• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

The pope hits the nail on the head

ttwtt78640 said:
Taking from those that produce the most and giving that to those that produce the least does not increase production but it does produce more income equality. You seem to think that the better economic plan is to increase income equality but at the expense of production. Comparing the per capita GDP of Vatican City and the USA, we see that the USA produces twice as much per person yet has greater income inequality - "fairness", it would appear, comes at a steep price.
Click to expand...

Increased production was never a biblical virtue, increased equality was.

BTW taking away from those that produce is the and giving to those that do not, is what modern capitalism is based on ... i.e. the for profit financial system, and labor exploitation.
 
RGacky3 said:
I don't think anyone argues for that ... having a saftey net and then ways to get back on your feet is that.

But yes ... I too am against the for profit financial system (100% dependant on the work of others), as well the capitalist wage labor system.
Click to expand...

It is easy to say what you are against, but much harder to say exactly what you would replace it with. ;)
 
RGacky3 said:
Increased production was never a biblical virtue, increased equality was.

BTW taking away from those that produce is the and giving to those that do not, is what modern capitalism is based on ... i.e. the for profit financial system, and labor exploitation.
Click to expand...

Wrong. It is trading your production for satisfying your needs. A system that satisfies your needs regardless of your production is sure to fail.
 
RGacky3 said:
You can't just measure social justice on one single thing, for example, access to healthcare for the poor is a big one, economic security, workplace democracy, and so on are all relevant.
Click to expand...

I know. But you cannot do a multi-factoral analysis here. And you do not gain much additional insight at this level of discussion by spreading over a large number of indices. Buying power after transfers is a pretty good measure for our purposes here. Only if we want to start thinking about secondary problems does that become of interest. But if you start differentiating we lose any hope of sense, because the matter becomes so komplex it gets lost. Take any one of the questions you threw in just now and you have added more than 300 pages of definitions and equations.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
It is easy to say what you are against, but much harder to say exactly what you would replace it with. ;)
Click to expand...

Something that puts people before profits, and social welfare before property ....

Wrong. It is trading your production for satisfying your needs. A system that satisfies your needs regardless of your production is sure to fail.
Click to expand...

No it isn't, that's what workers do, Capitalists and financeers, trade use of their capital and control of money for the fruits of labor. Bankers don't produce anything ... the just "own" the same with capitalists (in their position as capitalists, not as managers).
 
RGacky3 said:
Increased production was never a biblical virtue, increased equality was.

BTW taking away from those that produce is the and giving to those that do not, is what modern capitalism is based on ... i.e. the for profit financial system, and labor exploitation.
Click to expand...
19After a long time the lord of those servants cometh, and reckoneth with them. 20And so he that had received five talents came and brought other five talents, saying, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me five talents: behold, I have gained beside them five talents more. 21 His lord said unto him, Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord
The King James Version, (Cambridge: Cambridge) 1769.
 
joG said:
I know. But you cannot do a multi-factoral analysis here. And you do not gain much additional insight at this level of discussion by spreading over a large number of indices. Buying power after transfers is a pretty good measure for our purposes here. Only if we want to start thinking about secondary problems does that become of interest. But if you start differentiating we lose any hope of sense, because the matter becomes so komplex it gets lost. Take any one of the questions you threw in just now and you have added more than 300 pages of definitions and equations.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily, because does that include the healthcare costs thats you'd have to have in a country with for profit healthcare? that someone with a socialized healthcare system wouldn't have to worry about? Does it include the amount of time free that a country with better labor laws allows? Does it include the lack of debt and lower interest rates that a person has in a country that has more socialized or less profit based or regulated financial industry? Does it take into account actual poverty rate and conditions?

No ....

Id say looking at poverty rates, living standards for hte poorest, and inequality levels counts.

For example a poorer country that has lower inequality is and a lower poverty rate, is doing better than a rich country with higher inequality and a higher poverty rate, even if overall working people make more money .... (just like a gold medalist 70kg boxer is better than the 120 kg boxer that comes in 15th place, even though that 120kg boxer might be able to knock out hte 70kg boxer).
 
johndylan1 said:
19After a long time the lord of those servants cometh, and reckoneth with them. 20And so he that had received five talents came and brought other five talents, saying, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me five talents: behold, I have gained beside them five talents more. 21 His lord said unto him, Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord
The King James Version, (Cambridge: Cambridge) 1769.
Click to expand...

Oh boy .... ok

vrs one

“Then the kingdom of heaven will be like this.

Its a PARABLE ... and EVERYONE reading this understands its about evangalism not actually an economic policy statement ... but if we were to take all parables literally, then ALL workers should get the same pay dispite how much they work ... ANd we should annoy our neighbors until they give us stuff we want ....

