|
Pope: Not to share wealth with poor is to steal
Seraph.Ramyrez
Server: Seraph
Game: FFXI
Posts: 1918
By Seraph.Ramyrez 2015-04-28 14:08:05
Who knows indeed?
And like I said, I guess to some extent it doesn't matter; the change is change and, seemingly, is for the better either way. In my opinion, anyhow.
Maybe, for me anyhow, it's also partly the fact that even if you're not a "believer", you still never quite stop being Catholic, and all the terrible things still bother you even though you don't even buy into their stuff any more.
It's like when a con gets out of prison; they've served their time, they're rebuilding their life, but they still think like they're on the inside in some ways and if they just go by instinct, they fall into habits from their time locked up.
You stick me in a Mass for a wedding or funeral, my brain still tries to go through all the ceremony and I have to push it down. :p
By Jetackuu 2015-04-28 14:08:44
Quote: Pope Francis has taken aim at capitalism as "a new tyranny" and is urging world leaders to step up their efforts against poverty and inequality, saying "thou shall not kill" the economy. Francis calls on rich people to share their wealth. That's not a solution. We already share our wealth far more than he does. What more does he want?
I mean, we could take our tithes from the church away and give it to homeless shelters (those who actually go to church that is).
If he wants to promote income equality, then he should promote policies that, you know, increase jobs and increase wages, not by asking for a more dependent class. That's promoting more income inequality...
Unfortunately, there will be people swayed by this idiot...
Can you Reaganomics any harder? Obamanomics is certainly the answer, isn't it.
How's that going for you again? High unemployment, larger income inequality, low to stagnate real GDP growth, not to mention all of the social issues that arises from all this also.
You certainly are living the dream world. So, how long are you going to live in this misery before you admit that your wrong?
The unemployment rate is still at 5.5%, not really that high, not great, but not high. (inb4 that's not the real #) Out of all that, you pick the argument easily referenced?
How's that labor participation rate going for you?
But at least you admit that there is a larger income inequality and low to stagnate real GDP growth, along with a lot of social issues that arise from a poor economy is all on your hero Obama.
I admitted nothing, and I picked the one that I could easily prove you wrong on, the rest takes more time, and considering trying to change your belief on trickle-down economics, is like trying to convince a conspiracy nut to be rational.
But please, quote me on anytime I ever said that I liked Obama,because I don't. As for the poor economy: it really has nothing to do with him, at all. But nice try.
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-04-28 14:12:27
I admitted nothing, and I picked the one that I could easily prove you wrong on, the rest takes more time, and considering trying to change your belief on trickle-down economics, is like trying to convince a conspiracy nut to be rational. You know, you have yet to prove or even present an argument against the policies of Reagan and how, in your opinion, the booms created by those policies were detrimental to this nation.
All you have done is said "no u!" so many times.
But I would love for you to "easily prove me wrong." You never give out any sources to your arguments, all you do is say "no u" and your knowledge of basic economic theory is on par of flower head's basis of economic theory.
But please, quote me on anytime I ever said that I liked Obama,because I don't. Whatever you say. For somebody who keeps preaching how much he dislikes Obama, you certainly approve and parrot most of his talking points.
Lakshmi.Flavin
Server: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 18466
By Lakshmi.Flavin 2015-04-28 14:12:40
Talk about a biased observation. Probably.
Who in your mind contributes the most to charity? Is it the wealthy or is it the poor? Depends on how you define contributions. It seems like you might be thinking purely about monetary contributions but there are many people who donate much of their time and lives to helping others so it would depend on what sort of value you put on each.
Who is charity really benefiting also, the rich or the poor? Both.
[+]
Bismarck.Snprphnx
Server: Bismarck
Game: FFXI
Posts: 2689
By Bismarck.Snprphnx 2015-04-28 14:13:58
Who knows indeed?
And like I said, I guess to some extent it doesn't matter; the change is change and, seemingly, is for the better either way. In my opinion, anyhow.
Maybe, for me anyhow, it's also partly the fact that even if you're not a "believer", you still never quite stop being Catholic, and all the terrible things still bother you even though you don't even buy into their stuff any more.
It's like when a con gets out of prison; they've served their time, they're rebuilding their life, but they still think like they're on the inside in some ways and if they just go by instinct, they fall into habits from their time locked up.
