Posted on 05/15/2014 6:56:29 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
First, take todays Unconventional Logic pop quiz:
If you were kidnapped by terrorists, whom would you want to come to rescue you?
Captain Sweden
Captain Denmark
Captain Belgium
Captain France
Captain America
OK, now back to economics.
With both Thomas Piketty and Pope Francis in the news calling for government-coerced redistribution to reduce inequality, it is useful to ask, Why this, and why now?
Pikettys argument for additional government redistribution programs, which he bases upon numbers that dont take government redistribution programs into account, is certainlyto put it delicatelycreative, but the question still remains why Pikettys ideas (which have been around since Das Capital) are getting so much play at this particular point in time. After all, by Pikettys own numbers, inequality isnt much worse today than it was in 2000, and no one seemed very worried about inequality in 2000.
Also, on May 9, Pope Francis called for,
the legitimate redistribution of economic benefits by the State. In so doing, the pontiff shrugged off the experience of the past 30 years, during which globalized capitalism raised more than a billion people out of absolute poverty, after decades of redistributive approaches (in the form of socialist governments and foreign aid) had failed.
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
Does the title make any sense to anyone??
You will have to read the ENTIRE article to determine that.
Actually, Pope Francis didn’t mean to imply he support redistribution of wealth. But his continued inability to comprehend the kind of misinterpretations his poorly phrased statements elicit - deliberately or inadvertantly - by the world Marxist Press calls int question his qualifications for the Office he holds.
A real Saint shouldn’t be running an organization like the Catholic Church. He should be setting an example in the trenches. Different skill sets.
All I can say on the matter is the Pope will speak with authority the day the Catholic Church divests itself of all lands and property.
I had no idea that the Republicans chose a communist pope.
One would think that the Pope, being from Argentina, would understand what the effects of socialist economic policies are.
RE: I had no idea that the Republicans chose a communist pope.
I had no idea the Cardinals were Republicans...
Stupid article. The Republicans aren’t to blame for redistributionism. The Republicans aren’t to blame for the socialists who advocate for it. This guy’s argument seems to be that if the Republicans were just a little better and finding that magic pro-growth candidate, they would have won the election and all this talk of redistribution would have gone away. That’s like saying that if a battered wife was a little stronger, she could have fought off her abusive husband and so she’s to blame for being beaten.
You are delusional
That’s right he blames BUSH......I get tired of this. The entire article is as dumb as Picketty and his book
Blame Bush (because that’s what he does...oh he throws in O too but blames Bush)
Nah they are hall players
I’ll live with my dilusions and you can live with yours, but this Pope, while a holy and decent man, is really unqualified for the position he holds. In today’s times, we need an Urban II, not a St. Francis of Assisi, sitting on the Papal throne.
The UN was threatening to bring up the subject of gay pedophile priests again, and wanted the pope to play ball and say some nice things about totalitarian Marxism.
That's why he keeps so quiet about Pelosi and all wanting more and more abortions
Did he even have anything to say about Warren Buffett?
Social justice types like the pope are the REASON Argentina went way left.
Um, Bergoglio fought AGAINST liberation theology when he was in Argentina.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.