiles, by the duplication of their two talents, merited a double recompense also. … But the servant who received only one talent, and hid it in the ground, represented such of the Jews as persisted in the observation of the old law, and thus kept their talent buried in the ground, for fear the Gentiles should be converted. (St. Hilary)

Ver. 18. He that had received the one. The man who hid this one talent, represents all those who, having received any good quality, whether mental or corporal, employ it only on earthly things. (St. Gregory) — Origen is also of the same sentiment: if you see any one, says he, who has received from God the gift of teaching and instructing others to salvation, yet will not exercise himself in this function, he buries his talent in the ground, like this unworthy servant, and must expect to receive the like reward."

Commentary from: haydock1859.tripod.com/index.html

 

[Rascalking]

The only thing wrong with capitalism it isn’t clear enough so everyone can see it’s benefits.

Even people who are usually strongly anti-capitalist won’t be the first ones to ship off to Cuba or Korea. They benefit greatly by living in a capitalist country.

 

[estesbob]

What’s the difference between capitalism and communism?

Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism the reverse is true.

• some Anglophone philosophy

Which is why the United States and North Korea are so similar

 

[Abu]

Dirt #167:
One would do well to READ the entire encyclical in context, rather than parsing out one or two sentances that support an opinion.

Precisely – emphatically affirming the benefits of free enterprise in Centesimus Annus, Bl JPII emphasises what both he and Pope benedict XVI have taught over and over again:
**“These criticisms are directed not so much against an economic system as against an ethical and cultural system.” **[CA # 39].

Some make their own trouble by failing to listen, learn and love the truth that is why they fail to understand that people cause these problems, NOT the free enterprise economic system, which is why their “opinions” are faulty.

But this was explained clearly in #80:
“People can, and some do, undermine the common good, and the primary role of government is to support families in solidarity, and the role of the Church in subsidiarity, and that’s why we need laws to seek and punish those who steal, cheat, swindle, and against monopolies. Dr Alejandro Chafuen: Economics “is the study of the formal applications that can be deduced from the fact that human beings act purposefully. It does not consider whether these actions are good or bad (an ethical question). Economic science is value free. It analyses cause and effect relationships that, if true, are scientific….only human acts can be judged morally.” (Christians For Freedom, Ignatius, 1986, p 33).”

 

[Abu]

Dirt #169
The problem with finding commentary that supports one opinion is that it may be refuted with other Commentary, especially by those who seek to save Souls as opposed to supporting an economic theory.

False comparisons are useless for everyone. That Christ supports work and enterprise in pointing to our spiritual welfare which is what we are commanded to do, is irrefutable and not condemned anywhere in Sacred Scripture. Those concentrating on the spiritual can, and may, fail to see Christ’s support for work, as Fr Percy elucidates. We are dealing with principles of cause and effect NOT theories.

The error of confusing the vices of people with the plain and evident support of Jesus for prudence, justice fortitude and temperance in commerce seems never-ending.

In Matthew 25:14-30, we find Jesus’ Parable of the Talents.
As with all parables, its meaning is multi-layered. Its eternal meaning relates to how we use God’s gift of grace. With regard to the material world, it is a story about capital, investment, entrepreneurship, and the proper use of economic resources. It is a direct rebuttal to those who insist that business success and Christian living are contradictory.

Christ shows the reality that wealth needs to be produced before it can be distributed.
In the parable of the talents, Jesus lauds the servant who has multiplied talents – “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). Christ certainly praised the wise use of the fundamental right of economic initiative and prudence in this parable.

1. “There is the emphasis on the ‘talent’, which is a measure of value.
2. “The trading activity of the two stewards is important. Christ praises them for the energy, alertness, and perseverance they demonstrate in making a truly significant profit (they have doubled the original sum). There is a reference to accountability which is crucial to any business.
3. “Then the nuanced criticism of fear: ‘I was afraid, and I went off and hid your talent in the ground.’ This fear leads the lazy steward to avoid the risks and obstacles that are a key part of entrepreneurial work.
4. “There is the clear reference to the financial system. The lazy steward at least could have placed the ‘money with the bankers, and at my coming I should have received what was my own with interest.’ ”

“We can this affirm unambiguously that Jesus Christ ‘looks with love on upon human work’ and that the work of the merchant – the businessman or the entrepreneur – is one of the ‘different forms’ of work that is affirmed. The parable of the talents makes this clear by its reference to money, trading, risk taking and banking.”
Entrepreneurship in the Catholic Tradition, Fr Anthony G Percy, Lexington Books, 2010, p 48-49].

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].

 

[Dirt]

Precisely – emphatically affirming the benefits of free enterprise in Centesimus Annus, Bl JPII emphasises what both he and Pope benedict XVI have taught over and over again:
**“These criticisms are directed not so much against an economic system as against an ethical and cultural system.” **[CA # 39].

Some make their own trouble by failing to listen, learn and love the truth that is why they fail to understand that people cause these problems, NOT the free enterprise economic system, which is why their “opinions” are faulty.

How can one argue that? How can one seperate a system from those utilizing the system? That is like attempting to seperate fire and heat.

But this was explained clearly in #80:
“People can, and some do, undermine the common good, and the primary role of government is to support families in solidarity, and the role of the Church in subsidiarity, and that’s why we need laws to seek and punish those who steal, cheat, swindle, and against monopolies. Dr Alejandro Chafuen: Economics “is the study of the formal applications that can be deduced from the fact that human beings act purposefully. It does not consider whether these actions are good or bad (an ethical question). **Economic science is value free. It analyses cause and effect relationships that, if true, are scientific….only human acts can be judged morally.” **(Christians For Freedom, Ignatius, 1986, p 33).”
This is where we will never agree. I do not believe that anything is value neutral. All human endeavors are based on some value system. And we, as Catholics, are taught the true value system is that given us by The One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. Pax Christi to you.