You stick me in a Mass for a wedding or funeral, my brain still tries to go through all the ceremony and I have to push it down. :p
Just drink the kool-aid passed around during communion, and it will all be better
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-04-28 14:14:40
Depends on how you define contributions. It seems like you might be thinking purely about monetary contributions but there are many people who donate much of their time and lives to helping others so it would depend on what sort of value you put on each. Both monetary and voluntary contributions. You can substantiate and value the voluntary contributions by the way. It's actually not that hard.
How does the rich benefit from charity? Besides feeling good about it?
[+]
By Jetackuu 2015-04-28 14:16:09
I admitted nothing, and I picked the one that I could easily prove you wrong on, the rest takes more time, and considering trying to change your belief on trickle-down economics, is like trying to convince a conspiracy nut to be rational. You know, you have yet to prove or even present an argument against the policies of Reagan and how, in your opinion, the booms created by those policies were detrimental to this nation.
All you have done is said "no u!" so many times.
But I would love for you to "easily prove me wrong." You never give out any sources to your arguments, all you do is say "no u" and your knowledge of basic economic theory is on par of flower head's basis of economic theory.
But please, quote me on anytime I ever said that I liked Obama,because I don't. Whatever you say. For somebody who keeps preaching how much he dislikes Obama, you certainly approve and parrot most of his talking points.
Reality proves you wrong, why should I bother to take the time when all you're going to do is stick your fingers in your ears and pretend it isn't happening, like you do already?
It's historical fact that Reagan was bad for the economy and bad for America, only those deluded to believe he's their hero think otherwise.
but since you're acting like a certain other person who doesn't know how to use google...
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=how+reagan+was+bad+for+the+economy
Seraph.Ramyrez
Server: Seraph
Game: FFXI
Posts: 1918
By Seraph.Ramyrez 2015-04-28 14:16:20
You know, you have yet to prove or even present an argument against the policies of Reagan and how, in your opinion, the booms created by those policies were detrimental to this nation.
They torpedoed Social Security, for one. That little Ayn Rand sychophant Alan Greenspan came up with that little gem of an idea and Reagan rode it all the way to a big boom that screwed over every generation to follow, and rewarded Greenspan with his job at the Fed for it.
Lakshmi.Flavin
Server: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 18466
By Lakshmi.Flavin 2015-04-28 14:16:34
the change is change and, seemingly, is for the better either way. In my opinion, anyhow. For me it's very significant in that the church is actually able or willing to change their views a bit as it examines it's place in the world.
Seraph.Ramyrez
Server: Seraph
Game: FFXI
Posts: 1918
By Seraph.Ramyrez 2015-04-28 14:18:01
the change is change and, seemingly, is for the better either way. In my opinion, anyhow. For me it's very significant in that the church is actually able or willing to change their views a bit as it examines it's place in the world.
Well, the Pope is, at least. As you pointed out, he's got detractors in the Church.
But then again, he's El Papa, and they're the "other guys".
[+]
By Kooljack 2015-04-28 14:21:43
Asura.[b]Kingnobody[/b] said: »
How does the rich benefit from charity? Besides feeling good about it?
KINGNOBODY STRIKES AGAIN
////////////////////////
:/ sanitary conditions of human to-be-corpses across the globe will come back to affect you. (you specifically maybe not. but do you have any kids? any-kind of legacy to leave?). impossible to imagine ways to connect factors to colluding results neither seen or imposed. . .
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-04-28 14:22:28
I admitted nothing, and I picked the one that I could easily prove you wrong on, the rest takes more time, and considering trying to change your belief on trickle-down economics, is like trying to convince a conspiracy nut to be rational. You know, you have yet to prove or even present an argument against the policies of Reagan and how, in your opinion, the booms created by those policies were detrimental to this nation.
All you have done is said "no u!" so many times.
But I would love for you to "easily prove me wrong." You never give out any sources to your arguments, all you do is say "no u" and your knowledge of basic economic theory is on par of flower head's basis of economic theory.
But please, quote me on anytime I ever said that I liked Obama,because I don't. Whatever you say. For somebody who keeps preaching how much he dislikes Obama, you certainly approve and parrot most of his talking points.
Reality proves you wrong, why should I bother to take the time when all you're going to do is stick your fingers in your ears and pretend it isn't happening, like you do already?
