• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
  • We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

  • The rule regarding AI content has been updated. The rule now rules as follows:

    Be sure to credit AI when copying and pasting AI sources. Link to the site of the AI search, just like linking to an article.

Socialist Ideologies

Status
Not open for further replies.

Alexis OCA

Secrecy and Accountability Cannot Co-Exist
Sep 22, 2004
1,869
83
✟2,466.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
DreamTheater said:
Pure socialism rids all people of their own private property and personal possesions. It encourages sloth and low economic production. We defintely need to help the poor in our society, but the answer is not to pool all of our money together into one common fund and trust a small number of individuals to direct our income in ways that suit them best.

Indeed, those who believe in socialism generally believe in the innate and natural goodness of man and therefore deny original sin. They believe man can be perfected right here and right now. They know how to do it to. They will steal the fruit of your labor. But it's for your own good of course. Socialism is theft and a sin against 'thou shalt not steal'.
 
Upvote 0

Michelina

.
Site Supporter
Nov 6, 2003
13,640
663
✟19,733.00
Faith
Catholic
God and Capitalism
Reflections of a Catholic Banker

ROME, FEB. 5, 2005 (Zenit.org).- How to order the modern economy according to moral principles was the subject of a book published in November in Italy. "Denaro e Paradiso: L'Economia Globale e il Mondo Cattolico" (Money and Paradise: The Global Economy and the Catholic World) is a book-length interview with Ettore Gotti Tedeschi, president of the Italian operations of one of Europe's largest banks, Banco Santander Central Hispano.

Gotti Tedeschi starts off by explaining to author and journalist Rino Cammilleri how the market system, even with its imperfections, is the most efficient way of organizing an economy to satisfy individual needs. As well, the market plays an important role in individual initiative and creativity that permit resources to be used efficiently.

The Italian banker declares his opposition to an overly intrusive governmental role in the economy, arguing that in many cases a welfare state inevitably leads to waste and higher taxes.

At the same time, he recognizes that abuses and problems such as unequal distribution of wealth exist in free markets. Individualism and egoism, the source of many of these problems, form part of the human condition. What is needed, the banker argues, are laws that prevent abuses, but without eliminating the liberty that permits the operation of the market.

Gotti Tedeschi points out that an advanced, freewheeling economy is often needed precisely in order to help the poor. When goods are produced in high volume, their price often decreases, making them more affordable to the poor.

Individual responsibility

Asked if a market economy is guilty of creating artificial needs, Gotti Tedeschi observed that in a complex world the division between essential or superfluous needs can vary widely. It also depends on a culture, the prevailing morality, and the level of technological progress.

The banker acknowledges that people in rich countries are surrounded by opportunities to buy products. He puts the onus on consumers, however, rather than on the market. The economy puts these goods within our reach, but it is up to potential customers to distinguish between what is necessary or not.

To the charge that the market creates wealth at the cost of those who are weaker or less fortunate, Gotti Tedeschi points out that if it were not for an efficient system to create wealth, there would no money to enable people to help others. Someone who becomes rich has the possibility to help more poor people, and this sense of responsibility is something that should be developed, he recommends. The sense of poverty found in the Gospels is not one of a total lack of material goods, but rather a detachment from them.

Lasting values

Although Gotti Tedeschi is a strong defender of the free market, he recognizes the importance of other values. Absolute faith in scientific and technological progress, he notes, is a sort of new idolatry. We would be much better off, he speculates, if mankind had made as much spiritual progress as it has achieved with science and technology.

In the area of economics the Italian banker insists that it is no more than an instrument, neutral in itself. The danger is that decision-makers may allow themselves to be blinded by temptations stemming from a desire for power or profit, forgetting that economics is meant to be used for the good of mankind.

It is, therefore, vital to always keep in mind the supernatural dimension of human nature and the conviction that our lives have some ultimate meaning, not dependent on material factors. If this can be achieved, we can resolve the problems of abuses such as exploitation or coercion, which are the result of a myopic individualism that opts for what is useful over what is good with respect to the human person.

Gotti Tedeschi also explains that Catholicism has an important teaching in this regard, namely that we must make our choices according to a correct hierarchy of values, giving meaning to each one of our decisions. True riches are those that are everlasting, that is, salvation, while earthly wealth is only a means, not an end. If we remember this lesson, it becomes possible to possess material wealth, without losing our true humanity.

