Sunday, October 14, 2018

Metrics - Update

Update - Pope Francis's homily for this weekend's notable canonizations also dwelt on today's Gospel reading.  I've pasted some of it at the bottom of this post.

This is my homily for today, the 28th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Cycle B.  The readings for today are here.


We are going to have some eminent visitors in the coming weeks.  Next Sunday, at the 11:30 mass, our pastor, Fr. Darrio, will officially be installed as pastor of St. Edna; the new bishop of our vicariate, Bishop Rojas, will be coming here to do the honors.  And I’m told that sometime early next calendar year, possibly in February, Cardinal Cupich will come to dedicate our new parish center, which will be finished by then (we hope!).

There was a time, it must have been sometime late in the 1990s or perhaps very early on in the new millennium, when Cardinal George came to St. Edna.  If he came for any particular occasion, I don’t recall now what it was. 

There was one specific thing about that visit that still sticks in my mind, and it’s pertinent to this morning’s Gospel, which is about the spiritual perils of great wealth.  Cardinal George, in some ways, was a throwback to the old style of church official: he was stern and demanding, and he could be daunting.  Every deacon in the diocese could tell you that he didn’t suffer fools gladly.  But beneath the imposing façade, there beat the heart of a genuine priest, and there were times when it shone through.
 
That particular morning at St. Edna was one of those times.  To prepare him for his visit, someone had given him our annual report.  Now, in the business world where I work all week, an annual report is a set of financial statements, with income and expenses and assets and liabilities and government filings and all the rest.  But one of the many things I love about our parish is that we have our own spin on an annual report: instead of being obsessed with financials, our annual report also includes other metrics, like how many babies we baptized, how many times we brought communion to people in nursing homes, how many families in need received our Gift of Love at Christmastime.  Those numbers may not interest a financial analyst, but they’re real measures of the health of a parish.

Cardinal George loved our annual report.  He held it up and waved it in front of him.  And you could see all the pastoral activity in the report excited him – he smiled, which was not something that came easily to him among a group of strangers.  And he said the only words I can recall from that day – he said, “Reading this annual report is like reading the Gospel.”

What a wonderfully insightful comment that was from Cardinal George.  We do publish our actual financials regularly here at St. Edna – another thing about our parish that I love is that we try to be as transparent as we can about our finances – and if you read them, as I do, you know that, as the world measures wealth, this is not a particularly wealthy organization.  In fact, most years, it seems like it’s touch and go whether we’ll finish in the black – and some years, we don’t.
 
But acquiring and investing vast reserves of wealth is not how success and failure are measured in the kingdom of heaven.  I really think, if God is into metrics at all, he’s going to measure this faith community’s success by using the sorts of metrics that populate our annual report: to how many of our children did we try to pass along our faith?  To how many hungry people who came to our door did we provide food?   How many people in crisis found someone to talk with here, someone to listen to them, someone to pray with them?  To how many people did we proclaim the Good News that Christ died for us, rose from the dead for us, and is present with us when we gather here in his name?

Jesus’s message this morning to the wealthy man – go, give away your wealth, and then follow me – is hard for us to hear.  Did you notice that the disciples were amazed?  They had been taught that having wealth was a sign of God’s favor; the corollary would be that if you were poor, it would seem to be a sign of God’s disfavor. 

That was the misconception of their day.  The misconception in our day is a little different: it’s that whatever money we earn, whatever wealth we accumulate, is due to our own talents and character: our own shrewdness or guts or intelligence or hard work.  Isn’t that the mythology of the self-made man or woman?  That myth is embedded deeply in our American souls. 

My brothers and sisters, I think we need to resist that myth – the myth of the self-made man or woman.  It’s false.  Instead, let’s situate ourselves in the truth, by trusting God, and worshipping him in spirit and truth.  And when it comes to wealth, here is the truth, the wisdom of the kingdom of heaven: whatever good things have are blessings from God.  If we have much, it’s because we’ve been given much. 

It’s not a sin to be rich.  But having wealth brings its own set of spiritual perils.  One of the chief perils is that we’ll think that our wealth is something that we deserve, that it’s due us.  The truth is that whatever we have – wealth, talents, power, beauty, whatever gifts we have - is not due to our native abilities, and it’s not to keep for ourselves.  The truth is that whatever we have has been given to us by God.

