MaxB
26th December 2002, 16:57
Christianity vs. Socialism
By Joshua A. Claybourn
I was surprised recently to hear one of my friends say that Jesus and the disciples practiced socialism, and that because they did our government should as well. As a Christian and an economics and public policy major, this sparked my interest.
For those of you following along in your Bibles, my socialist friend was referring to Acts 4:32-37. However the Bible, even in these verses, is far from endorsing socialism. There is a strong difference between Christians voluntarily giving of their plurality to those in need, as they did in Acts, than a government system where you lose your rights to private property and the government forces you to give under penalty of death or jail.
It's wrong, morally wrong, to take 40 percent of what someone earns when there is no pressing need for it, and especially when the government could raise more dollars by lowering the rates. Supply-side economists will tell you that it works; lowering taxes will spur economic activity and eventually raise government revenue.
Part of the problem comes from our narrow-minded view of how the economy works. We tend to view it as a "zero-sum" game in which there is a finite amount of wealth, goods, and services so it must somehow be distributed evenly. But if this were true, we would have never moved out of the Middle Ages, economically speaking. There is more wealth and goods now because we re-invested it and increased research and development for great innovations.
When President Clinton signed welfare reform into law in 1994, the number of poor dropped dramatically and almost immediately- just as Republican tax cuts and deregulation in 1982 fostered an explosion of new businesses. Only then did it pay to invest and work, imagine and invent…and hire, hire, hire. Socialism presents no incentive for this advancement, but capitalism does. Communism solves this obstacle through a threat of death - hardly a Christian principle.
The Bible never specifically endorses any economic system. Perhaps, from the Matthew story in the Bible about a rich man, we should teach that being rich isn't admirable, even if it's achieved through noble means. But we should also teach that taking from some by force, and giving to others who we (or more likely, career politicians) think are more deserving is also wrong, and stupid. It's like killing the goose that lays the golden egg.
We should demand that the government decrease its size, intrusion, and top-down approach to economics. I hope, though, that we simultaneously increase our own personal giving to the poor, needy, and not-for-profit organizations. Anyone can argue against social programs, but it should be balanced with a giving heart from our own personal pockets. It is up to us to teach these noble values, not the misguided, bloated, and inefficient government.
By Joshua A. Claybourn
I was surprised recently to hear one of my friends say that Jesus and the disciples practiced socialism, and that because they did our government should as well. As a Christian and an economics and public policy major, this sparked my interest.
For those of you following along in your Bibles, my socialist friend was referring to Acts 4:32-37. However the Bible, even in these verses, is far from endorsing socialism. There is a strong difference between Christians voluntarily giving of their plurality to those in need, as they did in Acts, than a government system where you lose your rights to private property and the government forces you to give under penalty of death or jail.
It's wrong, morally wrong, to take 40 percent of what someone earns when there is no pressing need for it, and especially when the government could raise more dollars by lowering the rates. Supply-side economists will tell you that it works; lowering taxes will spur economic activity and eventually raise government revenue.
Part of the problem comes from our narrow-minded view of how the economy works. We tend to view it as a "zero-sum" game in which there is a finite amount of wealth, goods, and services so it must somehow be distributed evenly. But if this were true, we would have never moved out of the Middle Ages, economically speaking. There is more wealth and goods now because we re-invested it and increased research and development for great innovations.
When President Clinton signed welfare reform into law in 1994, the number of poor dropped dramatically and almost immediately- just as Republican tax cuts and deregulation in 1982 fostered an explosion of new businesses. Only then did it pay to invest and work, imagine and invent…and hire, hire, hire. Socialism presents no incentive for this advancement, but capitalism does. Communism solves this obstacle through a threat of death - hardly a Christian principle.
The Bible never specifically endorses any economic system. Perhaps, from the Matthew story in the Bible about a rich man, we should teach that being rich isn't admirable, even if it's achieved through noble means. But we should also teach that taking from some by force, and giving to others who we (or more likely, career politicians) think are more deserving is also wrong, and stupid. It's like killing the goose that lays the golden egg.
We should demand that the government decrease its size, intrusion, and top-down approach to economics. I hope, though, that we simultaneously increase our own personal giving to the poor, needy, and not-for-profit organizations. Anyone can argue against social programs, but it should be balanced with a giving heart from our own personal pockets. It is up to us to teach these noble values, not the misguided, bloated, and inefficient government.