Why is socialism bad by Church teaching?

[frantony]

Socialism is contrary to democracy in that socialism calls for the redistribution of wealth and abolishment of private property. This means that if you work harder in your job than your co-worker you will not be rewarded.

In capitalism, some capitalists and their lazy children get a life-long holiday.

There is no incentive to excel. All wealth is distributed evenly and everything is state run and owned.
Labourers in capitalistic economies are exploited by the rich land and factory owners.
The rich get richer at the expense of the poor. But then who cares for the poor?

Few freedms exist. Couples were not allowed to have public displays of affections and I am sure it is discouraged even now.
Social freedoms depend on the culture of the people, and not on the kind of economic systems they follow.

Socialized medicine is frowned on in the U.S. and this is basically what is the proposed end result of the new health plan. Canada and Britain have socialized medicine along with other countries. It is not a popular idea in the U.S. because there is no incentive for the doctors to excel or even do a good job and taxes are usually raised to pay for this. Of course, the primary motivator is money and goods in the U.S. and that is threatened in a socialist medical community.

Cuba and Kerala(in India), where socialized medicine is practised have better medical statistics (infant mortality, longevity, etc.) than the U.S, at a much cheaper cost. In the U.S, doctors, phamaceuticals, and hospitals shamelessly fleece the public.

I asked fellow visiting from China to take care of my dad when he was ill and he and his wife who is a doctor were allowed to have two children, the limit imposed by the government is one child per family. Until very recently it was frowned on for any family to have more than one.

Even after imposing these restrictions, China’s population is still flourishing, and is growing at rates several times that of capitalistic countries. Some capitalistic countries have negative growth, and will cease to exist after some years.

China has performed millions of abortions, sterilizations and infanticide since they implemented this policy in the 70’s. They are now having problems because there are an excess of young men and not enough young women available for marriage.

There are more abortions and sterilizations per thousand of people in capitalistic countries than they have in China.

Most of the aborted and murdered children were girls becaused they we valued less. Now they do not have enough women.

In capitalistic countries, they abort boys as well as girls.

Socialism in China since the Cultural Revolution has been a vehicle for people to be murdered who excercise free speech and assembly such as the Tiananmen Square massacre.

School children in the U.S carry guns to their classes and massacres their classmates.
Black people have no equality with the whites, and live in slums, and mug people and kill them for money to buy bread.

Wiki on Mao-“Mao’s policies and political purges from 1949 to 1976 are widely believed to have caused the deaths of between 50 to 70 million people.” This was the Cultural Revolution that not only brought famine but the murder of any person or group of people who did not fit into the Revolutionary plan.

More people are killed due to religious reasons in non communist countries than are killed in communist countries for socialist causes. Shiites kill Sunni, and Catholics kill protestants, and Jews kill Muslims and even wage war.

Where the seeds of Socialism have been sown has meant the loss of millions of lives born and unborn.
Capitalism has caused more hatred, murders, and destruction of property due to strife and competition among the public than any communist system has caused. In many capitalistic countries, mothers kill their babies because they have no money to feed them. In some cases, they even kill and eat their children when they become hungry. In socialistic countries, all people get according to their needs, and not according to their might, or riches, or political contacts, like the do in capitalistic countries, where some rich people waste food while the poor starves.

Many Chinese have escaped from China and earlier in history from Taiwan to the U.S. to escape the rigid social structure and oppression. I know such a elderly woman and on her journey her she had to “give up” a child to get here.
*** "Gave up the child to whom? and why? Is it because she will not be able to feed the child in America? If she is an elderly woman, her child will surely not be an infant, and must have decided to stay back and work in economically flourishing China than migrate and live jobless and on the dole in the U.S.***

Also, look up Stalin, you won’t believe how under his brand of socialism he resorted to murder and starve millions of Russians.
Stalin was any day a better statesman and leader than George Bush.

Thank you for the great question, I am sure others have much to add.
What is written in bold italics are added by me.