When we trust God, when we put our faith in God, one of the gifts we are given is eyes to see.  And when we look around with eyes to see, we see things that disconcert us.  We see that there are people who don’t have enough, even in the midst of a community like this one where many people have more than they need.  Every day in our community, there are individuals and families in peril of being evicted from apartments because they’re unable to pay the rent.  There are people at risk of having their electricity shut off or their water supply turned off, because they don’t have enough money to pay their utility bills.  And yet how many people in our community have so much extraneous space in our homes that there are entire rooms that we seldom use?  How many of us consume electricity and water without giving much thought to it?  Some of us have so much, while others of us have so little. 

Jesus instructed the wealthy man to sell his possessions and give the proceeds to the poor.  If we’re fortunate enough that we have more than enough, let’s acknowledge that we’ve received a gift from God, and let us therefore do what he wishes us to do, which is to share our good fortune – share, literally, our fortunes – with those who are less fortunate.  Let us look for opportunities to be generous to those in need, perhaps even embracing a simpler lifestyle to do so.  Because those are the metrics used to measure our suitability for the kingdom of heaven.

Update 10/14/2018 10:48 pm ET:  Pope Francis canonized Pope Paul VI, Archbishop Oscar Romero, and five others this weekend.  Gerard O'Connell's story in America  included the following passage that gives us a sense of Francis's take on this week's Gospel reading.

[Pope Francis] referred to both saints [Paul VI and Archbishop Romero] in his homily when he commented on the Gospel story told by St. Mark the Evangelist that was sung in Latin and Greek at the Mass. That story recounted how a rich young man ran up to Jesus and asked what he must do “to inherit eternal life,” since he had observed all the commandments. Francis noted that the young man asked what he must “do”; in other words, he wanted “a good to be obtained, by his own efforts.” But, the pope recalled, “Jesus changes the perspective: from commandments observed in order to obtain a reward, to a free and total love. That man was speaking in terms of supply and demand. Jesus proposes to him a story of love” and calls on him to “sell what you have and give to the poor.” 
Pope Francis told the crowd that “the Lord does not discuss theories of poverty and wealth but goes directly to life. He asks you to leave behind what weighs down your heart, to empty yourself of goods in order to make room for him, the only good. We cannot truly follow Jesus when we are laden down with things. Because if our hearts are crowded with goods, there will not be room for the Lord, who will become just one thing among the others.”



35 comments:

  1. Sorry, I think this is watering down the message. To even begin following the instructions of Jesus to the wealthy man, it is not enough to "acknowledge we have received a gift from God" and "share our good fortune". If we give easily, we are just like the wealthy man in the beginning. What is required from us is to give, give, give -- until it hurts. Then we have taken a step in the right direction.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Claire, many thanks for that critique. You may be right: perhaps I should have pushed harder. Of course, had I insisted that everyone give, give, give, they may be justified in responding, "Ok - but you go first." Ashamed to say, I'm not there yet. I do give. But perhaps I could give much more.

      Delete
    2. I'm not there either -- but that's what the end of the Gospel is for...

      There is a real tension between the way our economy works, in which we are expected to save for our old age, and the radical detachment demanded here. Can we trust that if we give everything away, someone will take care of us in our needs? Our family? The state? Are we ready to rely on the goodwill of others for our needs?

      It's a hard text and it goes straight against our desire for financial "security".

      Delete
    3. I'm probably wrong, but I've always understood that Gospel reading to be about a calling to apostleship. The equivalent now would be someone who enters religious life, leaves everything behind and takes a vow of poverty.
      I don't think the Gospel is against prudently taking care of our own needs and those dependent on us. And someone has to help with the needs of those who were called to the more radical vocation.

      Delete
    4. "There is a real tension between the way our economy works, in which we are expected to save for our old age, and the radical detachment demanded here. Can we trust that if we give everything away, someone will take care of us in our needs? Our family? The state? Are we ready to rely on the goodwill of others for our needs?"

      I think it's worth some thought. One of the things that this Gospel passage caused me to wonder is, "Am I wealthy?". Of course, compared to the world median income, which a few seconds of Googling suggests is somewhere between $10,000-$20,000 per year, I'm fabulously rich. But compared to the billionaires that Jack mentions, I'm not wealthy at all. Between mortgage, car payments, college tuition and what not, we're a few weeks of unemployment away from a catastrophe.

      That said: when it comes to retirement income, I'm almost surely one of the "haves". I'm fortunate enough to have one of those corporate jobs (and so does my wife) that offers a 401(k) retirement plan. That means that whatever I put into my retirement account is tax-deferred; plus my employer contributes 50 cents for every dollar I put in. That's a guaranteed 50% return on that investment for the year. When you add on the tax benefit and whatever actual investment return that money earned for the year, it's usually even better.

