Jump to content
Making Chimichangas

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Landlord said:

TG, it was said in jest man, come on, aint nobody reading that response!

oh I know - you caught me   on an 'intense mode' there   - got in deep thought and spilled my brain out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, knapplc said:

 

You throw your share of darts. Don't play the victim.

 

 

 

 

 

Not playing the victim at all and never said I wasn't willing to trade barbs. However,  I'm perfectly willing to admit when I'm wrong or misworded something. I'm also willing to acknowledge I'm not perfect and that I don't have all the answers. But I do get pretty annoyed when someone, you in this case, acts like to be a Christian means that person has to be perfectly Christian in all their beliefs and actions and, if they aren't, then somehow that makes them a hypocrite. If you don't realize what a steaming pile of dogsh!t that approach is I'm sure I won't be able to convince you otherwise.

 

As TG stated so we'll, there is God and then there is Ceasar. I know what my religion and Jesus has to say about these things. Unfortunately I also know how and what our government does to try to address these things. I have no problem separating the two, religion and government, and in some cases opposing some policies that seemingly run counter to what Jesus said. So the other thing that annoys me is when people, you in this case again, want to act like this is some amazing unacceptable thing. The problem is too often you approach these discussions as Christians are damned if they do and damned if they don't. You would have a problem if I strictly followed the religion line in political matters, claiming separation of church and state is required but apparently you also have a problem when people do separate church from state. So it leaves me quite bewildered as to which way you really want it. And that is what precipitates accusations of not wanting to have an honest discussion or being mired in preconceived notions. As far as comments about missing the point, that's about the nicest way I can put it when someone takes something I've said and twists it to serve their purpose. But yeah, comments like "it's a real headscratcher" or "thanks for replying as expected" is just me taking a cheapshot and throwing my own darts. I'm a big boy and I won't be made a victim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Comfortably Numb said:

But I do get pretty annoyed when someone, you in this case, acts like to be a Christian means that person has to be perfectly Christian in all their beliefs and actions and, if they aren't, then somehow that makes them a hypocrite.

 

I didn't say this, it's a strawman, and yes, it's a "steaming pile of dogs#!t" as you so eloquently put it. 

 

43 minutes ago, Comfortably Numb said:

You would have a problem if I strictly followed the religion line in political matters, claiming separation of church and state is required but apparently you also have a problem when people do separate church from state. So it leaves me quite bewildered as to which way you really want it.

 

You don't know that. And frankly, it's another strawman.  And it's not honest discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TGHusker said:

Here is where I think some of the 'rub' is that Comfortably Numb may be trying to say (I don't pretend to speak for him - just trying to read between the lines -- so he can correct me as needed). 

Christian compassion and giving is to be internally motivated out of a love of God and a love for our neighbor.  It is not an external compulsion that motivates our giving and care.  Knapp accurately and thoughtfully captured the essence of Christian giving and what is to be our heart.  (Knapp - one day I hope you return to your faith roots - you have a good heart. But with that I affirm that one can have a good heart wtout a particular faith)

The rub is this:

Socialism is an external "mechanism' which exerts pressure via taxes forcing others to be "compassionate' in the way and to the recipients of the govt choosing.  In that way, it is not different than any other govt - democratic or otherwise - it may exert more pressure than let's say a very conservative or libertarian democratic govt and it may exert less pressure than a full bore communist govt - looking at the extremes.  Govts should be all about providing a safety net for its citizens - the debate is where to balance it out - how much 'giving' comes from private sector and how much from the public sector.   If govts take so much through very high taxes it will leave little funds for individuals (Christian or non-Christian, religious or non-religious) to give freely as their conscience dictates to the individuals or organizations they wish to personally assist.  I will say that the USA as the world's richest nation could have a greater and more encompassing safety net than what it does have.  If our priorities were right we would be spending less money in some areas so that we could provide better health care and other assistance to the needy.  However, the USA has also taken on the burden of caring for the world in so many other areas. Without our military, much of the world may be under dictatorships now.  We are usually the first nation to help in a disaster - providing food, medical supplies, etc for people around the world.  So we cannot flippantly say - just cut the military or cut foreign aid.  We could however make better choices - like not fighting 2 wars in the MidEast at the same time.  That could have funded a lot of safety net things here. 

 

This isn't a matter of being compassionate or not - it is a matter of how or the method by which compassion is to be administered in a free society.  Too much 'govt sponsored' compassion leaves less funds available for private donors (unless you are the very wealthy) to contribute freely as they desire.

 

So I think in an ideal world - socialism would work and we should and could all endorse it.  But we aren't in an ideal world - there is too much selfishness at every level (sin) to make it not work.  As a Christian we believe the ideal is yet to come.  In the mean time we are called to render to Cesar that which is Cesar's and render to God that which belongs to God(our lives).  And if we live in a society where Cesar is unusually large, we are to trust God for grace to give sacrificially both to Cesar and directly to our neighbor as our conscience dictates.  If we live in a society where Cesar is small, then as Christians we aren't to let the god of materialism to take over our hearts and the best way to do that is to give generously and freely to those who are in need out of a hear of obedience to God and love for our neighbor.  

 

Let me add: it isn't just in socialism that the sin of selfishness can ruin the utopia we try to build.  Capitalism, at its core, has a lot of 'self interest'.  So while the left leaning person may try to build a utopia through govt largeness, and while the right leaning may try to build a utopia via capitalism both utopias will ultimately fail because each are vulnerable to the seed of destruction - our internal selfishness or self interest.  

