Christianity based West European socialism is not Communism. In Soviet style Communism the ordinary man worked hard so that an elite ruling class called the state could have a great life without being questioned. The state was god.

In capitalism we are given this incredible explanation, if the rich don't get richer and the poor don't bail out the rich, the country is in great trouble. Now it takes three jobs to make ends meet, but if the rich are not bailed out by the poor, it might take four jobs to make ends meet. Interesting logic.

Socialist communism, or at least Soviet-style Communism, is a failed social experiment based on the excesses of the "Gilded Age" of a century ago, plus the nationalizing of industries that happened between the two World Wars. Communism is a political philosophy. Socialism is a financial philosophy. Unfortunately, most Americans have been taught that there are only monetary systems: capitalism (good) and socialism (bad). Socialism works really well on paper. But, it doesn't take into account basic human greed.

What we're seeing now is the opposite of socialism - unrestrained, unregulated capitalism. Certainly nobody is suggesting that the U.S. adopts a socialist economic system. But this bailout is one step in that direction.

What I would like to see is more of a protection for people who are losing their homes for various reasons. Yes, some people were living outside of their means. But many more people are losing their homes because they lost their jobs, had medical problems and little/no health insurance, have a spouse deployed with the Reserves or Guard, bought a house and can't sell their previous house, etc. Bail out the "little people", not the CEOs that caused the problem.

"Who can do that for us? Who can lead us to this new way?"

You. Me. The average American. Stop looking for a Messiah, because they don't come around too often, and they usually wind up being killed by the people that they hope to save. Become the change that you wish to see in the world.

We got in this mess by electing "leaders" who exploited their commitment to ending legal abortion, while their real agenda was to loot the financial system. I recall someone saying last week that the way to end abortions was to "elect pro-life Republicans who will appoint pro-life judges." Well, look what those "pro-life" Republicans have been doing in the meantime.

People like Barney Frank, Elliot Spitzer, and Barack Obama were sounding the alarm about sub-prime mortgages YEARS ago. And they were right.

Spidey and all of the others who vote for candidates strictly because they're pro-life Republicans, you're reaping what you've sown.

Prof. Stevens-Arroyo,

Your quip about cafeteria Catholics who only support abortion was amusing. Seriously, it made me chuckle. Of course, you've got a perfectly valid point; if you were Dorothy Day, rather than a pro-choice "Catholic" apologist for the Democratic Party, it would actually be well met. Our culture needs scolding by a woman like her, or by a pontiff like John Paul II (who wrote extensively about social justice, as you are no doubt aware). But your clever turnabout, while being fair play, was just clever.

Bigger issues, now.

Paul C, don't defend capitalism to vigorously. The Church doesn't wed itself to any "ism." A free market is a good thing; the ideology that everything is valuable based on its capital value (its usefulness for production) or for only its sale-price is diabolical. The worth of things comes from the mind of God and His purpose for them, their place in His plan, and not from what someone is willing to buy it for. That is the way to slavery.

Communism is horrific and antihuman because it misunderstands human nature. It is materialist, and humans have a spiritual dimension that cannot be ignored without consequence. Democrats blather on about how the early Christians were socialists - it isn't true.

To have one's possessions expropriated violently or by overtaxation is NOT the same thing as to give one's possessions voluntarily, even all of them, to the poor or to the community. They are not the same thing at all.

Charity is the perfection of sacrificial love, the disposition or attitude by which one habitually wills the good of another, even at one's own expense. This virtue cannot be compelled, and if it is institutionalized by mandatory systems, it is only short-circuited. Our social service system is the necessary consequence of this approach: we have all sorts of "charity" structures in which the "recipients" are debased and infantilized into demoralized semi-literates firmly established only among the clientele of their politican patrons at election time. There is nothing authentically Christian, charitable, or good about this situation.

Anonymous2, labeling yourself a separated Catholic (come home, please!), you chastised the US bishops for not condemning participation in this immoral system. Your sentiment is good, but your thinking is unclear. We have no reasonable option but to participate in this system. It can't be helped, unless one is willing and able to move off to Appalachia somewhere, hide from government regulators, and grow or sew all your own, well, everything really. For the rest of us, we are faced with the unpleasant prospect of having to participate in a system that is run by greed, profits very few at the expense of very many, is startlingly inefficient for all its worship of efficiency (as our many heaping landfills can attest), and grinds up the poor along with unborn babies, the lame, the slow, and the inept.

If we cannot escape it, we can at least challenge it. To do so we must do two things: (1) extricate ourselves from it as much as possible; (2) speak about why we are doing these crazy things. Buy second hand clothing rather than new to avoid supporting wasteful overproduction and sweatshop labor. Invest only in companies (and thus mutual funds, etc.) that are extremely conscientious. By durable, inexpensive plastic flatware (to heck with the Jones' opinion) and REUSE it. Do the math to figure out whether a new environmentally-conscious car makes actual sense, and if so, buy it - USED. Give the saved difference to the poor. In general, frugally regulate your general spending and turn over as much excess income as possible to the poor directly or through responsible, empowering charities - to reduce the engine of greed that drives our economy. Sell your large home and buy a cozier one, even if it means the kids share rooms, like back in the good ol' days. Give the difference to help put folks into homes who haven't got one yet.