:

 

[Monk21]

How many here would say that Canada is a Socialist country?
Besides your schools, libraries, Police, Fire dept. highways etc.
We have,
Socialized medicine.
Old age pensions @ age 65, plus supplements if you need them.
Canada pension, may be taken out at 6o, most go to 65.

 

[Monk21]

Frantony;
The example you use is of Communism. Socialism is not communism, although some thing do intermix.
Americans here seem to think that Socialism is a complete package and it is just nonsense abt freedom or the lack of it and no private property. There is something in their minds that won’t let go and they label things and paint everything with one brush. They rail on abt everything they have not experienced. They think they have the best country in the world and most have not been out of the country. I find them to be the most uninformed people on this earth. I don’t say that to be nasty, I say it with sadness.

 

[Cruxis117]

Precisely because we no longer live in a truly Capitalistic nation. Socialism and Communism are ever so slowly being imposed on us, and they have been for several decades now. Few people living today in the U.S. are old enough to remember a purely Capitalistic nation.

Because it was never such a thing. the U.S. has never benefited from Pure Capitalism, and other case examples showing why the U.S. should be a Democratic Socialist country are the E.U. (which have far better standards of living) as well as Chile, which was one of the “fruits” of an experiment with “Pure Capitalism” (resulting in the destruction of the economy).

 

[Cruxis117]

Frantony;
The example you use is of Communism. Socialism is not communism, although some thing do intermix.
Americans here seem to think that Socialism is a complete package and it is just nonsense abt freedom or the lack of it and no private property. There is something in their minds that won’t let go and they label things and paint everything with one brush. They rail on abt everything they have not experienced. They think they have the best country in the world and most have not been out of the country. I find them to be the most uninformed people on this earth. I don’t say that to be nasty, I say it with sadness.

I completely agree. Over here in Canada, you actually learn the difference between the two (Communism and Socialism, and there is a BIG difference, considering they are at two separate places on the Political and Economic scale).

While Communism is, when taken into context from history, a failed ideology, Capitalism and it’s political ally, Fascism, are also failed ideologies as well.

 

[Monk21]

A Jesuit speaking at a social justice conference here said " Capitalism is very good…then he added…“for the rich”

 

[Cruxis117]

It is a common error to equate the condemnation of an inordinate attachment to riches with the creation of wealty through hard work and thrift.
Face Reality:
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.*
In the parable of the talents, Jesus Christ, God the Son, 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).

Um…Scripture disagrees with you.

Matthew 19:16-21

As well as the calling of Peter and the others in Luke, and the other references in scripture. You misunderstand the scripture you quote, that is not about capitalism. That’s why it’s a parable. That bit of scripture is about sloth, about laziness. Not about those who are truly the poor and need our aid, which is what Socialism is all about.

 

[Abu]

Cruxis117
That bit of scripture is about sloth, about laziness. Not about those who are truly the poor and need our aid, which is what Socialism is all about.

False. Further, Mt 19:16-21 refers finally to the rich young man becoming an Apostle “come follow Me”. Nowhere does Christ require 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?

Christ’s teaching on wealth and property
In his outstanding work Christians For Freedom, Ignatius 1986, p 43-47, (with a new edition, since), Dr Alejandro Chafuen has examined carefully the teaching of Christ and wealth. Citing the case of the rich young man in Luke 18:18-25, Dr Chafuen remarks that many authors think that Jesus was condemning the possession of riches, but “the Late Scholastics indicated that this was not the correct interpretation. Citing Luke 14:26, where Jesus says, ‘If any man come to Me without hating his father, mother, wife, children, brothers, sisters, yes and his own life too, he cannot be My disciple,’ the Scholastics pointed out that this passage does not enjoin Christians to hate their fathers. Such doctrine would contradict the Fourth Commandment. Thomist and Scholastic interpretations of this passage is that the entrance to the kingdom of Heaven is denied to anyone who values things more than God. In Matthew’s Gospel (10:37), the same passage reads: ‘Anyone who prefers father or mother to Me is not worthy of Me. Anyone who prefers son or daughter to Me is not worthy of Me.’ It would be a violation of the natural order to value a created thing above its creator, as did the young ruler who pursued riches as his ultimate goal.