Very good points . I think any pure form of “ism” is flawed and will eventually have unintended bad results .

My beef with unregulated, unadulterated capitalism is the fact that it’s totally based on money . There isn’t much if any motivation in that system,  for the haves to help the have nots , or to worry about humanitarian issues at all . That’s where you need the government to “make” the haves contribute to the greater good  . Imo 

Pure socialism puts too much power in the governments hands though,  and since everyone gets the same,  it can kill motivation , and incentive . Government corruption would also have even a bigger impact in that system than it does now. 

I think a blend of those two systems (like we already have) is the best option, though i do agree we could do much better on social issues .

As far as God is concerned , Christians are supposed to emulate God and his teachings . Be humble, kind, loving, and compassionate etc  . Socialism in my mind does a much better job with that than capitalism . 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Jesus had to choose between Capitalism and Socialism, which do you think he'd choose?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, knapplc said:

If Jesus had to choose between Capitalism and Socialism, which do you think he'd choose?

 

 

He'd probably dismantle your restrictive hypothetical with some transcendent third-way nonviolent protest of whichever was the form of power and oppression.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/16/2018 at 8:01 AM, knapplc said:

It's always amazing to me when self-declared Christians speak out against Socialism.

 

Socialism looks good on paper, but it doesn't work and is against human nature imo. Not sure what religion has to do with an economic system. Seems like an emotional plea. I'm non-religious fwiw. 

 

In Socialism, the people in government end up getting wealthy and and everyone else gets the scraps. At least with capitalism the big earners get a lot but the standard of living increases for everyone. Assuming the economy is good of course.

 

I'm not overly impressed in Cortez's brilliance at this point either. Her answers on Firing Line were not impressive to say the least. Looked like the left's answer to Sarah Palin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, alwayshusking said:

 

In Socialism, the people in government end up getting wealthy and and everyone else gets the scraps. At least with capitalism the big earners get a lot but the standard of living increases for everyone.

 

 

I'm not quite sure this is true. The bottom half is, although I believe the US is going to reach a breaking point where things are too top heavy.

 

Socialist countries tend to have less economic disparity. The wealthy aren't as much richer than the poor as they are in capitalist socities. But overall they have less wealth.

 

I think there is a happy medium to be found that we haven't found yet. Certainly health care should be free and we can afford it if we're willing to not have tax policy that allows the rich to get richer, which they are already doing by buying politicians and policies. If we're going to let them have all the advantages in politics that allow them to screw people over if they desire, we shouldn't also let them have low taxes.

 

They have spent a lot of money to convince people to hate big government and be perfectly fine with corporations screwing them over and sometimes even poisoning and killing them.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Comfortably Numb said:

 

Not playing the victim at all and never said I wasn't willing to trade barbs. However,  I'm perfectly willing to admit when I'm wrong or misworded something. I'm also willing to acknowledge I'm not perfect and that I don't have all the answers. But I do get pretty annoyed when someone, you in this case, acts like to be a Christian means that person has to be perfectly Christian in all their beliefs and actions and, if they aren't, then somehow that makes them a hypocrite. If you don't realize what a steaming pile of dogsh!t that approach is I'm sure I won't be able to convince you otherwise.

 

As TG stated so we'll, there is God and then there is Ceasar. I know what my religion and Jesus has to say about these things. Unfortunately I also know how and what our government does to try to address these things. I have no problem separating the two, religion and government, and in some cases opposing some policies that seemingly run counter to what Jesus said. So the other thing that annoys me is when people, you in this case again, want to act like this is some amazing unacceptable thing. The problem is too often you approach these discussions as Christians are damned if they do and damned if they don't. You would have a problem if I strictly followed the religion line in political matters, claiming separation of church and state is required but apparently you also have a problem when people do separate church from state. So it leaves me quite bewildered as to which way you really want it. And that is what precipitates accusations of not wanting to have an honest discussion or being mired in preconceived notions. As far as comments about missing the point, that's about the nicest way I can put it when someone takes something I've said and twists it to serve their purpose. But yeah, comments like "it's a real headscratcher" or "thanks for replying as expected" is just me taking a cheapshot and throwing my own darts. I'm a big boy and I won't be made a victim.

 

 

 

Hypocrite isn't the right word here. It just makes no sense. One of the two most essential figures in the whole religion seems to believe in socialism and Christians tend to conveniently completely ignore it or rail against it. It's just plain confusing.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

 

Hypocrite isn't the right word here. It just makes no sense. One of the two most essential figures in the whole religion seems to believe in socialism and Christians tend to conveniently completely ignore it or rail against it. It's just plain confusing.

 

I guess I don't find it confusing at all. Maybe because socialism in the biblical sense is much different than political socialism. I believe in charity, helping the less fortunate etc. But when it comes to governments, politicians and forced sharing for the collective, I think history has shown us the downfalls of such a system. A person would have to severely spin the Bible to interpret that Jesus desired widespread political socialism. But yes many "Christians" do act in confusing ways when it comes to the welfare of their fellow man. Also many non-Christians but it isn't as easy to catagorize them into one tidy little group. Like most things the real problem is people in general but that doesn't drive division or seemingly provide any motive.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

 

Hypocrite isn't the right word here. It just makes no sense. One of the two most essential figures in the whole religion seems to believe in socialism and Christians tend to conveniently completely ignore it or rail against it. It's just plain confusing.