It's historical fact that Reagan was bad for the economy and bad for America, only those deluded to believe he's their hero think otherwise.
but since you're acting like a certain other person who doesn't know how to use google...
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=how+reagan+was+bad+for+the+economySorry, I'm not going to do your research for you.
Instead, I'm going to give you an educated opinion article on the difference between Reagan's policies and Obama's policies.
I'm sure you are going to say that guy lies, but not provide any educated reasoning behind it, just another "no u" comment.
But you have yet to prove anything. So, try again?
You know, you have yet to prove or even present an argument against the policies of Reagan and how, in your opinion, the booms created by those policies were detrimental to this nation.
They torpedoed Social Security, for one. That little Ayn Rand sychophant Alan Greenspan came up with that little gem of an idea and Reagan rode it all the way to a big boom that screwed over every generation to follow, and rewarded Greenspan with his job at the Fed for it. You made it sound like Reagan was the first one to raid the SS fund. Hate to break it to you, but it was actually Johnson who did it... Carter expanded on it, and the other presidents and Congresses afterwards continued to do it.
[+]
By Jetackuu 2015-04-28 14:23:42
You know, you have yet to prove or even present an argument against the policies of Reagan and how, in your opinion, the booms created by those policies were detrimental to this nation.
They torpedoed Social Security, for one. That little Ayn Rand sychophant Alan Greenspan came up with that little gem of an idea and Reagan rode it all the way to a big boom that screwed over every generation to follow, and rewarded Greenspan with his job at the Fed for it.
Not to mention that he increased the size of the government, increased the debt and deficit, gave tax cuts to the rich (to then reverse some of the tax cuts because the finances were ***), the whole mental health facility debacle, unemployment soared after the tax cuts, not to mention increased income disparity. So the very things that were just bitched about, were done by Reagan, and repeated, and are still being repeated.
But I sense a numbers argument here soon that's been done already, ya'll have fun.
[+]
Bismarck.Snprphnx
Server: Bismarck
Game: FFXI
Posts: 2689
By Bismarck.Snprphnx 2015-04-28 14:24:46
the change is change and, seemingly, is for the better either way. In my opinion, anyhow. For me it's very significant in that the church is actually able or willing to change their views a bit as it examines it's place in the world.
Well, the Pope is, at least. As you pointed out, he's got detractors in the Church.
But then again, he's El Papa, and they're the "other guys".
Yep. I think the Cardinals wanted the face of hope and change, and not actual hope and change. Now they are stuck with more than they bargained for. He is their "Mysah". the poor love him and the rich leaders... not so much
By Jetackuu 2015-04-28 14:25:51
I admitted nothing, and I picked the one that I could easily prove you wrong on, the rest takes more time, and considering trying to change your belief on trickle-down economics, is like trying to convince a conspiracy nut to be rational. You know, you have yet to prove or even present an argument against the policies of Reagan and how, in your opinion, the booms created by those policies were detrimental to this nation.
All you have done is said "no u!" so many times.
But I would love for you to "easily prove me wrong." You never give out any sources to your arguments, all you do is say "no u" and your knowledge of basic economic theory is on par of flower head's basis of economic theory.
But please, quote me on anytime I ever said that I liked Obama,because I don't. Whatever you say. For somebody who keeps preaching how much he dislikes Obama, you certainly approve and parrot most of his talking points.
Reality proves you wrong, why should I bother to take the time when all you're going to do is stick your fingers in your ears and pretend it isn't happening, like you do already?
It's historical fact that Reagan was bad for the economy and bad for America, only those deluded to believe he's their hero think otherwise.
but since you're acting like a certain other person who doesn't know how to use google...
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=how+reagan+was+bad+for+the+economySorry, I'm not going to do your research for you.
Instead, I'm going to give you an educated opinion article on the difference between Reagan's policies and Obama's policies.
I'm sure you are going to say that guy lies, but not provide any educated reasoning behind it, just another "no u" comment.
But you have yet to prove anything. So, try again? I never said to do my research for me, you're the one who doesn't know something, you're the one who needs to do research, I'm not going to hold your hand, you're not a child.
I don't care how much Obama is like Reagan, I already know I don't like the guy, you're arguing a point that exists only in your head, not in reality.