“As is indicated in Luke (12:29-31): ‘you must not set your heart on things to eat and things to drink; nor must you worry. It is the pagans of this world who set their hearts on all these things. Your father well knows you need them. No; set your hearts on His kingdom, and these other things will be given you as well.’ 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.

Get the facts and face reality.
No economic laws encourage “hoarding of wealth” – some PEOPLE hoard wealth. No wealth can be created until it is produced – that’s why the Late Scholastic system works so well to enable everyone to produce some wealth and to do with it as they choose through free-will. Economic laws are based on the principles of human action – of cause and effect involving God-given reason.

Free enterprise economics is one of many “greats” that the Catholic Church gave to the world in building Western civilization, including Catholic charity.

The socialism that is condemned by Pius XI in Quadragesimo Anno, 1931 has the following false theories:

1. The Welfare State as the supreme objective.
2. Everything belongs to the State, thus excluding the real rights to private property.
3. The elimination of free enterprise in favour of state-controlled production and distribution.
4. Rejects the principle of subsidiarity.

As Fr John Corapi explains:
“The common error is to think that socialism helps the poor and disenfranchised. As Pope Leo XIII pointed out as long ago as 1891 in his Encyclical Rerum Novarum, socialism does not help the poor. Rather, it reduces everyone to the same lowest common denominator of poverty and misery, while at the same time drying up the very sources of capital.”

 

[jimpres]

As Fr John Corapi explains:
“The common error is to think that socialism helps the poor and disenfranchised. As Pope Leo XIII pointed out as long ago as 1891 in his Encyclical Rerum Novarum, socialism does not help the poor. Rather, it reduces everyone to the same lowest common denominator of poverty and misery, while at the same time drying up the very sources of capital.”

Amen distribution of wealth.

 

[Cruxis117]

False. Further, Mt 19:16-21 refers finally to the rich young man becoming an Apostle “come follow Me”. Nowhere does Christ require 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?

Christ’s teaching on wealth and property
In his outstanding work Christians For Freedom, Ignatius 1986, p 43-47, (with a new edition, since), Dr Alejandro Chafuen has examined carefully the teaching of Christ and wealth. Citing the case of the rich young man in Luke 18:18-25, Dr Chafuen remarks that many authors think that Jesus was condemning the possession of riches, but “the Late Scholastics indicated that this was not the correct interpretation. Citing Luke 14:26, where Jesus says, ‘If any man come to Me without hating his father, mother, wife, children, brothers, sisters, yes and his own life too, he cannot be My disciple,’ the Scholastics pointed out that this passage does not enjoin Christians to hate their fathers. Such doctrine would contradict the Fourth Commandment. Thomist and Scholastic interpretations of this passage is that the entrance to the kingdom of Heaven is denied to anyone who values things more than God. In Matthew’s Gospel (10:37), the same passage reads: ‘Anyone who prefers father or mother to Me is not worthy of Me. Anyone who prefers son or daughter to Me is not worthy of Me.’ It would be a violation of the natural order to value a created thing above its creator, as did the young ruler who pursued riches as his ultimate goal.

“As is indicated in Luke (12:29-31): ‘you must not set your heart on things to eat and things to drink; nor must you worry. It is the pagans of this world who set their hearts on all these things. Your father well knows you need them. No; set your hearts on His kingdom, and these other things will be given you as well.’ 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. So, he never asked the young rich man to give everything he owned to the poor to follow him? Weird…I guess I never read that in Scripture…

Get the facts and face reality.
No economic laws encourage “hoarding of wealth” – some PEOPLE hoard wealth. No wealth can be created until it is produced – that’s why the Late Scholastic system works so well to enable everyone to produce some wealth and to do with it as they choose through free-will. Economic laws are based on the principles of human action – of cause and effect involving God-given reason.

Free enterprise economics is one of many “greats” that the Catholic Church gave to the world in building Western civilization, including Catholic charity.