 

For someone who hates to have their words twisted, they sure seem to twist a lot of words. Weird!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

I'm not quite sure this is true. The bottom half is, although I believe the US is going to reach a breaking point where things are too top heavy.

 

Socialist countries tend to have less economic disparity. The wealthy aren't as much richer than the poor as they are in capitalist socities. But overall they have less wealth.

 

I think there is a happy medium to be found that we haven't found yet. Certainly health care should be free and we can afford it if we're willing to not have tax policy that allows the rich to get richer, which they are already doing by buying politicians and policies. If we're going to let them have all the advantages in politics that allow them to screw people over if they desire, we shouldn't also let them have low taxes.

 

They have spent a lot of money to convince people to hate big government and be perfectly fine with corporations screwing them over and sometimes even poisoning and killing them.

 

 

It's funny to me that many (most?) of the objections to more socialist policies are about money.  We're more concerned with the cash in our pockets than with helping our fellow man, and we use examples like the people who abuse the system as a reason not to explore socialism more - all while largely ignoring the abuses of capitalism while promoting it as an alternative to socialism.  It's why Paul's first letter to Timothy (1 Timothy 6:10) is such an important read for people who vote along the lines of their religious affiliations. 

 

  • Plus1 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, alwayshusking said:

 

Socialism looks good on paper, but it doesn't work and is against human nature imo. Not sure what religion has to do with an economic system. Seems like an emotional plea. I'm non-religious fwiw. 

 

In Socialism, the people in government end up getting wealthy and and everyone else gets the scraps. At least with capitalism the big earners get a lot but the standard of living increases for everyone. Assuming the economy is good of course.

 

I'm not overly impressed in Cortez's brilliance at this point either. Her answers on Firing Line were not impressive to say the least. Looked like the left's answer to Sarah Palin.

 

I think it all depends on what part of society you are talking about.

 

Police security, fire security, roads and infrastructure, public education.....are all areas where we all benefit greatly from a socialism.  I personally believe that healthcare needs to go in this direction.  If you look at other industrialized countries with socialized medicine, their healthcare is much much cheaper and actually better.  Their population is healthier.

 

Now, I do not agree with socialism when it comes to industry and private ownership of property and businesses.

 

The discussion needs to be what areas should be socialized and at what level....instead of if socialism or capitalism is better.  They both have their places in society.

  • Plus1 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, BigRedBuster said:

 

I think it all depends on what part of society you are talking about.

 

Police security, fire security, roads and infrastructure, public education.....are all areas where we all benefit greatly from a socialism.  I personally believe that healthcare needs to go in this direction.  If you look at other industrialized countries with socialized medicine, their healthcare is much much cheaper and actually better.  Their population is healthier.

 

Now, I do not agree with socialism when it comes to industry and private ownership of property and businesses.

 

The discussion needs to be what areas should be socialized and at what level....instead of if socialism or capitalism is better.  They both have their places in society.

 

I would agree with this. Maybe what we really need is a new breed of society that intentionally combines the best parts of other forms.  The best parts of capitalism, the best parts of socialism, the best parts of a democracy. Are there any good parts to Marxism? Probably none of that. :D

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I would agree.  I've listened to enough talk radio over the years and know that those on the right would prefer pure capitalism as though it would be a panacea for all of society ills.   However, I have deep reservations that pure capitalism would work as an economic philosophy or pure conservatism would work as a governing philosophy.  I say that as a center right leaning person.  It is also true of socialism.   We have to get our spending priorities corrected and then I think the best of capitalism (revenue generation) could drive the wheels of the best in socialism (creating a safety net for all).   Stop the endless wars, don't mingle in other countries affairs, give time lines for our commitments to help countries (ie - Europe & Japan and Middle East should not need all of our military bases - we should be help them to be self sustaining and then get out.  Most of his is old WW2 policies - time to move on), decrease the power of the Military Industrial Complex which needs all of these bases overseas and wars to fund their corporate greed.  Root out medicare, welfare administrative deficiencies and fraud - true of all depts.  Privatize where it makes sense and where it does not diminish service (VA Hospitals for example - give medical insurance cards to vets to go to any hospital where they can find assistance in a more timely and efficient manner).    Modernize govt with technology.  As we all know, colleges and univs are being change by the advent of on line and remote classrooms. Why do we need everyone in DC anymore.  Why do we keep reinforcing the power driven structure.  Much govt business could be done remotely - thus reducing not only govt admin costs but also the graft involved with rubbing shoulders with lobbyists day in and day out which in turns affects true representative govt.  It may take a millennial President and Congress - someone(s) raised in the era of technology to have the vision to make this kind of drastic change. 

  • Plus1 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, TGHusker said:

Yes, I would agree.  I've listened to enough talk radio over the years and know that those on the right would prefer pure capitalism as though it would be a panacea for all of society ills.   However, I have deep reservations that pure capitalism would work as an economic philosophy or pure conservatism would work as a governing philosophy.  I say that as a center right leaning person.  It is also true of socialism.   We have to get our spending priorities corrected and then I think the best of capitalism (revenue generation) could drive the wheels of the best in socialism (creating a safety net for all).   Stop the endless wars, don't mingle in other countries affairs, give time lines for our commitments to help countries (ie - Europe & Japan and Middle East should not need all of our military bases - we should be help them to be self sustaining and then get out.  Most of his is old WW2 policies - time to move on), decrease the power of the Military Industrial Complex which needs all of these bases overseas and wars to fund their corporate greed.  Root out medicare, welfare administrative deficiencies and fraud - true of all depts.  Privatize where it makes sense and where it does not diminish service (VA Hospitals for example - give medical insurance cards to vets to go to any hospital where they can find assistance in a more timely and efficient manner).    Modernize govt with technology.  As we all know, colleges and univs are being change by the advent of on line and remote classrooms. Why do we need everyone in DC anymore.  Why do we keep reinforcing the power driven structure.  Much govt business could be done remotely - thus reducing not only govt admin costs but also the graft involved with rubbing shoulders with lobbyists day in and day out which in turns affects true representative govt.  It may take a millennial President and Congress - someone(s) raised in the era of technology to have the vision to make this kind of drastic change. 