      Here's the thing, though: not everyone in the US gets what I just described. There are many workers who don't receive any retirement plan at all from their employers - and naturally, they tend to be at the lower end of the wage spectrum. It's up to them to save on their own, and then count on Social Security and Medicare (if they're eligible - undocumented immigrants aren't), and do what you suggest: hope that their family or kind friends or strangers will help them out.

      So it strikes me that one way to answer the question, "Am I wealthy?" is to take a look at whether or not a person receives the sort of privileged retirement-savings I described above. That factor seems to be a real dividing line in our society. Certainly, on that basis, I'm one of the "haves".

      Even my 401k plan isn't as secure as the old defined-payment pensions that used to prevail, and are becoming rarer every year in the US. My retirement "savings" (actually investments) are subject to market volatility. Had I not panicked when the Great Recession made my retirement investments tank, I would be farther ahead than I am today, but as it is I still have a long way to go before I can think of retiring. By contrast, my wife's parents, who were a very nice blue-collar couple - he was a Teamster, she was a Chicago Public School teacher - had defined-payment pension benefits that I'd love to have waiting for me. I think their lifestyle improved when they retired.

      Delete
  2. Sounds like October is your archdiocese stewardship month, too. We will get some time, talent, and treasure homilies. And some couple and family witness talks before Mass. So far we haven't been asked to do that. Which is just fine with me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Katherine, you're right that stewardship was on my mind in composing this one, although I didn't use the word. Kind of building on Claire's comment, I'm not sure that "stewardship" hasn't sort of lost its punch because we've domesticated it.

      I don't claim to be an expert in the spirituality of stewardship, but I think one of its foundational approaches is to "give from the top": we'd do our spiritual giving first, and *then* pay our bills and have a lifestyle with whatever is left over. If we have to dial down the expenditures to make that work, so be it.

      I've heard testimony from people who have embraced that; their testimony - very much in line with Jesus's words this morning - is that they end up being blessed with so much unexpected and unlooked-for money, goods and so on, that they end up ahead of where they started.

      Delete
    2. I'm glad we don't push the point of the literal "tithe" to the extent that some of the Protestant churches do. I think it is true that one size doesn't fit all. And I believe that giving of one's time; as a catechist, cantor, etc. counts also, not all contributions are monetary.

      Delete
  3. True story about a great priest I am lucky enough to know. He had a $5 bill and, as it happened, a $50 bill in his pocket when he was approached by a homeless man. He thought" "If I give him the $5 it will change his life. If I give him the $50 it will change my life." He gave the homeless man the $50.

    That is the law and the prophets. Everything else is commentary.

    ReplyDelete
  4. "Giving until it hurts." I think this happens in different ways. Sometimes almsgiving seems like a piece of cake compared to giving time, understanding, forgiveness, comfort, etc.--arguably other forms of wealth that Jim 's sermon touches on. The older and more decrepit I get, the more I'd rather give someone money to get rid of them. Not an attractive quality, but I'll cop to it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And I'd much rather give money to a cause than buy raffle tickets, obverpriced cookie dough, or frozen pizzas.

      Delete
    2. "Obverpriced" should be overpriced.

      Delete
    3. As it happened, this was a weekend for howling demands on parishioners. The bulletin has the bishop's message on "world mission Sunday" next week. The teens were passing out plastic boxes to be filled with needs and goodies (list of suggestions included) for the kids in our twin parish in Haiti. The call went out for auction items for the Christmas dinner show. And the Fall Fest is coming up on Oct. 26-28 (full page ad in bulletin). The Food Pantry was collecting canned goods, as it does every week. And this is a parish with an unusually high number of tithers from way back, although a tithe on most of our incomes wouldn't stir the water at some parishes collectively known as Our Lady of the Cadillacs.

      On the other hand, we never, never hear homilies about what it takes to fix the roof or the air conditioning.

      Delete
  5. I find it very interesting that in a world where the top eight richest billionaires own as much combined wealth as "half the human race" none of the homilies appears to be concerned about this and other similar statistics

    Does anyone think that this is OK with Jesus?

    Why don't we have any homilies about the problems of sinful economic and political structures of the world?

    Why is everyone leaving this up to Bernie Sanders?



    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jack, I think it's because they know the bishop would be getting a bunch of angry letters from peop!e accusing the homilist of "promoting socialism".

