 |
| “Specifically, this involves challenging all forms of injustices and resisting the economy of exclusion, the throwaway culture and the culture of death which nowadays sadly risk becoming passively accepted,” Francis said. |
Strib carries the AP feed with their headline being the quote in Crabgrass headlining, above; this mid-item excerpt:
Latin America's first pope has frequently lashed out at the injustices of capitalism and the global economic system. On Friday, Francis called for the United Nations to promote a "worldwide ethical mobilization" of solidarity with the poor.
He said a more equal form of economic progress can be had through "the legitimate redistribution of economic benefits by the state, as well as indispensable cooperation between the private sector and civil society."
Francis urged the U.N. to promote development goals that attack the root causes of poverty and hunger, protect the environment and ensure dignified labor for all.
Aside from challenging "by governments ... out of generosity" as wrong and as right, "by governments ... out of fundamental duty," it's good to see a Pope on top of inequality, complaining. If the Vatican Bank performs too, it will be a true blessing. "Freedom" has to mean more than a right to starve, just as society based on individualism is an oxymoron.
BOTTOM LINE: You know the man is right when you see this. The hackster-huckster from Fox writing:
By appearing to sanction what amounts to forced redistribution, Francis grievously exceeded his authority and became what amounts to a robe-wearing politician. He also exposed his Church, one of the wealthiest institutions in the world, to inevitable charges of hypocrisy. And he put himself in a position of having to back up his frothy talk with ruinous action.
Let’s see: for starters, perhaps the Catholic Church and its affiliated non-profit organizations should start voluntarily paying income and real estate tax in the United States, from which it has traditionally been exempt.
There is no doubt that the addition of tax revenue from the Church would be considerable, if hard to estimate. The 17,000-plus parishes may not all measure up to architectural wonders like St. Patrick’s in New York or the newer Our Lady of the Angels in Los Angeles. But few Catholic churches have absolutely no value. What would 39.5% of all that be?
How could Francis, or his subordinates in the United States object to voluntarily turning over part of their vast revenue?
Well, yes, forced redistribution would be a fine thing. Huey Long's "Share the Wealth" was something I heard at ten years old during my one year living in New Orleans, and it rang true then and still rings true now.
And the Fox-man is correct, taxing The Church, as well as all churches is overdue and necessary.
Beyond that, I await a new Hollywood star, "Alec Fox." That being a more likely event than church taxation and sharing of wealth [either forced or, it has to be a joke, voluntary sharing].
____________UPDATE_____________
It should not need to be pointed out, but it instead appears necessary - when our Nation taxes disproportionately at low and mid levels while countenancing for years tax code inclusion of multiple loopholes for wealthy individuals and corporations, it is the antithesis of Francis' "legitimate redistribution of economic benefits by the state." It is an entirely odious and illegitimate redistribution of economic benefits by the state, burdening us all for the benefit of politicians and their fellow traveling greed mongers. Teddy Roosevelt had an apt term, "malefactors of great wealth."
Can you say Koch?
Moreover, that last Teddy link, quoting, “He means well, but he means well feebly,” is interesting in that he knew neither Mark Dayton nor Barack Obama.