**The socialism that is condemned by Pius XI in Quadragesimo Anno, 1931 has the following false theories:

1. The Welfare State as the supreme objective.
2. Everything belongs to the State, thus excluding the real rights to private property.
3. The elimination of free enterprise in favour of state-controlled production and distribution.
4. Rejects the principle of subsidiarity. **

As Fr John Corapi explains:
“The common error is to think that socialism helps the poor and disenfranchised. As Pope Leo XIII pointed out as long ago as 1891 in his Encyclical Rerum Novarum, socialism does not help the poor. Rather, it reduces everyone to the same lowest common denominator of poverty and misery, while at the same time drying up the very sources of capital.”

This is known as Communism. Not Socialism. Two Entirely Separate things which can be understood if you take a basic High School Social Studies Course. And I’ve taken this course…in a Catholic High School. Trust me, Christ Jesus (not to press any labels on him) taught things which follow what we consider today a Democratic Socialist ideology. St. Peter did own a fishing boat…and left it and everything else he owned to follow the Christ.

What kind of foolish thought is that? No, The CC did NOT develop a Free Market Economy. Have you ever heard of Adam Smith? Who is considered the Father of Capitalism and your free market economic failure? My friend, listen to reason. Socialism has many, and I mean many wonderful examples of how it works. Ever heard of Norway? Democratic Socialist country, which has one of the Highest Standards and Qualities of Living?

Trust me, Capitalism, when fully understood, is an evil which must be cast aside. Likewise, Communism, and Fascism as well must be thrown away. Socialism, when understood in proper context, is morally sound.

 

[Cruxis117]

Furthermore, if you want a perfect case example of your Capitalism at work…look at Chile. Free-Enterprise Economics was surely a “Great” there…a “Great” tragedy.

 

[Abu]

Cruxis117
The CC did NOT develop a Free Market Economy…Socialism, when understood in proper context, is morally sound.

False – The world is in crisis in every respect, partly because of what passes all too often for “Catholic” education.
Learn from the great Fr John Corapi and the Late Scholastic theologians who developed the laws of economics; no faithful Catholic may reject the condemnation of socialism declared uninterruptedly from the earliest social teaching.

St Augustine taught that wickedness was not inherent in commerce, that price was a function not simply of the seller’s costs, but also of the buyer’s wants, and it was up to the individual to live righteously. Politics I, 1254]. Thus he gave legitimacy to merchants, and to the deep involvement of the Church in the birth of free enterprise. [Stephen P Bensch, *Historiography: Medieval European and Mediterranean Slavery 1998, p 231; Cf. Victory of Reason, Rodney Stark, Random House, 2005, p 57,58, 254].

Randall Collins has noted that innovation and specialization in the monastic estates was “a version of the developed characteristics of capitalism itself… the dynamism of the medieval economy was primarily that of the Church.” [Randall Collins, *The Sociology of Philosophies: A Global Theory of Intellectual Change, 1998, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, p 47].

The reader might notice that the life expectancy of people in the West has taken tremendous leaps since the 1800s. Why? Because in the West the free market system has discovered ways to create wealth. Much of that created wealth goes into the paychecks of households and is spent on medical care. But where did the medical care come from? It comes from the fact that some people and the “evil” corporations take their discretionary income and save it. This money is then used to develop diagnostic medical equipment, medicines, and surgical equipment, and support medical schools which train practitioners who are able to use these great things for the health of every patient. This is apart from the huge increases in living standards from the poverty before free enterprise was developed.
See Dr William Luckey (*Back To Nature September 25, 2009):
[drwilliamluckey.com/index.cfm/Economics-Errors]

The Medieval Schoolmen who preferred to be called the “Doctors”, “were the foremost thinkers of their times.” (Christians For Freedom, Ignatius 1986, p 21). They employed logic and reasoning for the development of mankind. Chafuen incisively points out: “The Doctors offered utilitarian arguments to show that goods that are privately owned are better used than commonly owned goods. This explanation offers a budding theory of economic development: the division of goods and their ultimate possession by private individuals facilitates increased production.”