      Delete
    2. Just speaking for myself: the idea didn't occur to me to talk about that. So thanks for the suggestion. I'm not quite sure what I would say - I'd need to think and pray about it some more.

      Delete
    3. Around here at least, it's sort of expected that deacons don't rock the boat too hard. Not that my husband is a boat rocking type anyway. If they think you like to rock boats, you're real likely to get weeded out in formation.

      Delete
    4. Katherine - I don't like to rock the boat. But I also believe that we are called to preach the Gospel with integrity. That is why I am grateful for critiques like Claire's.

      The unwritten rule around here is, if you feel like you're going to preach something that would rock the boat, give the pastor a heads-up and get his view (which is to say, get his permission, or at least give him a chance to veto it). That is as it should be - he's the boss of the place and responsible for what gets proclaimed there.

      Delete
    5. Jim, that's kind of how it is here, too. If in doubt, run it by the pastor and get his feedback.

      Delete
  6. Speaking of donations to charity. Elizabeth Warren's DNA test came in showing indian ancestry. Punkass welcher Trump still won't cough up $1M he promised to charity if she proved it with a DNA test. Anyway, my girl is good.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Warren's Native American brew is pretty thin, but I give her creds for clearing up an issue that Trump made more out of than she did.

      Meantime, let's not drag the Welsh into it. My people have been unfairly maligned as thieves, cheats, and crooks long enough. Thank you, Venerable Bede, for that stereotype.

      Delete
    2. Nah. Trump won't be parting with that $1 mil. He'd have to eat some crow, and he never does that. A lot of people have some Indian ancestry, especially if the family has been here a long time. My sister's DNA test showed Native American, about 6 generations back. Which would verify the family story. I'm not getting the DNA test, should be the same as my siblings. I think.

      Delete
    3. The latest is that Trump denied ever making the pledge, and said, "Who cares, anyway?"
      You'd think he'd be a little bit embarrassed to lie about something where there's video footage of him saying it.

      Delete
    4. Yeah, he denies it. It's on tape. 35% of Americans by now know he never said it. It's on tape. Fake news.

      Speaking of fake news, the whole uproar wasn't worth the effort Warren put into proving the Infallible Fat Boy is wrong. Because, No. 1, he will never admit it. And No. 2, my man Charles Pierce says if he had been Warren he would have offered his DNA as a trade for Trump's tax returns. The art of the deal. Wish some Democrat could think like my man Charles.

      Delete
  7. She's probably about as indian as I am Scandinavian, 0.5%, but there it is. 0.5% western european, 2% Finnish. All the rest is Polish. If poles were aryans, I'd be Der Führer. Instead, pass the babka.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Jim, They had been taught that having wealth was a sign of God’s favor… that if you were poor, it would seem to be a sign of God’s disfavor.

    I've heard testimony from people who … end up being blessed with so much unexpected and unlooked-for money, goods .. that they end up ahead of where they started.

    Jim - sounds much like some Protestants I know. The prosperity gospel teaches them that if they tithe to the church (often a minister's stand-alone congregation), they will receive back more than they give - because they are "good" christians. In their minds, supporting their local congregation and memorizing bible passages (out of context) is all that it takes to be a "good" Christian. The "missions" they support in poor parts of the world are mostly bible studies - not much concerned with the material poverty and suffering they encounter while trying to convert "the natives". That version of "christianity" assumes that the point of being "christian" is to save their own hides (hmm, souls) and they are taught that can “be saved” through "faith" alone. They often note that "the poor will always be with us", as if that somehow means it's OK that there are a whole lot of people who are poor. Their "faith" is shown by how much they give to the church - not how much they give to the poor. Many believe that the poor are poor precisely because they are not "christians". The "church" they tithe to is very often a non-affiliated, congregation. Then there are the celebrity preachers like Osteen and a whole raft of others, including that priest on EWTN (Corapi) who was raking it in from the huge crowds who paid to hear him preach in person before the tawdry news revealed his true nature and he ran off to his hidden ranch in Montana. He isn't the only Catholic priest who has made big bucks off of his "missions".