But keep reading

34 Then the king will say to those at his right hand, ‘Come, you that are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; 35 for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, 36 I was naked and you gave me clothing, I was sick and you took care of me, I was in prison and you visited me.’ 37 Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when was it that we saw you hungry and gave you food, or thirsty and gave you something to drink? 38 And when was it that we saw you a stranger and welcomed you, or naked and gave you clothing? 39 And when was it that we saw you sick or in prison and visited you?’ 40 And the king will answer them, ‘Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these who are members of my family,[g] you did it to me.’ 41 Then he will say to those at his left hand, ‘You that are accursed, depart from me into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels; 42 for I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not give me clothing, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.’ 44 Then they also will answer, ‘Lord, when was it that we saw you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not take care of you?’ 45 Then he will answer them, ‘Truly I tell you, just as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.

This .... is not a parable.
 
RGacky3 said:
Something that puts people before profits, and social welfare before property ....



No it isn't, that's what workers do, Capitalists and financeers, trade use of their capital and control of money for the fruits of labor. Bankers don't produce anything ... the just "own" the same with capitalists (in their position as capitalists, not as managers).
Click to expand...

OK. What would you replace bankers with? If private ownership/control is to be removed that leaves what? You want the federal gov't to control everything, but then who controls the federal gov't?
 
ttwtt78640 said:
OK. What would you replace bankers with? If private ownership/control is to be removed that leaves what? You want the federal gov't to control everything, but then who controls the federal gov't?
Click to expand...

Me personally? Credit Unions ... State banks that are democratically accountalbe .... and not for profit.

Who controls the federal government? The people as long as we have a functioning democratic system which is extremely important.
 
RGacky3 said:
Me personally? Credit Unions ... State banks that are democratically accountalbe .... and not for profit.

Who controls the federal government? The people as long as we have a functioning democratic system which is extremely important.
Click to expand...

A functioning democratic (actually a democratic republic) system is what we now have, although many question its effectiveness when things like PPACA are foisted upon us. ;)
 
ttwtt78640 said:
A functioning democratic (actually a democratic republic) system is what we now have, although many question its effectiveness when things like PPACA are foisted upon us. ;)
Click to expand...

Ehh ... if you think we have a functioning democratic (or democratic republic system) look at public opinion on policy and actual public policy ... then look at corporate opinion ....
 
RGacky3 said:
Ehh ... if you think we have a functioning democratic (or democratic republic system) look at public opinion on policy and actual public policy ... then look at corporate opinion ....
Click to expand...

So the basic problem is that the people are too stupid to vote wisely? Corporations do not vote, yet they obviously do influence the voting patterns of the people and, by extension, the actions of those elected.
 
RGacky3 said:
Not necessarily, because does that include the healthcare costs thats you'd have to have in a country with for profit healthcare? that someone with a socialized healthcare system wouldn't have to worry about? Does it include the amount of time free that a country with better labor laws allows? Does it include the lack of debt and lower interest rates that a person has in a country that has more socialized or less profit based or regulated financial industry? Does it take into account actual poverty rate and conditions?

No ....
Click to expand...

Yes and no. It does include all transfers. So the costs for healthcare would be included. Here, of course, we enter a really complicated item, however.

As far as labor laws are concerned, you demonstrate a problem, that I mentioned above. You say "better" laws. But, what do you mean? Is a law better that reduces the amount of buying power while reducing the amount of hours worked or one that increases the number of hours and the income?

When you pick up on interest rates you are moving into a realm that interacts with the social questions, but is really at a totally different level of analysis and as to the "country that has more socialized or less profit based or regulated financial industry" I am afraid, I have no idea, what you are talking about.
RGacky3 said:
Id say looking at poverty rates, living standards for hte poorest, and inequality levels counts.

For example a poorer country that has lower inequality is and a lower poverty rate, is doing better than a rich country with higher inequality and a higher poverty rate, even if overall working people make more money .... (just like a gold medalist 70kg boxer is better than the 120 kg boxer that comes in 15th place, even though that 120kg boxer might be able to knock out hte 70kg boxer).
Click to expand...

Not necessarily (and I do not mean your example). It would very much depend on your definitions and the levels we are talking about. A lot of people would probably prefer living in a rich country with a higher Gini at the poverty rate of 60% of average income than in a poorer country with a lower Gini at the poverty line, where that means no shower, one meal a day and meat for your birthday.
 
johndylan1 said:
19After a long time the lord of those servants cometh, and reckoneth with them. 20And so he that had received five talents came and brought other five talents, saying, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me five talents: behold, I have gained beside them five talents more. 21 His lord said unto him, Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord
The King James Version, (Cambridge: Cambridge) 1769.
Click to expand...

Is this real or are you joking? Mind you that you should not joke religion on religious discussions?
 
WOW!

So suddenly the Pope is a marxist? Lol.

A few quick questions:

What economic system has created more prosperity than capitalism? What has lifted more people out of poverty than capitalism?

How can you fail to see that demanding governments deliver equality of condition (something they can never do anyway) only serves to absolve individuals of their moral responsibility to their fellow man?
*i see this theme throughout leftist philosophy. People on the political left are most frequently the selfish, racist, sexists bigots in society- but they seem to assuage their guilt by identifying politically with those who have branded themselves as compassionate and tolerant- all style, no substance.*

Most importantly...
What other economic system is compatible with individual liberty?

enough for now



Jayar
 
Your Star said:
Those are not the only two options.
Click to expand...
We use to have a nice balance of both private endeavors and a government that did what the Constitution allowed it to do.