This is intriguing.  Ben Sasse has 4 offices in Nebraska, plus DC.  Plus their time would be spent with constituents rather than "the swamp".   I kinda like it at first glance!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, funhusker said:

This is intriguing.  Ben Sasse has 4 offices in Nebraska, plus DC.  Plus their time would be spent with constituents rather than "the swamp".   I kinda like it at first glance!

Exactly my point.  If Trump really wanted to drain the swamp and if he was an astute business leader, he should see the advantages of moving us away from a brick based govt to one that is more flexible. While most of the alphabet soup agencies may need to remain in DC, our Congressmen could operate closer to home and represent us better.  Too many of these congressmen/women go to DC and think of themselves as little  kings and get sucked into the DC power machine and forget why they are there. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Comfortably Numb said:

 

I guess I don't find it confusing at all. Maybe because socialism in the biblical sense is much different than political socialism. I believe in charity, helping the less fortunate etc. But when it comes to governments, politicians and forced sharing for the collective, I think history has shown us the downfalls of such a system. A person would have to severely spin the Bible to interpret that Jesus desired widespread political socialism. But yes many "Christians" do act in confusing ways when it comes to the welfare of their fellow man. Also many non-Christians but it isn't as easy to catagorize them into one tidy little group. Like most things the real problem is people in general but that doesn't drive division or seemingly provide any motive.

 

 

 

I don't think giving to charity and helping the less fortunate is what people mean when they talk about Jesus and socialism.

 

knapp knows the Bible a lot better than I do but there is a parable where men do different amounts of work and they're upset that they get paid different amounts and the lesson is they shouldn't be upset.

 

I agree with what BRB said. We have socialist policies already with the fire dept, police dept, roads, and schools.

 

We absolutely should have free health care for all. I would argue it's more important and obvious than some of the above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My internets are crappy so I can't edit.

 

What I meant to say above is the men are upset they all got paid the same amount for different amounts of work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

 

I don't think giving to charity and helping the less fortunate is what people mean when they talk about Jesus and socialism.

 

knapp knows the Bible a lot better than I do but there is a parable where men do different amounts of work and they're upset that they get paid different amounts and the lesson is they shouldn't be upset.

 

I agree with what BRB said. We have socialist policies already with the fire dept, police dept, roads, and schools.

 

We absolutely should have free health care for all. I would argue it's more important and obvious than some of the above.

 

16 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

My internets are crappy so I can't edit.

 

What I meant to say above is the men are upset they all got paid the same amount for different amounts of work.

 

I think people should at least mean some of both when referring to Jesus and socialism. Yes, I know to which parable(s) you are referring but I would argue that there are many more examples in the Bible of simply helping your fellow man. And to my knowledge there are no cases where Jesus promotes any government entity providing for the collective. Render to God what is God's and to Ceasar what is Ceasar's....(sumthin like that).

 

And I will admit, there are a few parables, stories, etc. in the Bible that I really do not like or subscribe to. The parable in question would be one of those. Another is the two sons, one of whom has gone out and pissed away his money while the other stayed at home and responsibly worked his tail off. (I'm paraphrasing here of course). But when the wayward son returns the father throws a big party, slaughters the fattened calf and welcomes him with open arms. Of course the "good" son is a little bent out of shape. I would be much like the good son in that story even as I realize the gist of the parable is that God will always welcome you back with open arms. I like that part of the message but my sense of fairness sympathizes more with the ticked off brother. I still view myself as a Christian and these aren't deal breakers or I wouldn't be but I really struggle with a few of the seeming injustices in Jesus's teachings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Moiraine Actually I don't know for sure to which parable you were referring. I don't recall one where people were paid differing amounts for the same amount of work. However, there is the parable of Talents where the master gives one servant 5, another 2 and the 3rd one 1. The first two go out and trade and double what he gave them and 3rd buries his in the ground so as not to lose it. The master is pissed at the 3rd servant so he takes his 1 talent and gives it to the motivated servant who grew his 5 to 10.  I like this one. Should we say the Bible promotes capitalism?

 

an excerpt-

He also who had received the one talent came forward, saying, ‘Master, I knew you to be a hard man, reaping where you did not sow, and gathering where you scattered no seed, 25 so I was afraid, and I went and hid your talent in the ground. Here, you have what is yours.’ 26 But his master answered him, ‘You wicked and slothful servant! You knew that I reap where I have not sown and gather where I scattered no seed? 27 Then you ought to have invested my money with the bankers, and at my coming I should have received what was my own with interest. 28 So take the talent from him and give it to him who has the ten talents. 29 For to everyone who has will more be given, and he will have an abundance. But from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. 30 And cast the worthless servant into the outer darkness. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or these thoughts from God. 