You don't understand what reality and history are, these are well known facts (outside of the conservative/teabagger groups), try to keep up.
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-04-28 14:29:42
I admitted nothing, and I picked the one that I could easily prove you wrong on, the rest takes more time, and considering trying to change your belief on trickle-down economics, is like trying to convince a conspiracy nut to be rational. You know, you have yet to prove or even present an argument against the policies of Reagan and how, in your opinion, the booms created by those policies were detrimental to this nation.
All you have done is said "no u!" so many times.
But I would love for you to "easily prove me wrong." You never give out any sources to your arguments, all you do is say "no u" and your knowledge of basic economic theory is on par of flower head's basis of economic theory.
But please, quote me on anytime I ever said that I liked Obama,because I don't. Whatever you say. For somebody who keeps preaching how much he dislikes Obama, you certainly approve and parrot most of his talking points.
Reality proves you wrong, why should I bother to take the time when all you're going to do is stick your fingers in your ears and pretend it isn't happening, like you do already?
It's historical fact that Reagan was bad for the economy and bad for America, only those deluded to believe he's their hero think otherwise.
but since you're acting like a certain other person who doesn't know how to use google...
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=how+reagan+was+bad+for+the+economySorry, I'm not going to do your research for you.
Instead, I'm going to give you an educated opinion article on the difference between Reagan's policies and Obama's policies.
I'm sure you are going to say that guy lies, but not provide any educated reasoning behind it, just another "no u" comment.
But you have yet to prove anything. So, try again? I never said to do my research for me, you're the one who doesn't know something, you're the one who needs to do research, I'm not going to hold your hand, you're not a child.
I don't care how much Obama is like Reagan, I already know I don't like the guy, you're arguing a point that exists only in your head, not in reality.
You don't understand what reality and history are, these are well known facts (outside of the conservative/teabagger groups), try to keep up. Hypocrite says what again?
Server: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 10394
By Lakshmi.Sparthosx 2015-04-28 14:30:30
How does the rich benefit from charity? Besides feeling good about it?
Penance for all those small Asian/Hispanic children who died to make the products they made millions off.
Finally Jesus, I can sleep!
[+]
By Jetackuu 2015-04-28 14:33:41
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-04-28 14:33:57
Asura.[b]Kingnobody[/b] said: »
How does the rich benefit from charity? Besides feeling good about it?
KINGNOBODY STRIKES AGAIN
////////////////////////
:/ sanitary conditions of human to-be-corpses across the globe will come back to affect you. (you specifically maybe not. but do you have any kids? any-kind of legacy to leave?). impossible to imagine ways to connect factors to colluding results neither seen or imposed. . . Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: »How does the rich benefit from charity? Besides feeling good about it?
Penance for all those small Asian/Hispanic children who died to make the products they made millions off.
Finally Jesus, I can sleep! You know, I'm not sure if any of you guys are serious or not...
Lakshmi.Flavin
Server: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
Posts: 18466
By Lakshmi.Flavin 2015-04-28 14:35:46
Both monetary and voluntary contributions. You can substantiate and value the voluntary contributions by the way. It's actually not that hard. I'm sure someone probably has lol... When you're talking to people though some may put more value on one than the other even though both are necassary.
How does the rich benefit from charity? Besides feeling good about it? Are you trying to say that big donors do not benefit in any way at all? I figure this is a bait question to get me to say tax breaks so you can launch off into some argument that tells me otherwise! There's any number of benefits take for example the guy that just donated a ton of money to a school here recently and then the school spent a big chunk of that money throwing him a party in his honor with 300 other people. Poeple can benefit from the image of being charitable. People can benefit in gaining access to certain things via donations.
Am I saying rich people or anyone that donates shouldn't get credit? No. I think it's great. To sit there and say that one benefits more than the other is subjective though and, quite frankly, irrelevant because people who donate money or time for the benefit of others shouldn't really be concerned about who gets more credit or whoe benefits more.
Also, all charity is not directly related to the "poor".
[+]
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-04-28 14:39:10
We know you don't know what it means. Let me help you by pointing out the hypocritical statement you made:
A pretending "principles" statement:
I never said to do my research for me
Before you said:
You are basically telling me how to make your own point. AKA doing your own research. AKA, you being a hypocrite.
By Jetackuu 2015-04-28 14:41:29
We know you don't know what it means. Let me help you by pointing out the hypocritical statement you made:
A pretending "principles" statement:
I never said to do my research for me
Before you said:
You are basically telling me how to make your own point. AKA doing your own research. AKA, you being a hypocrite. That's not what I said at all, I told you to research yourself. I don't need to research, I'm informed, and I'm not writing a paper.
Like I said: you don't know what that word means.
But nice attempt, but still wrong. AKA entirely wrong.
Not to mention that I gave the link before I said that, so wrong even more.
Seraph.Ramyrez
Server: Seraph
Game: FFXI
Posts: 1918
By Seraph.Ramyrez 2015-04-28 14:46:02
You made it sound like Reagan was the first one to raid the SS fund. Hate to break it to you, but it was actually Johnson who did it... Carter expanded on it, and the other presidents and Congresses afterwards continued to do it.
Not the first. He's just the one who royally screwed the pooch and everyday workers. Since you -- apparently -- are not one of those, I'm sure you just love the ever-loving ***out of Reagan and Greenspan, because there's a cap on Social Security taxes, so once you're maxed, it doesn't matter. But the people who actually feel the impact of their taxes -- which, let's face it, you don't, as much as you complain -- get screwed over in the end.
And nothing ever trickled down like it was supposed to, but I'm sure that's because the 12 years of Reaganomics before Clinton stepped in* "just weren't enough time for it to work out like it was supposed to" (hint: it played out exactly as anticipated and exactly as they wanted it to).
Every president since has just kept on doing it. Bush v1 even specifically refused to stop.
Source (call it a bias site all you want, but the article is from a veteran professor of economics)
*Not saying Clinton's policies were "better" or "less risky" or anything like that necessarily. Just different.
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-04-28 14:46:29
Are you trying to say that big donors do not benefit in any way at all? I figure this is a bait question to get me to say tax breaks so you can launch off into some argument that tells me otherwise! There's any number of benefits take for example the guy that just donated a ton of money to a school here recently and then the school spent a big chunk of that money throwing him a party in his honor with 300 other people. Poeple can benefit from the image of being charitable. People can benefit in gaining access to certain things via donations.
Am I saying rich people or anyone that donates shouldn't get credit? No. I think it's great. To sit there and say that one benefits more than the other is subjective though and, quite frankly, irrelevant because people who donate money or time for the benefit of others shouldn't really be concerned about who gets more credit or whoe benefits more.
Also, all charity is not directly related to the "poor". Tax-wise, there is little to no benefits to donating to charities. You can thank Donald Pease for that
Society, it depends on the charity. If the charity is for the betterment of society (like healthcare research, technological research, grants/scholarships in universities, etc.), then everyone benefits from it. Granted, the people who don't donate to these charities benefit from it more (since they don't put in anything for the gain) than those who do, but that's another issue.
But in this case, the rich do not directly benefit from welfare charities. In most cases, we do not benefit from it at all, but we do it anyway.
The way the pope is claiming, we have to donate to these welfare charities because he thinks that will help the economy more than anything, which he is absolutely wrong about it.
[+]
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-04-28 14:47:46
We know you don't know what it means. Let me help you by pointing out the hypocritical statement you made:
A pretending "principles" statement:
I never said to do my research for me
Before you said:
You are basically telling me how to make your own point. AKA doing your own research. AKA, you being a hypocrite. That's not what I said at all, I told you to research yourself. I don't need to research, I'm informed, and I'm not writing a paper.
Like I said: you don't know what that word means.
But nice attempt, but still wrong. AKA entirely wrong.
Not to mention that I gave the link before I said that, so wrong even more. You are not informed, regardless on how you "think" you are. You have no basis nor reasoning behind your statements, and your constant dodging of providing sources to back up your statements proves that.
By Jetackuu 2015-04-28 14:51:20
We know you don't know what it means. Let me help you by pointing out the hypocritical statement you made:
A pretending "principles" statement:
I never said to do my research for me
Before you said:
You are basically telling me how to make your own point. AKA doing your own research. AKA, you being a hypocrite. That's not what I said at all, I told you to research yourself. I don't need to research, I'm informed, and I'm not writing a paper.
Like I said: you don't know what that word means.
But nice attempt, but still wrong. AKA entirely wrong.
Not to mention that I gave the link before I said that, so wrong even more. You are not informed, regardless on how you "think" you are. You have no basis nor reasoning behind your statements, and your constant dodging of providing sources to back up your statements proves that.
I am informed, regardless of how you think I'm not. I have great basis for my deductions that I based my statements on, including my reluctance to entertain somebody who is so willfully stubborn.
I've seen you schooled on this subject many times, by experts, and yet you still believe what you want in defiance of reality, that's called a delusion, and like I said earlier: it'd be no different than trying to convince a religious person out of their religion.
Valefor.Endoq
Server: Valefor
Game: FFXI
Posts: 6906
By Valefor.Endoq 2015-04-28 14:59:49
giving to those in need is the right thing to do.
[+]
Seraph.Ramyrez
Server: Seraph
Game: FFXI
Posts: 1918
By Seraph.Ramyrez 2015-04-28 15:00:35
giving to those in need is the right thing to do.
For once, we are in complete agreement.
[+]
Bahamut.Ravael
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 13617
By Bahamut.Ravael 2015-04-28 15:06:00
giving to those in need is the right thing to do.
The specifics on how that should be accomplished are the parts that nobody can seem to agree on.
[+]
By Jetackuu 2015-04-28 15:08:31
giving to those in need is the right thing to do.
The specifics on how that should be accomplished are the parts that nobody can seem to agree on. technology, but we're not quite there yet, so what do we do in the meantime?
Quote: 'Not to share wealth with poor is to steal': Pope slams capitalism as 'new tyranny'
Pope Francis has taken aim at capitalism as "a new tyranny" and is urging world leaders to step up their efforts against poverty and inequality, saying "thou shall not kill" the economy. Francis calls on rich people to share their wealth.
The existing financial system that fuels the unequal distribution of wealth and violence must be changed, the Pope warned.
"How can it be that it is not a news item when an elderly homeless person dies of exposure, but it is news when the stock market loses two points?" Pope Francis asked an audience at the Vatican.
The global economic crisis, which has gripped much of Europe and America, has the Pope asking how countries can function, or realize their full economic potential, if they are weighed down by the debts of capitalism.
“A new tyranny is thus born, invisible and often virtual, which unilaterally and relentlessly imposes its own laws and rules,” the 84-page document, known as an apostolic exhortation, said.
"To all this we can add widespread corruption and self-serving tax evasion, which has taken on worldwide dimensions. The thirst for power and possessions knows no limits", the pope’s document says.
He goes on to explain that in this system, which tends to devour everything which stands in the way of increased profits, whatever is fragile, like the environment, is defenseless before the interests of a deified market, which has become the only rule we live by.
Shameful wealth
Inequality between the rich and the poor has reached a new threshold, and in his apostolic exhortation to mark the end of the “Year of Faith”, Pope Francis asks for better politicians to heal the scars capitalism made on society.
"Just as the commandment 'Thou shalt not kill' sets a clear limit in order to safeguard the value of human life, today we also have to say 'thou shalt not' to an economy of exclusion and inequality. Such an economy kills," Francis wrote in the document issued Tuesday.
His calls to service go beyond general good Samaritan deeds, as he asks his followers for action “beyond a simple welfare mentality".
"I beg the Lord to grant us more politicians who are genuinely disturbed by the state of society, the people, the lives of the poor,” Francis wrote.
A recent IRS report shows that the wealth of the US’s richest 1 percent has grown by 31 percent, while the rest of the population experienced an income rise of only 1 percent.
The most recent Oxfam data shows that up to 146 million Europeans are at risk of falling into poverty by 2025 and 50 million Americans are currently suffering from severe financial hardship.
"As long as the problems of the poor are not radically resolved by rejecting the absolute autonomy of markets and financial speculation, and by attacking the structural causes of inequality, no solution will be found for the world's problems or, for that matter, to any problems," he wrote.
Named after the medieval saint who chose a life of poverty, Pope Francis has gone beyond general calls for fair work, education, and healthcare.
Newly-elected Pope Francis has stepped up the fight against corrupt capitalism that has hit close to home - he was the first Pope to go after the Vatican bank and openly accused it of fraud and shady offshore tax haven deals.
In October, Pope Francis removed Vatican bank head Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, after revelations of alleged mafia money laundering and financial impropriety.
Source
|
|