Has Francis said or written anything on Materialism?
Envy is not the corrective for greed.
The pope will never say “don’t offer anyone less than a $3 deal” or one Government job costs six private sector jobs, related tax revenue, and general happiness but the pope may need to understand a few things.
Second place is the first place loser but a peek is worth ten free market estimators. Reverse auction bid results can be turned into a low bid equation with a variance that looks something like this:
Low Bid = (95% – 1% times the number of bidders) times the average bid
Companies play free market basketball on a diving board because a company can’t maximize their profits if the company hits more often than the dummy. A 5% drop in price is usually enough to jump to 15% higher overall hit rate. Government is a slam dunking monopoly that has proven to be 20% more expense than the free market. Socialism, Fascism, Marxism, Statism, etc. is four scarcity leaps backwards and corresponds with Carman’s and Kenneth’s findings.
A Harvard Professor and previous President of IMF wrote a book called “This Time is Different” . Carman Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff studied fiscal crisis in 65 countries over 500 years. 1% GDP reduction in taxes increases private sector 3% in GDP. 1% GDP increase in Government Spending deceases private sector 1.2% GDP with a -0.2% change in GDP. Obviously a great deal of government debt can put a country at significant interest rate risk.
If we go from a 38% tax rate to 20% tax rate with a balanced budget the private sector will grow from $11 Trillion to over $16 Trillion. Tax revenue won’t decrease 48%. Tax revenue will only decrease 24%. Half of Washington won’t have to go on a permanent vacation, only one out of four. Employment will increase 25% so displaced bureaucrats will have lots of new opportunities to contribute to society.
If we get down to a balanced 10%, $20 Trillion – more than a 60% increase in jobs if half of Washington goes on a permanent vacation, each dollar earned buys ($0.90/$0.62) 45% more, and hard America becomes a soft warm place.
John Nash’s beautiful mind recognized the importance of interactions in which the results of one person’s choices depend not only on his own behavior but also on the choices of another person. There is a related game called Ultimatum. You and your partner split $10. Less than $3 deals disgust and anger. The dealer has a pulpit.
The Laffer effect is no joke. Charles Adams, an international tax attorney and historian, wrote books on taxes. Once tax rates rise above the disgust and anger point, the expected extra tax revenue never shows up. A flat tax system is part of Constitution. Everyone has to pay taxes to keep as many people’s tax rate below the disgust and anger tax rate or make sure an overwhelming majority is disgusted with high taxes.
Carman, Kenneth, John, and yours truly believes dealers can routinely get an $8 to $10 deal by getting his or her partner work for a $3 to $5 deal. With each $3 to $5 of earned success the partner becomes a dealer that turns the $3 to $5 deal into $6 to $8 of earned success. Turning $10 into $13 is a win-win systemic solution that creates good people, great outcomes, and durable trust but when it rains, rainmakers show up and turn everything to dirt.
There will always be zero-sum losers who just accept less than $3 deals and think the key to success is being an abusive dealer. A $7-$3 deal isn’t better than a $6-$4 deal because $7-$3 deals turn into $6-$2, $5-$1, and $4-two bit deals. Rainmakers turn everything to dirt because they feel entitled to $7up and someone else has to pay for the diet $7up.
Obama and company’s overall 30% to 40% tax and spend policies have systemically increased the public sector by 25% and eliminated 10 million private sector jobs. For the first 150 years of our existence, we were 10% tax and spend country. Present day Switzerland, Russia, and much of Eastern Europe are 15% tax and spend countries.
I can’t taste the difference between Wilson and Barack vegetable oil. The Federal Reserve was created on Jekyll Island and Obama is the Prince of Hyde Park. A famous Central Banker said something like “If I control the money supply, I care not for your laws”. If debt is money that can only be paid off with more money …. someone ends up owning everything and everybody.
Our founding fathers promoted the species (Gold and Silver) because a stable money supply is key to creating an innovative middle class and responsive Government. When things are set up right, the wealth disparity between rich and poor is only four fold and a society’s standard of living doubles every decade but there is a great deal of guess work involved. Government being around 45% of GDP appears to be the little or no innovation setpoint.