Now the swing is toward the government [at least] with a hand in everything to a government that is simply over-bearing at all levels.
 
WCH said:
We use to have a nice balance of both private endeavors and a government that did what the Constitution allowed it to do.

Now the swing is toward the government [at least] with a hand in everything to a government that is simply over-bearing at all levels.
Click to expand...

Eh, I'd say it's the exact opposite. Not enough regulation and too much corporate control.
 
RGacky3 said:
Oh boy .... ok

vrs one

“Then the kingdom of heaven will be like this.

Its a PARABLE ... and EVERYONE reading this understands its about evangalism not actually an economic policy statement ... but if we were to take all parables literally, then ALL workers should get the same pay dispite how much they work ... ANd we should annoy our neighbors until they give us stuff we want ....

But keep reading

34 Then the king will say to those at his right hand, ‘Come, you that are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; 35 for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, 36 I was naked and you gave me clothing, I was sick and you took care of me, I was in prison and you visited me.’ 37 Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when was it that we saw you hungry and gave you food, or thirsty and gave you something to drink? 38 And when was it that we saw you a stranger and welcomed you, or naked and gave you clothing? 39 And when was it that we saw you sick or in prison and visited you?’ 40 And the king will answer them, ‘Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these who are members of my family,[g] you did it to me.’ 41 Then he will say to those at his left hand, ‘You that are accursed, depart from me into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels; 42 for I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not give me clothing, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.’ 44 Then they also will answer, ‘Lord, when was it that we saw you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not take care of you?’ 45 Then he will answer them, ‘Truly I tell you, just as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.

This .... is not a parable.
Click to expand...

The point of posting this was because Jesus used it (no matter the actual point He was making) as a story that everyone could relate to. And to your point, nowhere in scripture, let alone the verses you posted requires charity to be done through governments. The heaviest tax is 20% in Egypt and that during famine. In addition Joseph's grain was sold. I have no problem with helping, and I do with and without government coercion. You see It is the heart of a man that helps his brothers, not the sword.
 
RGacky3 said:
I think it's great that the Pope is starting to emphasise the social justice part of the gospel.
Click to expand...
There is no such thing. If this has been reported properly The Leader of the Vatican outed himself as a garden variety Marxist. Now let him go sell all that he has and give the proceeds to the poor.
 
RGacky3 said:
The Gospel ... i.e. the Good news, which includes all of scripture, and the gospels are full of concern for social justice .... hell read Jesus's mission statement.

It inspires me to use my time and money to try and make the society I live in a more equitable society that focuses on justice and is inclusive .... God doesn't make calls for philanthropy, he makes calls for justice (misphat in hebrew).
Click to expand...
Did he call upon governments to take property from one member to give to another?

Clearly I missed that part. It must be in there because all of the radicals who want an excuse to steal from me claim it.

Tell you what, why don't you and the other socialist, what's his name, the leader of the Vatican, get together and between you sell all that you have and give it to the poor?

How will you make society more just? Will you call for a flat tax or a fair tax so that everyone pays for the level of government we believe we must have? Will you demand that the massive regulatory state be dismantled so the poor may have decent jobs?
 
RGacky3 said:
Increased production was never a biblical virtue, increased equality was.

BTW taking away from those that produce is the and giving to those that do not, is what modern capitalism is based on ... i.e. the for profit financial system, and labor exploitation.
Click to expand...
You are so profoundly ignorant. But I am not surprised. Your formulations are as Marxist as your conclusions. This will end badly for the Catholic (now Socialist) Church.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
OK. What would you replace bankers with? If private ownership/control is to be removed that leaves what? You want the federal gov't to control everything, but then who controls the federal gov't?
Click to expand...
The dictatorship of the Proles, of course.
 
joG said:
Yes and no. It does include all transfers. So the costs for healthcare would be included. Here, of course, we enter a really complicated item, however.

As far as labor laws are concerned, you demonstrate a problem, that I mentioned above. You say "better" laws. But, what do you mean? Is a law better that reduces the amount of buying power while reducing the amount of hours worked or one that increases the number of hours and the income?

When you pick up on interest rates you are moving into a realm that interacts with the social questions, but is really at a totally different level of analysis and as to the "country that has more socialized or less profit based or regulated financial industry" I am afraid, I have no idea, what you are talking about.
Click to expand...

I'm not going to go into a detailed debate about what is and is not better labor laws or whatever (it's the religious forum), but the point is that this conversation needs to be had, and christians should focus more on social justice.

Not necessarily (and I do not mean your example). It would very much depend on your definitions and the levels we are talking about. A lot of people would probably prefer living in a rich country with a higher Gini at the poverty rate of 60% of average income than in a poorer country with a lower Gini at the poverty line, where that means no shower, one meal a day and meat for your birthday.
Click to expand...

Very often higher equailty means better livingstandards for the working class and less poverty.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom