Inequality: The Problem No One Can Tackle | National Catholic Reporter

Inequality: The Problem No One Can Tackle | National Catholic Reporter by MSW. MGB: The problem is the entire debate.  It seems to be about marginal improvements in taxes, benefits and wages but no real vision for a different future where executives do not seek to be rock stars at the expense of their workers -and at times their shareholders.  It is no wonder the working class, who refuse to even acknowledge such a designation (is a step above or is still in poverty) is not exited by any of the debate - stays home and lets the Republicans have the Congress.  Indeed, many in the working class think they are in the middle class, so the working gets nothing while the middle gets more than it needs.  What we need to redistribute is not income, its ownership and that is a problem many have tackled - especially yours truly - both how to distribute it and what to do when you get it.



The lack of such a vision is why we have acquiesence.  Oddly enough, the creation of the current liberal welfare state, which the Vatican still holds dear in Caritas in Veritate, came about because Pope Leo was answering Marx - and this was essential because Marxism was in the lead in fighting for ownership and income through the union movement - which was attracting ethnics the world over, incluing in the United States.  Indeed, during the early party of the depression, there was a real danger the Marxists would win - so FDR triangulated between Industry, Labor and Government, with the help of Msgr. Ryan and made everyone happy until Reagan came along, coached by none other than George Will.  That tacit agreement to work together stopped under FDR when the Marxists were thrown under the bus (no ownership) and even the Catholics in the movement were reduced to Bing Corsby movies - with a Red Scare attempting to finish the job, but not so much - it merely radicalized the Socialists and gave them even less reason to think from a religious angle - although a part of my book shows that one can be both religious (indeed Catholic) and still have class conciousness - working for ownership.



Then we have Will's review.  I might say he was so much better before, but really, only my father would think so, although I was quite pleased with his column in the late 80s about the pro-life movement giving up on banning abortion.  If MSW was even paying attention, I am sure his head was spinning.  His subject is nothing new - its just a new version of trickle down.  I guess if you deal in high end real estate, cars or cuisine or have ambitions to be a personal servant, life is good in the celebrity actor, athlete or CEO business.  I would go the other way with such stories and use them to build a bit of class conciousness - even Duck is a millionaire.  It seems that people are more prone to desire that kind of of life than seek justice (which is not envy) for those who are not gifted with the luck, ability or guile of the celebrity.  Of course, my little plan would take at least the CEOs out of the celebrity showcase and would require the actors, entertainers and athletes to do more for those who are trying to work their way up.  Povery may be a great incentive for some, but others are equally talented and deserve a chance without having starving children - even an aspiring economic writer (now a best selling author) named Marx who did have a child starve.



Bottom line, if becoming an owners became the biggest part of retirement compensation and it actually meant some share in the control of the firm - as much so as the CEO gets if one is a long enough tenured employee (and the same pay by the way - with CEOs bidding on their wage against others), then the whole story of class conciousness may indeed change.



 As for the Church, I am sure they will flock to any successful movement - which will gladly tell them to emulate Francis on poverty.  Indeed, a morality based on Christian humanism will have the same basic content as one based on secular humanism.  Its natural law either way.  Indeed, if the Curia can't sell its natural law to secular humanists, its not natural law - its religious tradition.  Why is that essential - because atheists need to be convinced, as the Christian Left does, that the Catholci Hierarchy is really teaching truth, not patriarchy.  Can't see that the Church is doing a very good job right now, not even with Francis.