With some modifications, Bitcoins can indirectly tax on transaction size (good), proactively tariff (good), turn the down and out into limited central banks (good) and tax on population density (good) and be like an invading army. Bitcoins, that don’t vary in quantity could be the beginning of a wonderful bottom up Milton Friedman world that leaves the elites on top without any change.
The 10% public sector corresponds to a bottom 20% to top 20% ideal distribution is around $3.50,$4.50,$6.25,$8.25, and $11.25.
We went off the gold standard 40 years ago. Over that period the average overall tax rate was about 30%. Over the last 40 years relative wealth distribution went from ($2.75,$4.00,$5.25,$7.00,$9.25) to ($1.25,$2.00,$2.75,$3.50, & $18.50). 30% to 40% Obama has taken us to ($1.00,$1.75,$2.50, $3.25, and $16.75). If the dollar is no longer the world currency, ($0.75,$1.31,$1.87,$2.41,$12.19). The above mentioned Bitcoin arrangement would lessen the wealth disparity.
Francis is aware, I hope, that the only “corrective” for capitalism is a State whose fondest wish is to destroy, dismantle and outlaw his Church. How does he dare call himself the Church’s leader?
You would think that the experience of one of his recent predecessors under such a State would enhance his awareness on that subject.
I think you would have a hard time proving that ‘the only “corrective” for capitalism is a State whose fondest wish is to destroy, dismantle and outlaw his Church’ without inventing a totalitarian capitalism, something that is, frankly, weird to most people on the right.
By totalitarian, I mean a total system, not necessarily one with death camps or gulags. Capitalism is generally defined as a partial system that only deals with economics. In any normal system, the political and social norms that make up the rest of society will interact with and form the context within which capitalism operates. Necessarily, they correct and restrain capitalism.
So are you a totalitarian capitalist or the normal kind like I am that believes in the free market and that we all have obligations to the poor separate from any ROI of your charity and that it is correct to socially prefer those who have generous hearts and give of their own abundance to those who do not have.
Are the Parable of the Talents and Proverbs 31 missing from their Bibles?
Both present free enterprise as virtuous.
As a Catholic, I have no fear that Francis will be theologically sound. That does not, however, mean he might not pop off unintelligibly about economic matters. And his Cardinals and Bishops don’t have the same protection he does. I still believe that despite his p.r., Francis is still a “theological conservative” and wise enough to have seen what Marxism has done to the non-ruling class. I fear that many in the Church will see his empathy to the poor as a reason to bring back Liberation Theology. People are forgetting the horrors of Communism, are seeing the weakness of crony capitalism, and are wishing, like children, that everything bad in this world can be fixed.
Another cause for concern: the pope’s embrace of Cardinal Maradiaga as chair of his Group of Eight appointed to reform the church. Maradiaga’s extremism was on display in a recent speech in Dallas, where he spoke of “the neoliberal dictatorships that rule democracies” and called for destroying “the power of the new feudal lords.”
He excoriated “the Eurocentric democracies” who “are taking everything from them: life, culture, dignity, and freedom.”
He denounced “a world dictatorship of finance capital” and “the small transcontinental oligarchies that hold the financial capital dominate the planet.” He thundered that “The lords of financial capital wield over billions of human beings a power of life and death.”
Maradiaga has also expressed (in a 2002 interview) an anti-Semitism that seems terribly at odds with John Paul II’s thinking, but certainly consistent with many leftist screeds against “the lords of financial capital”.
All friends of the church have reason to be concerned. More on this at benfiniti.com.
I don’t believe “an axis between theological conservatism and political leftism” could be anything but a perfect catastrophe for the church, as it has been my experience that leftism substitutes the state apparatus for the people of God and tends to engage in hagiography of politicians, as recent events have shown. That is to say, the left makes the state its church, and it does not take heresy lightly. Nor is it willing to tolerate competition.
O’Sullivan’s law applies to organized religion, too.