Pope John Paul II acclaimed the free economy that recognises the “fundamental role” of private property and the freedom of mankind to economic creativity, as “the path to true civil and economic progress” within “the fundamental and positive role of business, the market”… “and the resulting responsibility for the means of production.” Centesimus Annus #42, 1991].

So it is time to face reality. Are you going to cast the first stone against the Catholic Church?

 

[Cruxis117]

False – The world is in crisis in every respect, partly because of what passes all too often for “Catholic” education.
Learn from the great Fr John Corapi and the Late Scholastic theologians who developed the laws of economics; **no faithful Catholic may reject the condemnation of socialism declared uninterruptedly from the earliest social teaching. **

St Augustine taught that wickedness was not inherent in commerce, that price was a function not simply of the seller’s costs, but also of the buyer’s wants, and it was up to the individual to live righteously. Politics I, 1254]. Thus he gave legitimacy to merchants, and to the deep involvement of the Church in the birth of free enterprise. [Stephen P Bensch, *Historiography: Medieval European and Mediterranean Slavery

1998, p 231; Cf. Victory of Reason, Rodney Stark, Random House, 2005, p 57,58, 254].

Randall Collins has noted that innovation and specialization in the monastic estates was “a version of the developed characteristics of capitalism itself… the dynamism of the medieval economy was primarily that of the Church.” [Randall Collins, *The Sociology of Philosophies: A Global Theory of Intellectual Change, 1998, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, p 47].

The reader might notice that the life expectancy of people in the West has taken tremendous leaps since the 1800s. Why? Because in the West the free market system has discovered ways to create wealth. Much of that created wealth goes into the paychecks of households and is spent on medical care. But where did the medical care come from? It comes from the fact that some people and the “evil” corporations take their discretionary income and save it.** This money is then used to develop diagnostic medical equipment, medicines, and surgical equipment, and support medical schools which train practitioners who are able to use these great things for the health of every patient.** That can afford it. Many people cannot. Just as well, America, for having such a system that you say is good, happens to have a worse (until recently, thanks to their first actual intelligent president in the last 8 years) health care system. This is apart from the huge increases in living standards from the poverty before free enterprise was developed.
See Dr William Luckey (*Back To Nature September 25, 2009):
[drwilliamluckey.com/index.cfm/Economics-Errors]

The Medieval Schoolmen who preferred to be called the “Doctors”, “were the foremost thinkers of their times.” (Christians For Freedom, Ignatius 1986, p 21). They employed logic and reasoning for the development of mankind. Chafuen incisively points out: “The Doctors offered utilitarian arguments to show that goods that are privately owned are better used than commonly owned goods. This explanation offers a budding theory of economic development: the division of goods and their ultimate possession by private individuals facilitates increased production.”

Pope John Paul II acclaimed the free economy that recognises the “fundamental role” of private property and the freedom of mankind to economic creativity, as “the path to true civil and economic progress” within “the fundamental and positive role of business, the market”… “and the resulting responsibility for the means of production.” Centesimus Annus #42, 1991].

So it is time to face reality. Are you going to cast the first stone against the Catholic Church?

I will not cast a stone against the Church, nor will I ever. I will cast a stone against the misunderstanding that you have against Socialism, which you interpret to mean communism. I agree with Pope JPII as well as the others you have mentioned, in a sense that yes, we should have private property. There is nothing wrong with that, nor is there something wrong with commerce or trade. What there is a problem with is Pure, Unadulterated Capitalism, which does not and should not ever exist.

It is Time to Face Reality. Are you going to propose that sharing your wealth and sharing your goods with others is wrong? Are you going to propose that Great Depression and The Recent Recession that had just happened are not byproducts of your glorious Capitalistic system, which Democratic Socialist Countries (aka countries with Mixed Economies, such as Canada) have survived far better than the U.S.?