You see how extensive we can get with this? But it takes time. The French Revolution came and went. A real, lasting transformation takes much more time.

What we do not need are more laws and patches on a basically broken system. It hasn't broken down because it's old; it's broken because it's got a crack in its foundation. It was foolhardy to base an entire nearly global economic culture on "enlightened self-interest," which might more honestly be called "greed with a long-term perspective." Well, we are perhaps seeing the beginning of the end of that long term. We need a revolution in our whole way of life, our whole culture. It needs shaking and restructuring from the bottom up. I cannot get Wall Street folks or Washington folks to be less self-serving, but maybe I can get myself to be a bit less self-serving, by serving others instead.

Who can do that for us? Who can lead us to this new way?

If anyone answers "Obama," or "McCain," I'll vomit.

THIS INSANITY MUST STOP (Our National Security is AT STAKE)

It is high time this INSANITY SHOULD STOP. The reason why the U.S economy is so vulnerable to Wall Street speculation is because of SHORT SELLING. The economists DO NOT REALIZE that these people (short sellers) are like PRINTING MONEY UNHINDERED. Earning money at the expense of others (short selling) is NOT EARNING BUT STEALING. It's the same reason why we can't print money freely because it is tantamount to stealing.

UNLESS the regulators BAN THIS SHORT SELLING IN THE STOCK MARKET, Americans will continue to SUFFER ECONOMICALLY as what is happening now. The ENEMIES of America does not need an airplane to crash to our buildings. They only need to PLAY UP THE OIL PRICE IN THE STOCK MARKET and then start BETTING ON THE OTHER STOCKS TO FAIL thru SHORT SELLING. Not only can they ruin the economy of America, but they can also make themselves rich by doing so.

NOW WHERE ARE THE BRAINS OF OUR LEADERS AND ANALYSTS ?

BAN SHORT-SELLING AND IMPLEMENT THAT OIL PRICE STABILIZATION MECHANISM NOW and all will be well again.

That 700 billion dollar bail-out should be used to relieve American homeowners by lowering their mortgage interest rates and those who already lost their homes should be asked to return with their payments restructured.

WE NEED THAT OIL PRICE STABILIZATION MECHANISM LAW NOW.

We have seen how the price of oil jumped 16 points in just one day for no valid reason. It's very clear that the government (both Congress and the executive branch) has NOT DONE anything to rein-in speculators. It is therefore NOT farfetched that oil would rise up again to an all time high as before.

I hope they would now legislate a bill that would rein-in the STUPIDITY of these speculators. Oil has been the lifeblood of world economy and people should not be allowed to play on this commodity. It's very clear that the speculators are not using their minds. They do not understand that they are slowly hanging themselves as the price of oil shoots up to where the economy cannot perform anymore. Their money would be deemed useless if there would be a work stoppage worldwide.

I hope Congress would make a law that would put a price cap on oil everytime speculators are playing with it. If the price of oil today (Monday) is 120 dollars per barrel, the price cap tomorrow (Tuesday) should be 120 dollars per barrel. Since it cannot go up that price, there would be massive panic selling which would pull down it's price. If the price of oil closes at 110 dollars tomorrow (Tuesday), the price cap should be set at 110 dollars per barrel on Wednesday. There is no way to go for the price of oil but DOWN if this mechanism would be put into place. Once the oil price reaches a SANE LEVEL of maybe about 90 dollars, regulators can then SWITCH-OFF that mechanism so it can settle to it's true value. There must be a body that can switch that mechanism on or off as the need requires.

We NEED THAT MECHANISM NOW AND CONGRESS SHOULD ACT NOW BEFORE THESE IDIOTIC SPECULATORS WOULD HAMMER THE ECONOMY AGAIN.

Russell,
The Catholic church does not take political sides in an election. It does take positions on political issues. Abortion is evil. All the other things you list are also evil. The Catholic church supports none of them. You are greatly in error in what you think the Catholic Church is all about..

Roman Catholic Hierarchy, please explain to me why the Roman Catholic Church from the pulpit proselytises for the George Walker Bush/John McainPalin Rove Limbaugh driven policies of hate. If the Roman Catholic Church's only immorality is abortion and all other immorality is acceptable, ie; rape, sexual abuse, hate, lying, torture, leading to the ruining of thousands of lives and the actual deaths and maiming of thousands of men, women and children (including children in the womb) I can understand why the sex abuse scandals were covered up by the Roman Catholic Hierarchy and why they overtly support those who perpetrated and continue to perpetrate the other immoral actions listed above. Under the above the Roman Catholic Church has become totally irrelevant in the realm of what constitutes moral behaviour. The "do as I say not as I do" dictum is not a viable Religious tenet.