1 John 3:17, NIV: "If anyone has material possessions and sees a brother or sister in need but has no pity on them, how can the love of God be in that person?

Luke 18:25 King James Version (KJV)

25 For it is easier for a camel to go through a needle's eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

Command those who are rich in this present world not to be arrogant nor to put their hope in wealth, which is so uncertain, but to put their hope in God, who richly provides us with everything for our enjoyment. Command them to do good, to be rich in good deeds, and to be generous and willing to share. In this way they will lay up treasure for themselves as a firm foundation for the coming age, so that they may take hold of the life that is truly life. (NIV, 1 Timothy 6:17-19)

In Capitalism money is the measure of a man .The rich are to be adored and worshiped as the winners of the game .  I don’t think God agrees with that . There are also many , many verses I could post about compassion for your fellow man , helping the poor, equality,  etc which are socialistic ideas . 

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Big Red 40 said:

Or these thoughts from God. 

1 John 3:17, NIV: "If anyone has material possessions and sees a brother or sister in need but has no pity on them, how can the love of God be in that person?

Luke 18:25 King James Version (KJV)

25 For it is easier for a camel to go through a needle's eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

Command those who are rich in this present world not to be arrogant nor to put their hope in wealth, which is so uncertain, but to put their hope in God, who richly provides us with everything for our enjoyment. Command them to do good, to be rich in good deeds, and to be generous and willing to share. In this way they will lay up treasure for themselves as a firm foundation for the coming age, so that they may take hold of the life that is truly life. (NIV, 1 Timothy 6:17-19)

In Capitalism money is the measure of a man .The rich are to be adored and worshiped as the winners of the game .  I don’t think God agrees with that . There are also many , many verses I could post about compassion for your fellow man , helping the poor, equality,  etc which are socialistic ideas . 

I think your summary of what capitalism is a bit off, spun to fit the purpose and that the rich are to be adored and worshipped as winners is just more narrative. But yes there are limitless examples of helping your fellow man and those less fortunate in the Bible. I would argue that those are more examples of personal charity and caring rather than being some example of socialism.

 

If making money is so evil how do you explain the parable of the talents I mentioned above? How can the rich help the poor if becoming rich is evil? I'd be interested to see the Biblical reference that leads anyone to believe that what is desired is turning our money over to a government entity to redistribute to the needy.

 

Having said that, I am actually in favor of socialized healthcare at this point. Our capitalistic society has screwed it up so bad that I just see no other viable solution.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What other objective does capitalism have otter than amassing wealth ? 

I think a lot of the Bible verses are a reminder that there’s a whole lot more to life, humanity, and the measure of a man , than work and money . Virtue lies in the love and compassion you show for your fellow man etc not money alone .

Pretty sure there is nothing in the Bible about giving control of your money to a government entity no . Lol   

I agree about socialized healthcare . We already have a blend of socialism , and capitalism in this country we just need to swing more towards the social side on issues like that . 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there's a good discussion here, but can we split off the socialism discussion from the Ocasio-Cortez thread?

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, establishment Democrats (politicians) show once again they don't support the unity they claim that the progressives should have:

Joe Lieberman urges voters to back Crowley over Ocasio-Cortez in general

 

That's right, Jow Crowley (the incumbent) that AOC beat in the primary ended up winning a third party primary, and Lieberman wants him to run against her. Against the Democratic Party. His own party. The Dems are more interested in protecting the status quo than even winning.

 

BRAND NEW CONGRESS!!! Replace them all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Big Red 40 said:

What other objective does capitalism have otter than amassing wealth ? 

I think a lot of the Bible verses are a reminder that there’s a whole lot more to life, humanity, and the measure of a man , than work and money . Virtue lies in the love and compassion you show for your fellow man etc not money alone .

Pretty sure there is nothing in the Bible about giving control of your money to a government entity no . Lol   

I agree about socialized healthcare . We already have a blend of socialism , and capitalism in this country we just need to swing more towards the social side on issues like that . 

 

 

You're right, there is no mention in the Bible that the goal should be amassing wealth and there is a whole bunch about helping others. But capitalism is simply an economic and political system. Some individuals may make it their goal to amass as much wealth as possible but that doesn't make it any inherent goal or requirement to make the system function. And yes it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to get into heaven. But that deals with the individual and speaks to the corrupting power of money and wealth. I think God is plenty okay with people making gobs of money, as long as they also satisfy the requirements of charity and helping their fellow man and not making money some kind of idol. IDK, it's dealing with related issues but on two different levels.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Comfortably Numb said:

 

You're right, there is no mention in the Bible that the goal should be amassing wealth and there is a whole bunch about helping others. But capitalism is simply an economic and political system. Some individuals may make it their goal to amass as much wealth as possible but that doesn't make it any inherent goal or requirement to make the system function. And yes it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to get into heaven. But that deals with the individual and speaks to the corrupting power of money and wealth. I think God is plenty okay with people making gobs of money, as long as they also satisfy the requirements of charity and helping their fellow man and not making money some kind of idol. IDK, it's dealing with related issues but on two different levels.

 

 

 

Is money an idol if you hoard more than you can ever spend in 10 lifetimes?

 

Anyhow, I think society benefits from forcing the wicked to help despite themselves. And in case it's misinterpreted, I'm talking about people who want to help no one, rich or poor, and who would help no one even with no taxes.

  • Plus1 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RedDenver said:

I think there's a good discussion here, but can we split off the socialism discussion from the Ocasio-Cortez thread?