Oh, and in terms about that crack about the “Catholic Education”, granted, faith wise there isn’t a great emphasis, like private schooling, but likewise, the education in the Catholic School System I went to was FAR better than the public.

We aren’t in disagreement, if you can believe that. We do acknowledge that commerce is good, and so on and so forth. But ultimately, Capitalism is and has always been a failed ideology, economically. And yes, there is a difference between Communism and Socialism, one that you fail to grasp it seems.

Go watch Capitalism: A Love Story, by Michael Moore. It seems that many faithful Catholics, Moore included, understand the evils imbedded in Capitalism. BTW, you make it sound as if the CC has a say in Economics, whereas it is only able to teach in Faith and Moral Matters, not Economic or Political. No faithful Catholic would be blind to the socialistic teachings of Christ, such as sharing your wealth, forgoing possessions (or lust for possessions). And in the Book of Acts, it shows how the Apostles lived Communally, sharing what they had and working for what they needed. THAT, is the beauty of a socialistic system. Not “competition” and “working for individual benefit”, which is what you are proposing to be a Godly Teaching.

 

[Abu]

Cruxis117
What there is a problem with is Pure, Unadulterated Capitalism, which does not and should not ever exist.
in the Book of Acts, it shows how the Apostles lived Communally, sharing what they had and working for what they needed. THAT, is the beauty of a socialistic system. Not “competition” and “working for individual benefit”, which is what you are proposing to be a Godly Teaching.

How puerile – tilting at windmills – at what does not exist!
BTW, “Capitalism” was Marx’s term of derision.

And now more fantasy over the Acts of the Apostles, extolling Acts 2:44-47, where the faithful lived together and owned everything in common, as a “beauty of a socialistic system”!
These so-called “Apostolics” were condemned by St Thomas and the Late Scholastics, who quote St Augustine. Why?
In his Summa, II-II, Q. 66, art. 2, resp., St Thomas quotes St Augustine: “Augustine says: ‘The people styled apostolic are those who arrogantly claimed this title for themselves because they refused to admit married folk or property owners to their fellowship, arguing from the model of the many monks and clerics in the Catholic Church (De Haeresibus 40).’ But such people are heretics because they cut themselves off from the Church by alleging that those who, unlike themselves, marry and own property have no hope of salvation.”

The scoffing at “competition” and “working for individual benefit” reflects the errors of the condemned Liberation Theology.

Since the free enterprise system of economics by its nature and results has enabled the creation and spread of wealth for untold billions since the days of eking out an existence before the 18th century, the illusion above should be replaced by reality.

Long before the so-called “Protestant work ethic”, the rise of the West was due to an extraordinary faith in reason, influenced by Greek philosophy, which resulted from Catholic theology and doctrine, unlike Greek religion. Free enterprise “evolved, beginning early in the ninth century, by Catholic monks…seeking to ensure the economic security of their monastic estates.”(The Victory of Reason, Rodney Stark, Random House, 2005, p 55].

Catholic philosophy and theology, based on reason and faith, enabled the birth of free enterprise. From the great monastic estates in the ninth century, immense increases in agricultural productivity grew from “such significant innovations as the switch to horses, the heavy moldboard plow, and the three-field system” away from subsistence agriculture to specialised crops and products, sold at a profit to initiate a cash economy. “As their incomes continued to mount, this led many monasteries to become banks, lending to the nobility.” The Victory of Reason, Rodney Stark, Random House, 2005, p 58].

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…” For these reasons Joseph Schumpeter applauded them as the first real economists. (Thomas E Woods Jr, The Church And The Market, Lexington Books, 2005, p 8).

 

[Abu]

Cruxis117
Capitalism is and has always been a failed ideology, economically. And yes, there is a difference between Communism and Socialism, one that you fail to grasp it seems. Are you going to propose that Great Depression and The Recent Recession that had just happened are not by products of your glorious Capitalistic system, which Democratic Socialist Countries (aka countries with Mixed Economies, such as Canada) have survived far better than the U.S.?