SAQIB KHAN

You wrote, "Islam provides guidance to its adherents in all phases and activities of life, material as well as spiritual."

It seems to me that 'guidance' is too tame of a word to be used here and that 'to its adherents' is also misleading, as far as 'all phases and activities of life, material as well as spiritual' this does seem to be right on the mark and it also seems to take away people's God-given free will right along with it.

Anything that has to be imposed from the outside rather than obeyed freely from the inside is not FREEDOM, not true freedom.

Just because people abuse their free will and use it in ways that are not 'nice', so to speak, is no excuse to cram someone's version of god down their throats.

The True, Living, Triune, Triumphant God gave us free will and what we do with it is our responsibility whether we accept that responsibility or not.

By the way, God is a searcher of hearts and minds, not of religious afiliations or lack thereof and it is important What one does and Why one does it and What one Knows.

As far as implementing 'sharia law' as the law of the land or to be more blunt about it, the law of the planet, which is the goal of islam, which you pointed out, I disagree completely, since God gave us free will.

Laws are one thing but trying to set up a 'theocracy' is another, even God when He became One of us did not try to set up a 'theocracy'.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

ANONYMOUS

You wrote, "A suggestion to all Catholics visiting this thread:

Take a break from this blog for about two weeks, read other Catholic blogs and then return to compare the Catholicism in this blog.

My experience: This reads like a partisan political blog which is critical of Catholicsm."

I am a Catholic and I cherish my Catholic Faith and in reply to someone else on a different section of this blog, I said that I do not let religion get in the way of my Faith.

I was wondering what do you mean by 'all Catholics' and 'Catholicism'?

Could 'all Catholics' be those that are in good standing with the Catholic Church and 'Catholicism' be the rules and regulations?

Just wondering!

So many people seem to let the rules and regulations even the dogma get in the way of God and this includes both the clergy and the laity.

"Catholic" means univeral and I take that very seriously as in God's Plan is universal.

If God's Plan is not universal then it would not be "Good News", as the Angels said: "This is GOOD NEWS FOR ALL PEOPLE" and "Peace to men of good will", PEOPLE as in ALL OF HUMANITY and men as in male and female.

Two seperate statements and both True.

Take care, be ready.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

Rebecca, everything you say is correct. The underlying questions though, are what is the best means to drive economic growth and what is the most just and efficient way to ensure that the least of our brothers are taken care of. Capitalism has been demonstrated as the most efficient overall economic driver. The issue is how to balance economic motivation with the altruistic goals of supporting those unable to support themselves.

At its root, Catholicism finds its true authority: the historical Jesus, Son of the Heavenly Father, and the Holy Spirit--the light of our soul and the voice of our conscience.

What would Jesus Christ have us do for each other? Feed our hungry, shelter our homeless, heal our sick, teach our children, and forgive our neighbors--by redistributing wealth, creating affordable housing, providing affordable health care and quality education, and replacing reckless warfare with diplomacy and compassion.

By the measure that our nation creates equal opportunities to secure well-paying jobs, its economic burden will be lowered.

It's not about Capitalism and Communism, nor about capitalism and communism. It's not about Right or Wrong. It's about natural tendencies such as competition and cooperation, about striking a BALANCE between the two. Neither altruism nor self-interest are inherently bad, they need to be balanced one against the other to work properly.

A suggestion to all Catholics visiting this thread:

Take a break from this blog for about two weeks, read other Catholic blogs and then return to compare the Catholicism in this blog.

My experience: This reads like a partisan political blog which is critical of Catholicsm.

Christian Europe was influenced for centuries by the Catholic Church (a separate Church of England came into existence only later in the history of Christianity).

The socialist ideals of Europe is based on Christianity. Read the Book of Acts for a description of how first generation Christians lived.

Christian socialism is more in line with Kingdom of God on earth, than each to his own kind of pioneer spirit which leaves the vulnerable and weak without support.

Believing in God in theory and worshipping mammon in practice is not what Christianity was meant to be about.

This is NOT a failure of free markets of a "crisis in capitalism." Quite the contrary, the markets are working perfectly fine and as expected, of course. We, through our government, including the Federal Reserve are the ones who have "failed" here, not the market place. What we saw this week is the free market for credit slapping us, as a society, in the face and saying "how stupid or weak do you think I am, to let you to continue to loan hundreds of thousands of dollars to anyone who can fog a mirror and think that you can get away with it?"

The land of free markets and free men has become the land of the free lunch. Wall Street hustlers can make billions in bonuses – when the sun shines. As soon as it begins to rain, the losses are handed out to the general public. What kind of capitalism is this?
Daily Reckoning

Everybody pays and somebody collects. It's not a question of good or bad. It's how and when, now or later. If you signed a bad mortgage, you signed your rights away. Don't expect to keep the property. The country is littered with bad paper, signed by well meaning people. That doesn't mean we should give them money as a reward for littering. More shockwaves are ahead. It's what it is and what it will be. It's not evil, it's just business. Fraud is evil and we have a lot of fraud, so punishment will follow fraud. Don't punish the innocent, it's not difficult finding the guilty. It's all on paper.