 

[RCIA4]

Personally I am against capitalism… In many Catholic countries in Europe such as Belgium. Ireland, Spain, Malta, and Poland there are strong traditions of Catholic distributism and anti-capitalism feelings in general…

Catholic trade unions which advocate Catholic alternatives to both socialism and capitalism are abundant…

Pay no attention to Catholics who advocate for the free market for they are violating Catholic social teaching… Please pray for the destruction of greed and inequitable sharing of wealth so a new world order based on distributism comes about…

 

[Abu]

Dirt #175
How can one seperate a system from those utilizing the system? That is like attempting to seperate fire and heat.
we, as Catholics, are taught the true value system is that given us by The One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

Unless and until you do you will forever be mired in error as the Popes have emphatically taught:

Pope Benedict XVI emphatically affirmed: “Society does not have to protect itself from the market, as if the development of the latter were ipso facto to entail the death of authentically human relations…Therefore it is not the instrument that must be called to account, but individuals, their moral conscience and their personal and social responsibility.” (Caritas in Veritate, Benedict XVI, 2009, #36).

“These criticisms are directed not so much against an economic system as against an ethical and cultural system.” [CA # 39].

Treating the Popes’ teaching and clear emphasis as worthless is precisely what dissenters who arrogantly claim superiority do.

 

[Abu]

RCIA4 #176
Pay no attention to Catholics who advocate for the free market for they are violating Catholic social teaching…

Since the Supreme Vicar of Christ emphatically affirms the free market, we know from what depths the idea of rejecting his teaching comes!

Where does the Church emphatically affirm free enterprise? In Her Scriptures, and Her social teaching.
Free enterprise, which is acknowledged as enabling the ‘fundamental human “right to freedom of economic initiative.” ’ (*Sollicitudo Rei Socialis *(On Human Concerns), Encyclical, 1987, #42).

Real Catholics follow the wise teaching of the Church such as Bl John Paul II, Centesimus Annus, 42, 1991:
‘If by “capitalism” is meant an economic system which recognizes the fundamental and positive role of business, the market, private property and the resulting responsibility for the means of production, as well as free human creativity in the economic sector, then the answer is certainly in the affirmative, even though it would perhaps be more appropriate to speak of a “business economy”, “market economy” or simply “free economy”.’

 

[Monte_RCMS]

Personally I am against capitalism… In many Catholic countries in Europe such as Belgium. Ireland, Spain, Malta, and Poland there are strong traditions of Catholic distributism and anti-capitalism feelings in general…

Catholic trade unions which advocate Catholic alternatives to both socialism and capitalism are abundant…

Pay no attention to Catholics who advocate for the free market for they are violating Catholic social teaching… Please pray for the destruction of greed and inequitable sharing of wealth so a new world order based on distributism comes about…

Without capitalism, Europe is imploding … collapsing in on itself.

The problem with capitalism is that it is attacked by people who cannot even explain what capitalism is and also cannot explain what profits are.

The problem with socialism is that it not only runs out of other peoples’ money to subsidize itself, but it also runs out of PEOPLE!

alfin2100.blogspot.com/2011/12/hope-vs-futile-despair-dynamic.html

Two excerpts:

The New York Times featured the town of Laviano in Italy. Only half its houses were occupied. But any closures of its churches were the least of its problems. It’s problem was even worse: it didn’t have enough kids to keep the schools open. The newly elected mayor “racked his brain and came up with a desperate idea: pay women to have babies.”

Laviano is not unique in Italy, or in Europe. In fact, it may be a harbinger. In the 1990s, European demographers began noticing a downward trend in population across the Continent and behind it a sharply falling birthrate. …

For the first time on record, birthrates in southern and Eastern Europe had dropped below 1.3. For the demographers, this number had a special mathematical portent. At that rate, a country’s population would be cut in half in 45 years, creating a falling-off-a-cliff effect from which it would be nearly impossible to recover. Kohler and his colleagues invented an ominous new term for the phenomenon: “lowest-low fertility.”

What happened? The problem as Steyn succinctly puts it, is that socialism not only “runs out of other people’s money”, as Margaret Thatcher once put it. It simply runs out of people. Future historians, if there are any left, will puzzle over how this came about. The economists will have an easier time explaining it. Through some process, socialism has apparently increased the discount rate to the point where the future is consumed for the sake of the present. Not only is investment taxed to feed consumption, tomorrow is hocked to pay for today.

If the fiscal deficit is the direct monetary expression of this high discount rate, the collapsing population is its equivalent demographic expression. Both are saying the same thing, in different terms. In incentives terms, the future is no longer real; so people don’t save up for it nor do they have any incentive to sacrifice for it.

Second excerpt:

This bubble graphic shows where science and technology R&D is being spent. Here is a PDF report showing Battelle’s near term projection for global R&D spending. R&D spending in Europe will be essentially stagnant, while spending in Asia is supposed to drive future growth in R&D.

Nations that are collapsing due to debt and demographics are not likely to look toward the future. They are far too busy paying for the mistakes of the past and dealing with their expanding debt of suffering today.

 

[David_Castlen]

Personally I am against capitalism… In many Catholic countries in Europe such as Belgium. Ireland, Spain, Malta, and Poland there are strong traditions of Catholic distributism and anti-capitalism feelings in general…

Catholic trade unions which advocate Catholic alternatives to both socialism and capitalism are abundant…

Pay no attention to Catholics who advocate for the free market for they are violating Catholic social teaching… Please pray for the destruction of greed and inequitable sharing of wealth so a new world order based on distributism comes about…

Do you teach RCIA? and if so, do you teach them this?