Early Silicon Valleys?

It is also possible to understand other elements of capitalism from a Catholic viewpoint. Technological progress, for example, is worthwhile because it frees us from the fatigue of work. In trying to reconcile economic activity with morality, Gotti Tedeschi recommends that we should apply the same principles, whether at home, in church, or in the workplace.

The banker also argues that it is wrong to give all the credit to Protestantism for the origins of capitalism. He argues that many monasteries -- "Silicon Valleys" on a reduced scale, in his words -- made a vital contribution to capitalism in the late medieval period. Monasteries made many of the technological discoveries that were vital to the start of the industrial era. He also traces the origins of capitalism to developments in 13th-century Italy, well before the rise of Protestantism.

Catholicism also has much to contribute to today's economic world. For example, it sees the person as an end in himself, and not just as an instrument through whom consumption can be increased. Catholicism also reminds us that the economy should not limit itself merely to multiplying material production, but should instead take into account all aspects, including the spiritual, of human nature, says Gotti Tedeschi. To achieve this capitalism needs to be influenced by norms and moral decisions that can orient us in deciding what is good for us, as creatures made up of both body and spirit.

In this sense the version of capitalism that sees it ordered according to the "law of the jungle," where egoism and exploitation dominate, is alien to the Catholic vision of how the economic order should be organized.

Free to choose

Gotti Tedeschi also explains how we should understand the concept of freedom of action, or liberty, which is an important part of capitalism. The human person was created in God's image and given the task of continuing the Creator's action in the world. With Christ's incarnation we see how human work acquires a redemptive dimension. Exercising this human creativity, however, requires freedom of action, but it is not an aimless freedom, or a freedom exercised without responsibility.

A Catholic capitalism, he continues, enables us to be children of God and creators using the means we have available and our human genius. This is the true capital in capitalism, which then directs the activity of the material and financial means used to produce wealth. What would be immoral would be not to produce all the wealth possible, or to invert the correct order of means and ends.

What Gotti Tedeschi recommends is an economy inspired by Christian values, which exalts human nature and man's lasting vocation -- and which is directed by people who believe that their lives have a lasting meaning.
 
Upvote 0

Paul S

Salve, regina, mater misericordiæ
Sep 12, 2004
7,872
281
48
Louisville, KY
✟32,194.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Markh said:
To be Catholic is to be at the very least redistributist! and in my opinion a Socialist!

There's a big difference between voluntarily giving to the poor and having half or more of your income taken by the state to use as it sees fit.

Jesus did instruct us to give, but I don't think He would have wanted the Roman soldiers to force those Jews who weren't giving to the poor to do so.
 
Upvote 0

Dream

Well-Known Member
Aug 7, 2003
5,089
212
✟6,389.00
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Private
Both sides of the economic spectrum are morally unacceptable.

Jesus was not a socialist. He never forced anybody to give up their money and never demanded that people help the poor. He never said to His followers "Now I know you guys are unintelligent with financial matters, so I'm going to take all of your income and do with it what I see best." God gave us free will.

But at the same time, Jesus did not encourage capitalistic behavior. Capitalism kindles itself on greed and the thought that one must be victorious over his neighbor. Jesus encouraged charitable work and good ideals over competition.

The morality of economics can be a very sticky topic. For example, the minimum wage is in dispute. Supporters of the minimum wage will point out that one cannot live on any income below the minimum wage, so it must be raised. But just like a price ceiling causing a shortage, setting a mandotory minimum wage will cause unemployment. So are we better off with or without the minimum wage? We have less people working, but for a higher wage. It's not always a black and white issue.
 
Upvote 0

Alexis OCA

Secrecy and Accountability Cannot Co-Exist
Sep 22, 2004
1,869
83
✟2,466.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Michelina said:
What Gotti Tedeschi recommends is an economy inspired by Christian values, which exalts human nature and man's lasting vocation -- and which is directed by people who believe that their lives have a lasting meaning.

:amen: Long live the FREE market.

Where charity and love are found....it dosen't say coercion and class envy. I think most socialists break the 'thou shalt not covet' commandment as well.
 