"I disagree that capitalism is in itself bad. Competition is good for society because it drives excellence. But it must be regulated because some people cheat. That doesn't mean that the system itself is bad, it just means certain people are bad."

Paul c- it's difficult to argue with that. Perhaps the real problem isn't with capitalism or communism, but our perceptions of them and how society functions as a whole. Communism originally was a political system the was a response to societal ills. A Russian peasant and a tsar lived vastly different lives, and the inherent inequality of life under the tsars eventually caused the collapse of the monarchy.

So in one sense, communism (or Marxism) arose as a means of creating social equality- an integral part of the founding of America. But communism today is a perfect example of how the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Capitalism has always been tied up into our notions of the frontier, the idea that America is a place where anyone can be president, and the streets are paved with gold if you work hard enough. There's a mythology that played into our economic idealogy and like communism, paved quite a few roads on the way to hell. Capitalism without conscience, without discipline, and without real patriotism eventually causes its own demise.

For all the engines of excellence capitalism may have driven, one greed became its defining characteristic of success, everything shifted from wealth for the sake of excellence to wealth for the sake of wealth.

I don't know as the answers are in religious morality- religions defining morality are very problematic- just read the blogs in On faith. We need to get back to the governing concept of the common good or greater good, where there is the implicit understanding that combined we are an entity greater than the sum of our parts. we form a complex and intrinsic whole where we are all equal under the law and the greater or common good guides our principles. And how do we best balance that?

The 'American Dream of becoming prosperous' has nothing in common with true Christianity. All life is sacred and that means, as one west-coast Jamaican priest once put it, 'radical hospitality', which should of course begin with the most vulnerable: the poor, the child in a womb. That, and not the 'right' to prosperity, is what the American Dream should be, if it is to be considered Christian.

Furthermore, the advocates and leading beneficiaries of the 'free market' model have demonstrated what they really mean by 'free', that is, that they are able to change its definition as it suits them. Self service rights for some, crumbs and debt for others.

paul c writes
"I don't see any inherent unfairness to basic capitalism. Those who contribute the most to society are rewarded for their work and their ideas. "

That's an over simplifacation. There is no evidence in the world that Bill Gates works harder (or as hard) as your average coal miner. I use Gate's as an example because he's become the richest guy in the world (or one of the top three) through luck (watch the old PBS show "Triumph of the Nerds" for more info) more than hard work. Mind you, I don't think "fairness" is a good measure for economic systems. Capitalism certainly provides the larges number of goods, innovations, etc.

"The only arbiter is the market place. This is infinitely better than a communist society where everyone is rewarded equally no matter what they do. Such a society breeds laziness, while the capital society breeds hard working entrepeneurs"

More to the point, people are generally lazy, and communism lacks any reward for people who overcome laziness and work harder or are smarter. Communism goes against human nature - most anyone will work harder for rewards, or for their kids. ALmost nobody will work harder for no rewards, or for his neighbors kids.
Of course the verdict on unregulated capitalism was handed in long ago, and here in the USA we have regulated capitalism, and the real 'debate' is how far those regulations ought to go.

Side note - speaking of unfairness, I often hear conservatives bleet about the unfairness of progressive taxation, which shifts the cost of government from everybody to the upper classes. Aside from the fact that progressive taxation works very well, I think we can see how it's actually very fair - the current bailout is of the by all of us and a payoff to the very wealthy, so really wealthy get more benifits from the government than the rest of us do.

Have a nice Sunday!

PERMANENTLY BANNING INSANITY (a guideline to who should become president)

From the time humanity started, there never was a practice that a person can sell what he DOESN'T OWN. It is only logical that NOBODY can sell a house or any property which he doesn't own. And yet, this kind of practice is LEGALLY done in the stock market thru SHORT SELLING. That is the term they use for the "PUT OPTION" in stock trading. YES, it is legal to sell stocks which you don't own in the stock market thru short selling. What happens is the one engaging in short selling gets a profit from the loss of another. The lower the stocks plunge the richer they become. What is worse is if they make creative ways to pull it down. That is how insane the stock market has become. GREED and INSANITY has become their god.

Finally, upon seeing that there's a possiblity that all banks around the world could collapse because of this practice, they've made a decision to TEMPORARILY BAN SHORT SELLING. It was not a galant act on their part but only a REACTION TO SURVIVE. They are only TEMPORARILY STOPPING THEIR GREED TO SURVIVE.

It was NOT the planned government BAILOUT which saved the market although it could help ease the money crunch. I hope the bailout would bring down mortgage interest rates so homeowners would also benefit. With the government now owning Fannie and Freddie and the planned absorption of foreclosed properties thru a massive 700 billion dollar bailout, the government has NOW the POWER to REDUCE them.