The facts of the worth to mankind of free enterprise are self-evident, and as we have seen have been acknowledged by the Magisterium whose duty from Christ is to teach the nature of man and uphold the laws established in human nature founded on the principles of human action – of cause and effect involving God-given reason – which, in economics were elucidated by the Late Scholastics as we have seen, and based on a standard social principle of Christ’s Church – subsidiarity.
On the contrary, socialism has been roundly condemned as we have seen.

Morality is based in the person engaging with those laws. We have many problems – caused by politicians and economists and central bankers who prostitute those free enterprise laws by their foolish meddling and create injustices which plague every economy.

It is knowledgeable, faithful Catholics who may best work in harmony with God’s natural law in free enterprise to achieve the common good of society, simply because they are open to the fullness of truth and accept the social principle of Christ’s Church – subsidiarity.

Unlike the sharp depression of 1920-21 which was sensibly handled, the Great Depression was caused by pumping money into the economy.
Alan Greenspan has highlighted the “excess credit which the Fed pumped into the economy," resulting, finally, in an American economic collapse. The collapse of which Greenspan wrote was, of course, the Great Depression beginning in 1929 and extending, mostly, until 1941. This judgment which Greenspan makes about the “excess credit” that directly brought about the Great Depression was made in a 1966 article in Ayn Rand’s Objectivist magazine and subsequently republished in Rand’s Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal.[2]
[2] Alan Greenspan, “Gold and Economic Freedom” in Ayn Rand’s *Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal *(New York: Penguin, 1987), pp. 20ff.

As Federal Reserve chairman between 1987 and 2006, Greenspan acted even more irresponsibly than the Fed officials he was criticizing. Rather than, “sopping up the excess reserves,” Greenspan added even more, transforming a stock market bubble into a housing and consumer spending bubble of historic and unprecedented proportions.[3]
[3] Peter Schiff, *Crash Proof: How to Profit from the Coming Economic Collapse *(Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2007), pp. xiii-xiv.
[From Peter Chojnowski, Ph.D].

 

[athair_siochain]

There is a GREAT difference between a CHOICE to move to a different career and being FORCED to do so. What do you think made this country great if it was not free enterprise and individual initiative to better one self giving a sense of accomplishment and focus?/QUOTE

Free enterprise and individual initiative does not make the country great. it is the exploitation of poor Nations, and this countries poor,
The exportation of major industries to poor Nations. the greedy profiteers make Billions if not Trillions of Dollars out of those poor Nations workers, many work for $1 a day making items that are exported back to the US , the retailers often charge 30 to 40 times the original manufacturing cost, I paid a mark up of 8000% for a item that was made in China
That is how Capitalism works.

 

[athair_siochain]

It is a common error to equate the condemnation of an inordinate attachment to riches with the creation of wealty through hard work and thrift.
Face Reality:
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.

In the parable of the talents, Jesus Christ, God the Son, 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).

Greed is one of the seven deadly sins.

PS 10:3. The greedy man curses and spurns God ,

11 Peter 2:3 (false prophets ) in their greed they will exploit you with false words,

11 Peter 2: 14 (false prophets ) have hearts trained in greed,

I could go on and on quoting the Bible . Christ was a Socialist of sorts, Capitalism is evil. it offers the man the whole world

 

[athair_siochain]

The facts of the worth to mankind of free enterprise are self-evident, and as we have seen have been acknowledged by the Magisterium whose duty from Christ is to teach the nature of man and uphold the laws established in human nature founded on the principles of human action – of cause and effect involving God-given reason – which, in economics were elucidated by the Late Scholastics as we have seen, and based on a standard social principle of Christ’s Church – subsidiarity.
On the contrary, socialism has been roundly condemned as we have seen.

Morality is based in the person engaging with those laws. We have many problems – caused by politicians and economists and central bankers who prostitute those free enterprise laws by their foolish meddling and create injustices which plague every economy.

It is knowledgeable, faithful Catholics who may best work in harmony with God’s natural law in free enterprise to achieve the common good of society, simply because they are open to the fullness of truth and accept the social principle of Christ’s Church – subsidiarity.

Unlike the sharp depression of 1920-21 which was sensibly handled, the Great Depression was caused by pumping money into the economy.
Alan Greenspan has highlighted the “excess credit which the Fed pumped into the economy," resulting, finally, in an American economic collapse. The collapse of which Greenspan wrote was, of course, the Great Depression beginning in 1929 and extending, mostly, until 1941. This judgment which Greenspan makes about the “excess credit” that directly brought about the Great Depression was made in a 1966 article in Ayn Rand’s Objectivist magazine and subsequently republished in Rand’s Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal.[2]
[2] Alan Greenspan, “Gold and Economic Freedom” in Ayn Rand’s *Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal *(New York: Penguin, 1987), pp. 20ff.

As Federal Reserve chairman between 1987 and 2006, Greenspan acted even more irresponsibly than the Fed officials he was criticizing. Rather than, “sopping up the excess reserves,” Greenspan added even more, transforming a stock market bubble into a housing and consumer spending bubble of historic and unprecedented proportions.[3]
[3] Peter Schiff, *Crash Proof: How to Profit from the Coming Economic Collapse *(Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2007), pp. xiii-xiv.
[From Peter Chojnowski, Ph.D].

A capitalistic mind is blinded by greed, economics is a box of mirrors, where did the money come from that was lent to young families to buy their first home,? answer it was pulled out of a hat, the equity hat.

Over a decade house prices were forced upwards to a point where they were up to 5 times the true value, one could say property values created Trillions of Dollars in equity Nation wide. all this equity was used to buy more property. overseas holidays and many luxury items.

If I had a dog kennel that was creating $400 dollars a week. that dog Kennel would be worth $400.000 as a investment property,

So how did the cookie crumble. ask the landlords and moneylenders between them they force prices up so property creates more equity., then if you check out those who control the Nation you will find the majority are landlords and moneylenders.

They will tell you the market place controls prices. who controls the market place,

So how can socialism be bad, Communism is no different than Capitalism because those who do the real work are slaves to the system. while the top cats live the good life…

We call people who are not working unemployed, the truth is they are surplus workers. employers create jobs, so they should be blamed if there is no job, most governments are happy with 5% surplus, this keeps wages low, that is Capitalistic thinking,

 

[Abu]

athair_siochain
Greed is one of the seven deadly sins. Christ was a Socialist of sorts, Capitalism is evil. it offers the man the whole world.

Nowhere does Christ require 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? Face reality.
It is a dream to feel that Christ was a “socialist”, just what His Church condemns.

Get the facts and face reality.
No economic laws encourage “hoarding of wealth” and greed – some PEOPLE hoard wealth, some people are greedy. No wealth can be created until it is produced – that’s why the Late Scholastic system works so well to enable everyone to produce some wealth and to do with it as they choose through free-will. Economic laws are based on the principles of human action – of cause and effect involving God-given reason.

In Caritas in Veritate (2009), Pope Benedict XVI writes: “The Church has always held that economic action is not to be regarded as something opposed to society.” Further: “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.” (#36).
There is no mention of greed or of capitalism.

To pontificate that “capitalism is evil” is to show a complete lack of knowledge and total disregard for true laws of economics, and to attack Christ’s Church which developed and acknowledges these laws.

When you can separate greedy people from the free enterprise system you will have begun to appreciate the laws as used by good, honest, thrifty people, who work with all others to produce wealth which is shared and available for charitable and other productive uses.

 

[Black_Rose]

Wiki on Mao-“Mao’s policies and political purges from 1949 to 1976 are widely believed to have caused the deaths of between 50 to 70 million people.” This was the Cultural Revolution that not only brought famine but the murder of any person or group of people who did not fit into the Revolutionary plan.

That is just anti-Mao propaganda. The Great Leap Forward which allegedly was the cause of 30 million deaths was not due to Chairman Mao’s malice, but can be attributed to bad weather, implementation flaws, and a US embargo.

Do you think the Kuomintang was any nicer and merciful than Mao Zedong?