Upvote 0

Alexis OCA

Secrecy and Accountability Cannot Co-Exist
Sep 22, 2004
1,869
83
✟2,466.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
DreamTheater said:
But at the same time, Jesus did not encourage capitalistic behavior. Capitalism kindles itself on greed and the thought that one must be victorious over his neighbor. Jesus encouraged charitable work and good ideals over competition.

I agree. And since the 19th century the Church in her wisdom understood the fine distinction between 'capitalism' and the 'free market'.
 
Upvote 0

Markh

Extra Mariam Nulla Salus
Dec 12, 2003
2,908
191
39
London
Visit site
✟26,544.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
DreamTheater said:
Pure socialism rids all people of their own private property and personal possesions. It encourages sloth and low economic production.

Thank you for that comment, I am well aware of the ins and outs of socialism, my degree is Politics and it is pretty much all I read about and study.

DreamTheater said:
We defintely need to help the poor in our society, but the answer is not to pool all of our money together into one common fund and trust a small number of individuals to direct our income in ways that suit them best.

I'm afraid that is contry to Catholic social teaching.

There is nothing wrong with redistribution of wealth- which means high tax and high spend.

I am proud that at mass we hear bidding prayers "for greater redistribution of wealth by governments", because that is in fact Catholicism.
 
Upvote 0

Markh

Extra Mariam Nulla Salus
Dec 12, 2003
2,908
191
39
London
Visit site
✟26,544.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
How can you say redistribution is theft, don't you realise innequalities of wealth are unjust in themselves!

How can a man have Liberty and how can a man have freedom if a man can only think about how hungry he is? We need redistribution in order to raise the starting ground in life so everyone has the same liberties and the same oppertunitues. That would be justice in society.
 
Upvote 0

Dream

Well-Known Member
Aug 7, 2003
5,089
212
✟6,389.00
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Private
Markh said:
Thank you for that comment, I am well aware of the ins and outs of socialism, my degree is Politics and it is pretty much all I read about and study.

Mark, you seem to be viewing everything as either black or white, when in fact there are varying shades of gray. How many politics courses have you taken so far?

I'm afraid that is contry to Catholic social teaching.

You seemed to ignore a lot of what has been posted here. Maybe you should read them first.

There is nothing wrong with redistribution of wealth- which means high tax and high spend.

From a purely economical stance, this is a very naive statement. I question if you are really reading up on what you say you are or if you are just reading what you want to hear.
 
Upvote 0

Paul S

Salve, regina, mater misericordiæ
Sep 12, 2004
7,872
281
48
Louisville, KY
✟32,194.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Markh said:
How can you say redistribution is theft, don't you realise innequalities of wealth are unjust in themselves!

No, they're not. One person getting rich doesn't necessarily mean others get poorer.

Jesus never condemned being rich. He did say that greed is bad, and that the rich should help the poor, but He never said that being rich means you go to hell.

If inequalities of wealth are unjust, then the tax rate should be 100%, and then the government divides the amount by the population, so everyone has the exact same amount of money. Let's do this, and then watch as nobody works anymore, since there's no incentive to do anything - let's all live off the efforts of others.

We should donate to charity to provide for those who are unable to provide for themselves, but as Paul says in his latter epistle to the Thessalonians, "If any man will not work, neither let him eat." Socialism encourages not working.
 
Upvote 0

Caedmon

kawaii
Site Supporter
Dec 18, 2001
17,359
570
R'lyeh
✟94,383.00
Faith
Catholic
Politics
US-Others
Increased production and lower prices may be a good thing here in the States, but:
(1) What about the people in Mexico, Bangladesh, Taiwan, etc. who manufacture all these products, while making only a fraction of the US minimum wage for the same effort and work hours?
(2) And how about all the US workers who lose their jobs because of cheaper overseas materials and labor?

How is it just to these groups of people, and what can we do about it? Notice that the question is two-part.
 
Upvote 0

Paul S

Salve, regina, mater misericordiæ
Sep 12, 2004
7,872
281
48
Louisville, KY
✟32,194.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Caedmon said:
Increased production and lower prices may be a good thing here in the States, but:
(1) What about the people in Mexico, Bangladesh, Taiwan, etc. who manufacture all these products, while making only a fraction of the US minimum wage for the same effort and work hours?