The point is, let SANITY PREVAIL. The government should now focus on that ONE GOAL to bring DOWN mortgage interest rates and MOST IMPORTANTLY make SHORT SELLING BE BANNED PERMANENTLY.

The PRESURE TO BRING IT BACK coming from the SHARKS would be great. I think Bush would buckle to the pressure. What we need is a next president who can STAND FOR WHAT IS RIGHT. The presidential candidate who can promise to abolish SHORT SELLING ( profiting from the LOSS of others) should be the NEXT President.

Arminius - agreed that Clinton participated in this fiasco. I think most would agree that his primary characterological shortcoming was that he was too often persuaded by the voice of his own ego, which included a sizable dose of hedonism and personal lack of self-restraint (his downfall by his own admission, even regarding his own health). De-regulation would appeal to him in the same way that NAFTA seemed to make sense at the time.

However, he had virtues that counter-balanced the weaknesses, as did Carter. In the end, Carter was the better Baptist! He has set a standard for post-presidencies that few will ever attain to. He has always struck me as a wealthy man that was rich in spite of himself....

In the future, both Clintons could serve substantial roles in an Obama administration - and Carter might even take a few tours of the Mideast for old times sake.

In the end, Clinton and Carter both took their responsibilities to the voters seriously, and treated it as their first priority.

This cannot necessarily be said for their republican counterparts. I fear McCain would continue in this tradition of serving elitist factions, first and foremost.

Capitalism is all well and good, within limits. Everyone needs to share in the largesse, however.
The poor among us probably do not expect to be rich, but they should at least be able to expect healthcare and a life that is somewhat free of chronic desparation - in a nation that spawns enough millionaires to populate NYC and Boston combined. Everyone has their own aspirations.

The rich in this country are in a position to perpetuate and grow their own wealth - and they do so with complete abandon.

These are the same folks (through their typcially GOP representatives) that fight the ideas of a higher minimum wage and national healthcare whenever the issues arise.

As we speak, pensions and healthcare coverage in retirement are quickly becoming a thing of the past in the private sector. General Motors and Ford claim they're going broke paying healthcare benefits - when in fact they've been making bad business decisions for the last decade.

Corporations and the corporate elite run this country - their well-paid lobbyists are clogging the corridors of Congress.

Once finished with Congressional duties, the door swings immediately to Wall Street and various highly paid corporate management and consulting positions for those elected officials that have done their best for Corporate America while in Washington. This corporate nepotism is just another form of completely legal payola.

As we discussed before, corporate bailouts and huge corporate tax exemptions is just another form of welfare for the wealthy elite.

Such self-centeredness and self-serving behavior at the top of the pecking order represents a system well on it's way to a total corruption of the ideals upon which the system was founded.

The profound failure of our private financial system finds capitalism and it's uber-capitolists in a state of obvious decline.

In a just world, our failed Wall Street pirates would be walking the yardarm rather than retiring to villas in Switzerland.

CCNL. "The correction beings!"
You mean revenge that is based on hatred, right?
Where do you get that "burning someone" is correction? It is called murder.
Gasoline is expensive. I was in advance auto today and a guy came in reeking of the smell of gasoline. Three people in the store comment on it including the store manager. I was so bad that the manager was ready to ask the gut to leave.
Ironically, one of the people in the store was someone that I know, haven’t seen him for a long time but it was nice to see him again. Jim said to me that gut smells like he has been rolling in gasoline, that’s when the manager said he was going to ask the guy to leave because he smelled so bad. The guy in the parking lot said his engine caught fire from a gas leak and that he poured water on it and it didn’t stop the fire, he was in a black truck, and I could recognize both of them. The guy in the truck was talking about burning his wife to death with gasoline. I told him that he would go to jail for murder and that I would be a witness to what he said. He also told me that he has hidden cameras in his house to spy on his wife with microphones and that he put a GPS system on her car so he could track her whereabouts. I told him that he will go to jail for doing these things and he laughed and said I won’t get caught. I said the very ones that think that they are above reproach are the ones that get caught. He said he didn’t care that he had people to do it for him and that they would lie for him.

The guy said “she has to pay for what she did to me.”

Paul C,

Of course capitalism is not evil. But, like our democracy, it is a dynamic. If either one has limits lessened, it gets wild and out of hand. If either one has too many regs and limiting laws, it gets stagnant. The trick is to guide it according to the current situation. The trouble is, this 'current situation' is usually much different than former situations..... But the lesson here is that the lessoning of oversight allowed a number of CEOs to do some really nasty things. And most will stay rich, even get other jobs. It's the slobs like me at the bottom that suffer.

I would cite Bill Gates as a good example of capitalism. Sure, he played hardball, but an Enron-type CEO he was not. He made his company prosperous by caring for it, caring for his employees, caring for his product. Always. Sure, he got filthy rich, but so did his company. And Gates is now plowing billions into charity, instead of buying $6000 shower curtains.