Yeah op did get derailed a bit I’ll bow out . Back to your regularly scheduled program . ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Big Red 40 said:

What other objective does capitalism have otter than amassing wealth ? 

 

None. In fact, the root of that societal philosophy is in the name: Capital. It's all about money, collecting assets, amassing wealth. Anything charitable is not intrinsically part of a system based on gaining capital.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Comfortably Numb said:

I think God is plenty okay with people making gobs of money, as long as they also satisfy the requirements of charity and helping their fellow man and not making money some kind of idol.

 

 

 

Matthew 19:21-26 Jesus answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”  When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth. Then Jesus said to his disciples, “I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. 24Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.” When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished and asked, “Who then can be saved?” Jesus looked at them and said, “With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.” Peter answered him, “We have left everything to follow you! What then will there be for us?”  Jesus said to them, “I tell you the truth, at the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man sits on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or fields for my sake will receive a hundred times as much and will inherit eternal life. But many who are first will be last, and many who are last will be first.

 

Mark 4:19 but the worries of this life, the deceitfulness of wealth and the desires for other things come in and choke the word, making it unfruitful.

 

Proverbs 23:4-5 Do not wear yourself out to get rich;  do not trust your own cleverness.Cast but a glance at riches, and they are gone, for they will surely sprout wings and fly off to the sky like an eagle.

 

James 5:1-6 Now listen, you rich people, weep and wail because of the misery that is coming on you. Your wealth has rotted, and moths have eaten your clothes. Your gold and silver are corroded. Their corrosion will testify against you and eat your flesh like fire. You have hoarded wealth in the last days. Look! The wages you failed to pay the workers who mowed your fields are crying out against you. The cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord Almighty.  You have lived on earth in luxury and self-indulgence. You have fattened yourselves in the day of slaughter.You have condemned and murdered the innocent one, who was not opposing you.

 

Proverbs 11:28 He who trusts in his riches will fall, but the righteous shall flourish as the green leaf.

 

Proverbs 11:4 Wealth is worthless in the day of wrath,  but righteousness delivers from death.

 

1 Timothy 6:17-19 Instruct those who are rich in this present world not to be conceited or to fix their hope on the uncertainty of riches, but on God, who richly supplies us with all things to enjoy. Instruct them to do good, to be rich in good works, to be generous and ready to share, storing up for themselves the treasure of a good foundation for the future, so that they may take hold of that which is life indeed.

 

Luke 16:14 The Pharisees, who loved money, heard all this and were sneering at Jesus He said to them, “You are the ones who justify yourselves in the eyes of others, but God knows your hearts. What people value highly is detestable in God’s sight.”

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had another related thought.

 

 

Why do any Christians who want(ed) laws to not let gays get married or adopt, not also want to force people to help the poor? Why pick and choose? Homosexuality (and women wearing pants) is an abomination. And we're supposed to help the poor. Both are in the Bible. Why pick and choose which things in the Bible the government should be involved in?

 

I personally think Christianity shouldn't be mixed with government and my reason for wanting healthcare to be free is based solely on the fact that we could afford it and it's the right thing to do. I fail to understand why more Christians don't feel this way. They fight against the government being involved in some Biblical things but not others.

 

 

And yes, I know not all Christians wanted there to be laws against gays. But the GOP is anti tax and anti-welfare, and a lot of Christians are Republicans and have been for a long time. Ones I know personally are against government health care of any kind. So there has to be an intersection here.

  • Plus1 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Comfortably Numb said:

If making money is so evil how do you explain the parable of the talents I mentioned above?

 

Per my understanding (I've had a modest but intensive amount of biblical/theological training), the parable of the Talents is an instruction on how to wisely and boldly use your talents/gifts/resources (including wealth) in service of God's kingdom and your fellow man. It also has an undertone of proper trust and perception of God - the first two servants see the master as generous, understanding and kind and the third sees the master with fear.

 

Interestingly, a pretty important element of that parable, probably the most important element, which I think still kind of speaks against capitalism, is that the master is entrusting his money in the hands of his servants until he returns - it's not their money at all. Capitalism is founded on acquiring personal wealth, while the story is about rewarding faithfulness and good stewardship of what you're given, with the knowledge that it's not really yours in the first place.

 

 

 

4 hours ago, Big Red 40 said:

Pretty sure there is nothing in the Bible about giving control of your money to a government entity no .

 

There isn't. The closest is Acts 4 when the early church sold all their possessions and pooled their resources to care for each other and others. The apostles were the governing body in the church, but you're right that it was not a state sanctioned government or anything like that. It also wasn't compelled to those who weren't interested.

  • Plus1 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing about this discussion on Socialism vs Capitalism is that Jesus never endorses a political/economic philosophy.  He instead flips the discussion to the individual - "what are you going to do about the poor, the naked, the hungry -- YOUR neighbor.  He doesn't ask - what is your govt going to do about it?  Generosity is to be an individual virtue. Yes, it can be and should be a national virtue as well but only as we as individuals are generous in total.   We cannot say that we are a generous person if that is based solely on the govt spending our collective tax dollars - that is being generous wt other people's money.   The Biblical example of King David not willing to sacrifice to God with a gift given to him from another because it 'cost him nothing' comes into play.  