They also have lower living expenses. Also, the whole world doesn't progress at the same time. 100 years ago, US workers who manufactured things were in the same position workers in other countries are now. I'm sure 100 years from now, Mexican workers won't be making less than minimum wage.

Caedmon said:
(2) And how about all the US workers who lose their jobs because of cheaper overseas materials and labor?

The economy changes. Was it just to develop better methods of farming when it put most of the farmers out of work? Now, we're shifting from manufacturing to more service-oriented jobs. We should help those who lose their jobs, but we should help them to develop the skills for the jobs that are being created.
 
Upvote 0

Markh

Extra Mariam Nulla Salus
Dec 12, 2003
2,908
191
39
London
Visit site
✟26,544.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
DreamTheater said:
From a purely economical stance, this is a very naive statement. I question if you are really reading up on what you say you are or if you are just reading what you want to hear.

in terms of economics the free market does generate more wealth (for the wealthy) and obviously, has lower taxes leaving the people with less money.

But since when has economics been upheld before moral duty!

Economic statistics do not matter, it is the moral statistics that hurt and the fact that there are so many poor people worldwide provides a moral obligation to have high taxes in order to redistribute our grossly disproportionate weath to a more equal starting point.

Like Rawls I believe that society should be designed in benefit for those who have been least advantaged, for those who have, out of no fault of there's had a poor upbringing, or a poor genetic makeup thus making them less capable of acheiving in a meritocratic society.

if it is not someone's fault for being born in a poor place in society, why should we punish them by not giving them equal oppertunities.

You can only have equal oppertuinities if you all start on a similar level in society.

Therefore, the role of the government should be to re-level society
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mustaphile
Upvote 0

Markh

Extra Mariam Nulla Salus
Dec 12, 2003
2,908
191
39
London
Visit site
✟26,544.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Paul S said:
If inequalities of wealth are unjust, then the tax rate should be 100%, and then the government divides the amount by the population, so everyone has the exact same amount of money. Let's do this, and then watch as nobody works anymore, since there's no incentive to do anything - let's all live off the efforts of others.

Of course that is unjust, innequalities of wealth should only be allowed when they benefit the worst off people in society.

For example, doctors benefit the worst off people in society, so doctors should be paid more in order to encourage people to become doctors.

I am not advocating total equality of wealth, rather relative equality of wealth.

Of course I would probably have 90% taxes on those extra bits some people earn in the 90,000+ salary.
 
Upvote 0

Alexis OCA

Secrecy and Accountability Cannot Co-Exist
Sep 22, 2004
1,869
83
✟2,466.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Markh said:
Of course that is unjust, innequalities of wealth should only be allowed when they benefit the worst off people in society.

For example, doctors benefit the worst off people in society, so doctors should be paid more in order to encourage people to become doctors.

I am not advocating total equality of wealth, rather relative equality of wealth.

Of course I would probably have 90% taxes on those extra bits some people earn in the 90,000+ salary.

And just who are YOU to determine all this. You are no better than any other social engineer. You know better than any of us and will tell US what to do with the fruit of OUR labor. Inequality of wealth is, in many cases, no different than inequalities in intellect. Do your marxist college professors give everyone A's??? Well actually, your pretty smart so do they give you a D and share some of your GPA with the less smart?

90% taxes????...I guess you'll be running as democrat.
 
Upvote 0

Alexis OCA

Secrecy and Accountability Cannot Co-Exist
Sep 22, 2004
1,869
83
✟2,466.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Caedmon said:
Why is $20 billion not enough for Bill Gates? Couldn't that money be used for something better than filling coffers? How much money does someone have to possess before it's too much?

$20 probably is quite enough for the Gates family. But many individuals benefit from his charity. In a free society (and we are still somewhat free) it is not for anyone to dictate how much is enough.

But then your wage controls move on to the millionaire athletes (uh oh..do I hear charges of racism?), and then to the mid-level corporate executives, then to the factory worker, then to you....and by then you won't be too happy with wage controls. The theft mentality carefully hidden in state socialism has no end. Only the planners seem to do well and that I find disturbing.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.