Do you guys not understand that Capitalism is the driver of the greatness of America. It is what makes possible the American dream of becoming prosperous. Sure, people manipulate the system and sure, its obvious that better regulations need to be put in place. That means fine-tuning the system. It does not mean that capitalism is in itself evil.

Common Sense -

You chose a good handle.

Great post! I have one thing to quibble with - democratic presidents were not completely innocent. Deregulation had a small start under Carter (I think...), and Clinton certainly signed Gramm's bill to enshrine greed.

The current reign of the CEOs springs a memory. I am retired, a former computer programmer. It was an axiom in my profession that if you ever really screwed up bad, you were out on the streets, with no hope of re-employment as a programmer. But we all knew that any CEO who looted and pillaged, destroyed his company, putting thousands on the streets, ruined... would he be blackballed? Hell, no! He'd find a job quick... he 'obviously' would learn his lesson, while us underlings were incapable of that.... I think this is known in political science as 'plutocracy'.

Vote Obama.

Paul C - what you fail to acknowledge is the total lack of balance in our extant system at the top of that system. The very individuals that manipulated the financial system into oblivion are keeping their millions.

Over many years of de-regulation, that includes lots of rich folks - swinging doors that connect Washington with Wall Street are in abundance.

CEOs and financial managers are not paying heavy fines and penalities for their utter greed, venality, and chronically poor decision-making and mis-management - and are in fact suffering no apparent personal losses of any kind.....other than some downtime here and there to vacation before their next big money-management position.

Many will in fact remain at the helm of their financial ships after the mega-bailout, and after regulatory oversight is re-installed. And to imagine that the entire economy won't pay a very heavy price for this both now and down the road is utterly delusional.

McCain was in the middle of the last big Savings and Loan scandal/bail-out (Keating 5) and his recent financial advisor and best bud, ex. Sen. Phil Gramm of Texas, was the point man for the fiscal de-regulation that put everyone in a swamp full of alligators this time around.

This is the last bunch of yahoos anyone wants in control of the government at this moment in time.

Said $700 billion government bail-out needs to be parceled out with real justice in mind. This will not be done, but instead will be hurried through Congress in a panic. The national debt will increase by another trillion or two, but who's counting?? Republican presidents since and including Reagan are responsible for over 2/3 of our current fiscal debt - that includes the two Bushes if we're counting correctly.

With this monster bail-out GWB will further secure his unbeatable Presidential record as the all-time winner of accumulated fiscal debt during his administration.

To imagine putting McCain in after this is just begging for a bullet in the head.

If this is Capitalism, it's on it's last legs without monumental reforms. What shall we call this Reformation? How about a contest?!

Competition is not restricted to capitalism nor should rewarding the most competitive, in an ethical society, mean to make some wealthy and others destitute.

The economic model of capitalism is corrupt because it allows the wealthy to exponentially expand their wealth without working while demanding ever more work from the poor. The exponential compounding over time of returns for the wealthy on one end, and of debt for the poor on the other, is more than sufficient prove of this. Capitalism guarantees that wealth will always flow from the poor to the rich and from a Christian perspective contradicts the gospels.

Islam provides guidance to its adherents in all phases and activities of life, material as well as spiritual. The economic policy of Islam has been explained in most unequivocal terms: “ so that this (wealth) may not circulate solely among the rich from among you, (59/7). Equality of all men in wealth and comfort, even if it is ideal, does not promise to be of unmixed good to humanity. First because natural talents are not equal amongst different men, so much so that even one if one were to start a group of person with complete equality, soon the spendthrift will fall into difficulties and will again look on the fortune of his comrades with greed and envy. Further, on philosophical and psychological grounds, it seems that in the every interest of human society, it is desirable that there should be grades in wealth; the poor having the desire and incentive to work harder.

On the other hand if it is asked of men to work harder than their capacity without a reward, then everyone will become lazy and careless would be tremendous waste of people’s talent and loss to humanity. Everyone knows that livelihood is in constant progress, though the domination and exploitation one after the other of all things that God has created, whereas one sees that the rest of animals have changed nothing in their livelihood ever since God has created their spices. The cause of this difference as discovered by the biologist is simultaneous existence of a society, a cooperation, and a liberty of competition inside the members of the society, i.e., human beings, whereas other animals suffer from the lack of some or all these requisite conditions. Dogs, cats, rats, monkeys, snakes, etc for instance do not even create a family; they perpetuate their race by means of free and momentarily,” love”, rutting instinct. Other such as crows, pigeons do create a family in the form of couples yet even if the male helps in the nest building, every member of the couple depends on its own for livelihood.

Perhaps the most developed social cooperation is found among bees, ants and termites: they live in a collective way with the complete equality in livelihood, yet without any competition among its members and consequently it is not possible for the more intelligent or more industrious bee to live more comfortably than others. For this reason, there is neither evolution nor change, much less progress in any of these species as against the human race. The past history of man shows that every advance and every discovery of the means of comfort came into existence through competition and desire for amelioration, and also through the existence of grades of wealth or poverty among men, one above the other.