I also think we have to be aware of not casting judgment on either capitalism or socialism to harshly. They are just tools - inherently morally neutral.  It is what we do with them that make them tools of good or 'evil'.  Money is not the root of all evil.  It is the LOVE of money that is - as Paul tells Timothy.  Money raised by the tool of capitalism can be and has been used to generate great good in society and to fund social programs.   God Bless a Bill Gates for example who has made billions but who also contributes huge sums of money to social concerns.  Without the capitalistic society we have, he might not have had the freedom, initiative, and the reward to offset risk to create the products that we use but also create profits that fund so many of his charitable endeavors.   This can be true of each of us on an individual level - even with our smaller resources - as noted in the parable of the talents posted previously.  This is how we fulfill Jesus's words to cloth the naked, feed the hungry, etc.

  • Plus1 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I want to be clear on my position on this. Just because I don’t think the Bible promotes socialism (or capitalism) doesn’t eliminate my support for any possible socialist policy. We have plenty of them in our system now that are sort of required and actually working to some extent and, depending on the specifics, I may find more are needed (such as with healthcare). But yes a person with that many seeming planks of socialism in their platform will cause me to look at them harder and probably with a bit of a jaded eye. I guess that is why I brought the issue of socialism up in this thread to begin with. I apologize if it skewed the discussion too far.

  • Plus1 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TGHusker said:

One thing about this discussion on Socialism vs Capitalism is that Jesus never endorses a political/economic philosophy.  He instead flips the discussion to the individual - "what are you going to do about the poor, the naked, the hungry -- YOUR neighbor.  He doesn't ask - what is your govt going to do about it?  Generosity is to be an individual virtue. Yes, it can be and should be a national virtue as well but only as we as individuals are generous in total.   We cannot say that we are a generous person if that is based solely on the govt spending our collective tax dollars - that is being generous wt other people's money.   The Biblical example of King David not willing to sacrifice to God with a gift given to him from another because it 'cost him nothing' comes into play.  

I also think we have to be aware of not casting judgment on either capitalism or socialism to harshly. They are just tools - inherently morally neutral.  It is what we do with them that make them tools of good or 'evil'.  Money is not the root of all evil.  It is the LOVE of money that is - as Paul tells Timothy.  Money raised by the tool of capitalism can be and has been used to generate great good in society and to fund social programs.   God Bless a Bill Gates for example who has made billions but who also contributes huge sums of money to social concerns.  Without the capitalistic society we have, he might not have had the freedom, initiative, and the reward to offset risk to create the products that we use but also create profits that fund so many of his charitable endeavors.   This can be true of each of us on an individual level - even with our smaller resources - as noted in the parable of the talents posted previously.  This is how we fulfill Jesus's words to cloth the naked, feed the hungry, etc.

 

For the most part I agree with you.  However, collectively, as individuals we need to sometimes support programs that help out everyone including the poor.  An example is healthcare.  Individually, I can do absolutely nothing to help a poor person pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for cancer treatment or a heart surgery (that should cost a tenth of that).

 

We as Christians should have our compassion in mind when we vote for our representatives.  Voting for someone who does nothing but promise to lower your taxes and give you your money back and cut social programs......is not the compassion Christ meant.

 

Christ would support a healthy debate in society about how it's best to have a safety net for the poor.

  • Plus1 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

For the most part I agree with you.  However, collectively, as individuals we need to sometimes support programs that help out everyone including the poor.  An example is healthcare.  Individually, I can do absolutely nothing to help a poor person pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for cancer treatment or a heart surgery (that should cost a tenth of that).

 

We as Christians should have our compassion in mind when we vote for our representatives.  Voting for someone who does nothing but promise to lower your taxes and give you your money back and cut social programs......is not the compassion Christ meant.

 

Christ would support a healthy debate in society about how it's best to have a safety net for the poor.

agree 100% - my post isn't meant to diminish what we can do collectively  - and part of that is discussing what govt can do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, TGHusker said:

Money is not the root of all evil.  It is the LOVE of money that is - as Paul tells Timothy.  Money raised by the tool of capitalism can be and has been used to generate great good in society and to fund social programs.   God Bless a Bill Gates for example who has made billions but who also contributes huge sums of money to social concerns. 

 

Love of money implies an intention or a posture of the heart. An internal motivation. But then you're taking an external circumstances and using that as a defense of or a compliment to capitalism. Per your/scripture's argument, who cares if Bill Gates has contributed huge sums of money if his own love of money was the motivating factor that got him there in the first place? 

 

Capitalism isn't all bad, but the entire philosophy of how it succeeds is centered around the 'love of money'. The system itself is a neutral tool, but this particular system results in pretty much everybody loving money to an extent that I would imagine Jesus of Nazareth would have some very harsh words towards.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Landlord said:

 

Love of money implies an intention or a posture of the heart. An internal motivation. But then you're taking an external circumstances and using that as a defense of or a compliment to capitalism. Per your/scripture's argument, who cares if Bill Gates has contributed huge sums of money if his own love of money was the motivating factor that got him there in the first place? 

 

Capitalism isn't all bad, but the entire philosophy of how it succeeds is centered around the 'love of money'. The system itself is a neutral tool, but this particular system results in pretty much everybody loving money to an extent that I would imagine Jesus of Nazareth would have some very harsh words towards.

 

I really don't agree with this.

 

There are one heck of a lot of people who are successful in capitalism that don't wake up in the morning with the extreme desire to go see how much money they can hoard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

I really don't agree with this.

 

There are one heck of a lot of people who are successful in capitalism that don't wake up in the morning with the extreme desire to go see how much money they can hoard.