    After it was clear that Rome planned to do nothing to hold accountable the bishops who protected child molesters (including George of Chicago - who was still protecting priests after Dallas), I stopped giving money to the RC church - even while still attending mass at an RC church. I gave "time and talent", but not treasure. After a while, I decided I could no longer go to an RC parish in "good faith" and started going with my Protestant husband to the EC

    We decided 15 years ago that what we give in $ would go to those who are transparent with their use of money, whose financials are checked through neutral, non-church related groups such as Charity Navigator, or which, if small, are run by people that we know well enough to trust that they are doing the right thing with the money. They do not build 5000 sq ft retirement "homes" for themselves with wine cellars, expensive persian rugs, pools and hot tubs, etc (for example, the bishop in New Jersey and the bishop in Germany, but they aren't the only bishops who saw the "tithes" of the people as being owed to them personally).

    Our donations go to scholarship funds at our respective alma maters, to Catholic Relief Services, the Jesuit Refugee Service, to Doctors without Borders, and to a couple of local groups whose leadership we trust. We donate to our parish, and to an Episcopal Relief Agency, but the Anglican presence in the world is small compared to the RC presence. CRS does an amazing amount of good all over the world. We also give to two priests (one RC, one EC) who use “discretionary funds” to help people with an urgent need - the electricity is going to be cut off, or they can't afford the medication their child needs. I know these men, and that they are trustworthy. and they know who really needs the emergency cash better than I do.

    It's complicated trying to "support" the church (defining church is difficult) and the poor (identifying them can be tough at times also).

    ReplyDelete
  9. I had written:

    " I've heard testimony from people who … end up being blessed with so much unexpected and unlooked-for money, goods .. that they end up ahead of where they started."

    ... to which Anne responded:

    "Jim - sounds much like some Protestants I know. The prosperity gospel teaches them that if they tithe to the church (often a minister's stand-alone congregation), they will receive back more than they give - because they are "good" christians.""

    I can't speak for Protestants, but this past Sunday's Gospel reading gives them at least some high-level basis for that view.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As mentioned - the prosperity gospel relies on taking scripture quotes out of context.

      It seems the RCC in some places is heading down the evangelical protestant road - first in it's "renew the church" programs, the adoption of praise music and screens with lyrics, and coffee bars and all the rest of the stuff that the church in Timonium is borrowing from the evangelical protestants. Wonder if they have they will add stages with praise bands, complete with fake smoke rising on the stage, shown on the big screens.

      And the trads think that having the mass in English and singing psalms put to music by the St. Louis Jesuits was too protestant!

      Is the RCC now also copying prosperity gospel preachers in promoting giving by promising people that it's an investment that is guaranteed to return more than they gave. A twisting of the scriptures. Before I left the RCC, during a stewardship campaign, a couple got up and said just that - they had gotten back so much more in material blessings than they had given in tithes. It turned my stomach and started me down the road of giving most of our "tithe" to CRS, JRS etc than to the parish. Even before finally shutting the checkbook completely due to the failure to hold bishops accountable for enabling child molesters.

      Somehow I doubt that Trump is a multi-millionaire because of he's a "good christian" or because of his generous giving away of his personal wealth - including tithing to either churches or to the poor. And how many truly generous and good people gave so much away to those who had even less than they that they were barely surviving themselves, living extremely modestly and doing without. Somehow that prosperity ship never came in for them.

      Jesus didn't promise material wealth to anyone. But he spent a lot of time warning us against what material wealth can do to us - the dangers of the corruption of wealth. I am as guilty as anyone, with far more in the way of material goods than we need to survive in a dignified manner. It's something that does bother me and I have switched to having monthly amounts donated via credit card to the preferred groups who care for the poor and the refugees. That way I don't keep putting it off, and then writing a bunch of checks in December that total less than we give when it's spread out over the year. We also have a large house, using only a few rooms now that our family is grown and gone. Downsizing makes sense, but neither of us has any desire to move to a condo or "adult" community. We've been in this house for 46 years - moved in the day after we got home from our honeymoon. Not quite ready to fill the empty bedrooms with a poor family though, I will admit. And I feel guilty a bit because I don't want to do that. Not ready to "sell all".

      Delete
    2. Anne - I am about where you are: definitely not ready yet to "sell all". I think the fact that we think and pray about it is a hopeful sign.

      Delete
  10. I yield to no one in criticizing the various ways homilists and pew sitters water down the plain meaning of that Gospel. There are, I am told, six needle'seye gates where you can be photographed in modern Jerusalem, even though everyone who would know says there were none in Jesus' time. And it's true that one can be rich in money but in dire need of grace. And giving alms covers a multitude of sins. (Today's Gospel.) But after you squirm to the left or squirm to the right, you are left with the fact that there are people who are really poor in terms of what it takes to live. And you aren't. And what are you going to do about that?