Yes, the absolute liberty as in liberal democracy would lead to devilish capitalist men exploit the needy and ooze them out gradually. Man-made ‘democracy’ of the rich for the rich by the rich is the biggest fraud that the capitalists have inflicted on humanity. It is pure and simple exploitation of the poor by giving them a right to throw a paper in the ballot box. So, it was necessary for every progressive civilization and every healthy culture to impose certain duties on its members(such as to pay the taxes), the interdiction of having recourse and cheating etc, and recommend certain supererogatory acts like charity and expenditure for the sake of God. yet nevertheless to have a great deal of liberty of thought and action to its members, so that each one benefits himself, his exigency, his friends and the society at large.

This is exigency of Islam and its also conforms to nature. It tolerates the minority of the rich and accumulation of wealth but imposes upon them heavier obligations: prevents immoral means of exploitation, hoarding and accumulation of wealth. Further, it makes injunctions and also some recommendations for charity and sacrifice with promise of spiritual and eschatological rewards. Islamic view is that unless equality(masawat) in all spheres of life is not practiced, a society will remain unjust and it is the duty of the state to provide and look after the needs and comforts of its subjects. The Sermon of Last Hajj, “All mankind is from Adam and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over a black nor a black has any superiority over a white - except by piety and good action.” He explicitly mentioned the rights of men, women, and all groups of the society.

Every man-made economic philosophy, ideology and theory is bound to fail with inherent defects as has communism, socialism and capitalism. Capitalism was the need of 18-20th century colonialism and imperialism of European greedy and corrupt nations but the system became immoral and lewd. It is a failed system and we are seeing its decline now a days.

I don't see any inherent unfairness to basic capitalism. Those who contribute the most to society are rewarded for their work and their ideas. The only arbiter is the market place. This is infinitely better than a communist society where everyone is rewarded equally no matter what they do. Such a society breeds laziness, while the capital society breeds hard working entrepeneurs. Both types of communities need regulation to insure that no one cheats the system. And both types need to have a social conscience so that those who are not able to "pull their weight" are taken care of. The problems with capitalism, like those of any economic system, are related to those last two points - people cheating the system or being to greedy to assist the needy. When the pope complains about consumerism, it is to make this last point : People using their excess for luxury rather than charity..

By the way, I will grant you that small communes can work if everyone generally cares about the community and everyone in it and IF no one is worried about what anyone else is doing. Afterall, this is how our convents and monasteries work.

Hey Paul C - mostly agree with your sentiment.
While others loath the unfairness of capitalism, I see it as neccessary. Many of the great works of the last 150 years (in the USA at least) would never have happened in a system with a "fair" distribution of goods. The railroads that linked the parts of the USA together in the 19th century would never have been completed if done by committee, waiting for a national concensus. Capitalism is certainly the best system for producing innovation and creating a surplus of those products people want. Unfair? All by kids know that life is unfair, and whining about it changes nothing.
Communism, on the other hand, is not without virtue. On the scale of the nation-state I see it as unworkable, as it denies the basic human desire to have more than one already does. However on small scale with cooperating individuals it can work well. I have an uncle in the CC, and inside his brotherhood individuals "own" little more than the clothes on their backs. But they have enough money to open schools in Africa, the Carribean and the South Pacific. Collectively they make sure all their members are comfortable and even run their own retirement apple-farm.
Have a nice weekend all!

I disagree that capitalism is in itself bad. Competition is good for society because it drives excellence. But it must be regulated because some people cheat. That doesn't mean that the system itself is bad, it just means certain people are bad.

By the way, there are cheaters in every system. Do you think that the communist leaders really share the same benefits as the workers at large?

Social policy needs to be implemented regardless of the system in use because we always need to take care of those in society that can't take care of themselves.

As for the current federal bailouts, when a company like AIG goes under, its certainly more than the CEO and stockholders that suffer. It extends also to the workers and the customers.

We see how wrong the simple minded defense of capitalism can be - by looking toward Wall Street
and it's recent collapse as a result of greed, mismanagement, lack of regulation, high stakes corporate gambling without funds, and essentially, the corporate elite vanguard of capitalism run amuck.

However, their good friends over at the Fed have agreed to bail them out with taxpayer money - so there is little actual fallout impacting personal CEO fortunes made on the backs of countless taxpayers.

The biggest corporate bailout ever, has saved the day for the top 1%. And by an act initiated by the top 1%....Bernanke and Paulson being stalwart members of that elect membership themselves.
Bad management and monster CEO compensation packages will continue unabated.

Something really stinks - I don't smell the perfumery of heavenly ethers from where I'm standing. I think it's from all the sewage running downhill - and it seems to be coming our way.