 

 

I think you're thinking that I'm talking about some sinister, nefarious greedy greaseballs like Donald Trump, when I'm just talking about you and I. Acquiring money is the underlying motivation of almost everything we do. It might not seem like an obsessive love of money, but it's a system where acquiring capital is the only way to survive, and it's what we're subliminally taught as soon as we're able to learn. 

 

Love of money for people in capitalistic societies is like water for fish. Ask a fish how the water is and they'll ask, "What the hell is water?" :lol:

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Comfortably Numb said:

And I want to be clear on my position on this. Just because I don’t think the Bible promotes socialism (or capitalism) doesn’t eliminate my support for any possible socialist policy. We have plenty of them in our system now that are sort of required and actually working to some extent and, depending on the specifics, I may find more are needed (such as with healthcare). But yes a person with that many seeming planks of socialism in their platform will cause me to look at them harder and probably with a bit of a jaded eye. I guess that is why I brought the issue of socialism up in this thread to begin with. I apologize if it skewed the discussion too far.

The discussion branched into two other areas,  which both could have made good threads on their own . 1. The pros and cons of capitalism and socialism , and how they should be blended for the benefit of society . 2. The effect that religious beliefs/God have on peoples political views and why . 

As far as the OP goes I like most of Cortezs proposals , though I don’t think this country as a whole is ready to support that kind of agenda . There are justified worries about the cost of some of it, and the socialistic nature of it . I think a large portion of the population are still programmed to automatically reject anything with the word socialism attached to it . Eventually though I think a wave of young progressives will be elected and  push this country towards a more social mentality than we see now . Ocasio type gendas will become more the norm, and less of a scary socialist boogeyman . 

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Landlord said:

 

Love of money implies an intention or a posture of the heart. An internal motivation. But then you're taking an external circumstances and using that as a defense of or a compliment to capitalism. Per your/scripture's argument, who cares if Bill Gates has contributed huge sums of money if his own love of money was the motivating factor that got him there in the first place? 

 

Capitalism isn't all bad, but the entire philosophy of how it succeeds is centered around the 'love of money'. The system itself is a neutral tool, but this particular system results in pretty much everybody loving money to an extent that I would imagine Jesus of Nazareth would have some very harsh words towards.

We may be splitting hairs here but I know business men/women who see  capitalism as the system to magnify their love for God and people by using it to fulfill the mission to care for people and advance God's kingdom in this world. I've known of business which are in business for the sole purpose of using the funds above operation costs to fund outreach.  So, again, it comes back to us on the individual level.  We can use it for the benefit of others or it can have a corrupting affect on us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Landlord said:

Love of money for people in capitalistic societies is like water for fish. Ask a fish how the water is and they'll ask, "What the hell is water?" :lol:

Good line.  Love it.

 

But to expand your point  - this is why it was wrong for GWB to try to 'democratize' Iraq and Afghanistan.  Those societies have no rudimentary concept of what our water is like.  They didn't have the gills for our water and it was bound to fail. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, TGHusker said:

But to expand your point  - this is why it was wrong for GWB to try to 'democratize' Iraq and Afghanistan.  Those societies have no rudimentary concept of what our water is like.  They didn't have the gills for our water and it was bound to fail. 

So those people don't get democracy because we think they aren't ready for it? I don't understand this reasoning at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, RedDenver said:

So those people don't get democracy because we think they aren't ready for it? I don't understand this reasoning at all.

 

Sure they do.


But, I don't think it's worth American's lives and trillions of dollars to force it on them.  If a population doesn't fight and come together to promote democracy in their country themselves, it's a recipe for disaster and that's what we have seen in those countries.  The freedom it gives them, also allows the worst of the worst to rise to power and control, through force, people who want to live in peace.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

Sure they do.


But, I don't think it's worth American's lives and trillions of dollars to force it on them.  If a population doesn't fight and come together to promote democracy in their country themselves, it's a recipe for disaster and that's what we have seen in those countries.  The freedom it gives them, also allows the worst of the worst to rise to power and control, through force, people who want to live in peace.

I see. I thought you were saying we should have installed some other form of government like a dictator sympathetic to US interests.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/18/2018 at 6:33 PM, Big Red 40 said:

What other objective does capitalism have otter than amassing wealth ? 

 

 

 

On 7/18/2018 at 8:34 PM, knapplc said:

 

None. In fact, the root of that societal philosophy is in the name: Capital. It's all about money, collecting assets, amassing wealth. Anything charitable is not intrinsically part of a system based on gaining capital.

 

I disagree that is the only objective. I would say the main objective is to appropriately balance supply and demand. Money is simply the tool that helps set production and usage levels. If an item costs too much to produce suppliers will cut back on production of that item or stop all together. If the item makes them gobs of money then they will expand production. Likewise if an item is overpriced people won't buy it and if it's under priced they will buy more which in turn will cause producers to change pricing and/or production levels. It also determines wages and which skills society encourages and discourages. The main objective is keeping our whole economic system balanced.

 

And this is why I believe it is not the best system for things such as healthcare. The problem being that there cannot be a voluntary exchange of money for services when the consumer is in a no choice situation. Spend this amount or suffer or die? That's not a choice or free exchange. In a healthy system it may work but when corruption and greed are interjected it interferes with the proper functioning. This is why some things need government oversight or even full on price control.  And then we have to hold the government accountable and keep an eye on their corruption and greed. It all takes a delicate balance no matter which economic system is in play.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×