    Which is a question to ask every day, knowing that a man's reach should exceed his grasp, or what's a heaven for?

    (Sorry about Browning's pronoun; I didn't know him personally.)

    ReplyDelete
  11. ...you are left with the fact that there are people who are really poor in terms of what it takes to live. And you aren't. And what are you going to do about that?

    Yes - that is the question. What do we do about it?

    My grad degree from Georgetown was in international economics. I concentrated heavily on courses about economic development in the poor countries of the world. Although I branched out some from that over the years, it was part of my work for about 15 years. So much happened when we freed up trade, got rid of capital controls, etc, etc. The "Asian miracle" was export led, bringing millions of people out of poverty because those of us in the rich countries could buy goods made in the poor countries - with lower labor costs. This eventually pushed wages in those countries higher and higher as the middle classes grew and those countries achieved developed nation status and living standards. It has happened in much of Latin America also, but less evenly. And it helped us too, because the formerly poor countries buy a whole lot of our stuff too, now that they can afford it.

    We can't solve world poverty alone. For all of its faults, international business has helped millions out of poverty, now achieving the lowest rate of "severe poverty" in history, according to the World Bank (a once upon a time employer of mine)- single digits for the poorest of the poor. A huge achievement of the last 30 years, threatened now by the "me first" philosophy sweeping the rich nations who are embracing protectionism and isolationism.

    As individuals, what can we do? At the global level, we can support those who believe that helping other countries achieve a higher standard of living is a worthy policy goal. We can donate to CRS and others who do humanitarian work around the world. Supporting the reduction of poverty also means supporting those who believe that helping the poor with social safety nets in our own countries are worthy policies.

    But it also means that each of us who has more than enough have to figure out what we as individuals can do - for those in our own communities who have so little.

    As noted already, most of us (including my husband and I) give of our surplus and never come close to actually depriving ourselves of anything we need, or even want, if the wants are within reason financially.

    When our kids were in independent schools, mostly Catholic, and a couple of Episcopalian, I often felt guilty about spending money on tuition. We live in a top notch public school district - one of the best in the country. The kids in public school here do not suffer academically, but have excellent facilities, teachers, and academic opportunities and challenges. But, we also wanted a christian message (best found in the Episcopal schools our youngest attended we discovered, rather than in the Catholic schools our older sons attended). But would it have been "more" christian to send them to public school and just try to make sure the gospel values got through in our family and daily lives? We wanted them immersed in a school environment that modeled christian values, but we may have been overly optimistic about that.

    My guilt about this (and the fact that I attended college - Catholic - courtesy of two full scholarships) is one reason I strongly support scholarship funds at several family alma maters, including the Episcopal high school our youngest attended.

    But, we haven't invited a homeless mother and her kids to live with us, or maybe a refugee family. We haven't opened our homes the same way we open our wallets.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anne, I don't think you have to feel guilty about trying to do the best you could for your kids' education. That's what any parents worth their salt do. Where I think people need to feel guilty is when they spare no expense for their own children's education, but vote against public school bond issues because it will raise their taxes.

      Delete
    2. That link of faith and voting is very important. The Bible says a lot about the poor, but it doesn't show macroeconomics because in those days the average person had almost zero influence on anything that happened outside his own family group -- and certainly no influence on what the caesar, king of whoever wanted to do about trade and wages. So we have to figure out this voting stuff for ourselves.

      Delete
    3. Anne - best thing you've ever written here :-) Love your economic analysis.

      FWIW, I think we're in the midst of a political shift: the Democrats (almost surely following their upscale funding sources) are becoming the globalists, while the Republicans (following their downscale voter base) are becoming the isolationists. In the short term, I guess that has put Trump in the White House, but over the longer term, it will surely work to the Democrats' advantage.

      Delete
  12. Poverty is caused by a multitude of sins: Business owners who pay poor wages and benefits; consumers willing to sacrifice someone else's fair wage for their own cheap prices; lack of support for those who cannot work; high costs of quality day care; men who don't pay child support; poor or non-existent public transportation; the aforementioned public schools that don't get supported by those in private institutions; wages that don't allow for saving; banking and lending institutions that work against the poor who need to establish credit records.

    Some of these things can be alleviated by voting for better public policies.

    But the attitude of giving has to be there in the first place, as so many folks here have pointed out. Once you get the idea that God is a personal good luck charm who will do your bidding if you propitiate him with enough money and prayers, the poor are screwed.

    ReplyDelete