Anonymous2 is confusing social justice with a smoothly running economic engine. Capitalism is amoral, as many nave noted here. Its goals are different from those of social justice - but because a society's economic power helps determine the level of support available to its citizens, it can be an indirect agent of social aims. The kindest, gentlest, most caring civilization in the world won't last long if it exists in a desert with no food or water to share.

He also confuses abuses of the capitalistic system with the economic model of capitalism, which cannot and will never exist in the real world - but which can come close to existing if well-regulated. Strong adherents to the laissez-faire model bemoan excessive governmental involvement in the process, forgetting that for a society, capitalism is a means to an end, not the end in itself.

Paul C writes: "The reason capitalism is good is because it is basically a competition which rewards those that do well and penalizes those that don't."

Paul C's is not a fantasy but an outright murderous lie.

One guy in this world gets say 4% interest, at no risk (the bailout), on $1M, yielding $40K --without working.

Another works and sleeps on the street with his kids. He lives on less than $2 per day. If he lives in Afghanistan (avg. pre-invasion lifespan 36) or Iraq, he also has too dodge bombs, if fortunate to be able to.

Does that man and his children exist for Paul C.? If he does not, then his is a fantasy, for that man and his kids indeed exist.

If Paul C. and a mayority in the world's wealthiest nation don't see reality, how can they pretend to live justly? If they don't live justly, then what is this melting financial monster all about?

The reason capitalism is good is because it is basically a competition which rewards those that do well and penalizes those that don't. This is the engine that drives productivity gains. The reason socialism and communism drive weaker economies is that it doesn't reward hard work and ingenuity and hence, people are not as motivated to do well.

However, like in any other competition, there needs to be referees to make sure that everyone plays by the rules. This is a key role of government. Note, however, that you need to distinguish between true safeguards and redistribution of wealth.

Also, everyone is responsible for taking care of his neighbor, especially those who truly can not support themselves. This should be the province of both the public and private sectors.

"Needless to say, less skillful practitioners provide images that are more glaringly at odds with reality. So the more aggressive the efforts at spin control, the more it will drive the discerning to other sources of information."
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/09/financial-censorship-pr-at-work.html

I'm not saying it's just evil. It's out of touch with reality and reality can be hell. I trust the Washington Post talent. A little more talent here as well as there would go a long way towards improving things.

"Capitalism with Socialist elements (as in the New Deal of FDR)." What people tend to forget is that the New Deal programs were mostly meant to be temporary until the market could take things over. Now we are back to creating temporary solutions to long-term problems and bureaucracy just grows and consumes more than it produces and the cost of the government goes up along with public debt, so taxes go up and we end up serving the government. The government is supposed to serve the people. This isn't Cuba here or East Germany. We could turn the newspapers over to government and end up like China, killing our own infants. That isn't an option here. Some would like it to be. I'd like a million dollars for nothing too. I just keep investing in the newspaper, since it pays for itself. A half a dollar and all these people worked around the clock to get it written and printed and distributed. A bargain, the best you ever had. Plus cartoons just for laughs. Maybe the cartoonists can all work for the government and we can pay to laugh at ourselves with our own money while we are at it. Whatever.

Adam Smith's capitalism is a fragile thing that simply doesn't exist in the real world without careful checks and balances, because "enlightened self-interest" usually loses the word "enlightened" pretty rapidly once there are real profits to be made, the competitive model can be easily subverted, etc.

IMO, any benefits received from laissez-faire economic policies always seems trumped by it's downsides.

The fact is that the total meltdown of the (middle and wealthy class) world financial system would not have made one iota of difference to the billions who have nothing...no home...no income...no financial investments.

As a separated catholic I am nauseated by the anti-christian indifference of catholic middle and upper class lay and clergy who live as if 'charity' was enough while sipping blood from their 'investments'.

I am nauseated by the utterly hypocritical, better yet, spirirually fraudulent, Catholic Socially Resposible mutual funds that invest in the financial holocaust of the destitute.

How come THIS is not THE election issue in the divinely inspired empire.

To think that the bailout of the wealthy and middle classes is immediate and already in the billions while the poor of this world are given crumbs, if they are given anything at all. How can US bishops, 'succesors of the apostles' in the empire itself, remain silent and not condemn participation in this system, as is?

No, I am not a socialist and I believe Jesus Christ resurrected and is alive in glory.

Moon,Penn changed his name from McCarthy?

"Hell must be full of junk and socialists and communists"? Give me a break. I'll admit socialism and communism produce weaker economies, but EVIL? If anything, socialists and communists will tell you they base their economic philosophy on their moral beliefs about the poor.

That's why I agree with the Professor. Capitalism, if checked properly, comes closer to Catholic social teaching.

Quality pays for itself as any good capitalist knows. Everybody pays the price for junk and hell must be full of junk and socialists and communists.
I'm not buying that good is bad and bad is good. China is killing babies with junk baby formula. Capitalism protects babies and heaven is all the better for our good work here on earth. Communism is hell on earth. Good to go.