How do we work together to solve this?

Our culture is more enthralled with greed and materialism than ever before. How do we solve this terrible problem of an economic system that continues to result in more and more money for fewer and fewer human beings, while the masses are struggling just to get by?

I think the answer is found in religion, in the ability of God to touch hearts and train them to store up spiritual wealth instead of putting society’s efforts in the cause of increasing wealth inequality for the purpose of aggrandizing a life on this planet that ends after a few short decades.

Socialism seems like a pretty practical answer. :slight_smile:
Everyone contributes up to the level they’re capable, and benefits according to their needs. Pretty straightforward.
But I don’t expect it to happen any time soon, the exploiters will put up a massive fight and use all their ill-gotten money and influence to convince the population to continue voting against their own interests.

Please explain how everyone contributes up to the level they’re capable and benefits. So does that mean if a person decides they don’t want to work everyone else should supports them? If so sign me up because I didn’t like working. but I did like to eat etc…

Socialism has already been tried and failed miserably in Russia etc… Look at the workers paradise of Cuba everyone is poor. Oh everyone except the leaders. I came from divorced parents and know what it’s like as a child to come home from school and find the house cold or electric off because mom could not afford to pay the bills while on public assistance. I’m doing great in retirement because I didn’t live above my means. When I made minimum wage I lived accordingly when I made good money I saved to buy what I wanted instead of charging everything living above my means.

Justin Martyr writes about the early Christian worship services and I believe in that excerpt he mentions that everyone gives as he is able or chooses to. The money is used to help others out.

I think our problem is that we’ve created a sense of entitlement within our society that really dates back to Roosevelt’s New Deals. It was a great idea at the time and worked well to bring back self-worth to many who had been out of work and trying to find food to put on their family’s tables. What went awry was in the 60’s where government housing, food stamps and monthly income dependent upon how many children one had became the norm without adding an incentive to get out and work.

Over the years, this led to the government becoming the central figure to helping the poor rather than the churches. I don’t think it’s too late and I think there have been efforts to turn this around and get people to work. jlhargus is correct in that we need to learn within our means…my dad, for a time, worked 2 jobs to ensure that we had food on our table and a good roof over our heads. He did not die a millionaire but he was rich with a loving wife, 7 wonderful children, tons of grandchildren and many great-grandchildren. That is what is important and he instilled that into us although many of us got caught up in having “things” and learned a few lessons from that.

Blessings, all!


The widening gap we see between rich and poor is being caused by the socialistic ideas which have prevailed among both political parties. Business is being hampered by the overbearing bureaucracy at every level from small handyman services having to be licensed to mega corporations which have to hire whole compliance departments just to keep out of trouble with the government.

Pure capitalism works no better as we saw in the Industrial revolution where people were treated worse than farm animals. The solution in my opinion is somewhere in between. Having about one third the government intrusion we currently have is probably right. Enough to provide security, courts and public services which can’t be easily privatized (water/sewer and roads for example) and then stay out of the way of the greatness of the American Ethos.

There is no reason anyone in this country should go hungry or be without healthcare, but there is also no reason able bodied people should not be working and living solely from the public dole.

One last thought. Everyone calls the founding fathers racist for mandating only property owners would be allowed to vote. The modern version would be only those putting into societies coffers (taxpayers). The reason for this is those who were industrious enough to have vision, work hard and achieve things would not vote for poor policies which ultimately would destroy the system which allowed the wealth creation. You can see their fears realized in our current political climate. Time and again democratic societies collapse when the populace realizes they can vote themselves a living from the public coffers.


Well, would you be willing to lead by example by redistributing what you own?

Matthew Light #1
How do we solve this terrible problem of an economic system that continues to result in more and more money for fewer and fewer human beings, while the masses are struggling just to get by?
ChurchSoldier #5
Pure capitalism works no better as we saw in the Industrial revolution where people were treated worse than farm animals.

It is not the “economic system” or “capitalism” (so-called) that causes the trouble you cite, nor the industrial revolution.

We need to face reality. The sneer of “capitalism” came from the Karl Marx of Communism, and St John Paul II in *Centesimus Annus *clearly dislikes the term, preferentially substituting instead, and seeing the great worth of, the “modern business economy” and the functioning of the “free market”, as well as the "market economy or simply **free economy.” **(#42).

Not only has free enterprise raised the welfare of untold millions out of poverty, but is emphatically affirmed by Bl John Paul II in Centesimus Annus, 42, 1991. How does free enterprise raise welfare? As welfare = something that aids or promotes well-being/a contented state of being happy and healthy and prosperous, the answer is obvious. That untold millions have benefited is unchallengeable.

Free enterprise has, with the development of the economic laws of cause and effect by the Catholic Late Scholastics based on faith and reason, from the 14th to the 17th century, enabled the enrichment of untold millions from the poverty existing before the enterprises that came with the “Industrial Revolution”. Without the great contribution of the Industrial Revolution, sparked by Catholic economic and social thought and action in the West, we would still be eking out an existence as before that development. Catholic teaching, especially social teaching outlines the morality of this interaction.

Free enterprise is not a world of its own, it is a set of principles based on cause and effect and developed by the Catholic Late Scholastics for the common good.

Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI felt it necessary to teach that **“Society does not have to protect itself from the market, as if the development of the latter were ipso facto to entail the death of authentically human relations…Therefore it is not the instrument that must be called to account, but individuals, their moral conscience and their personal and social responsibility.” **(Caritas et Veritate, Benedict XVI, 2009, #36). [My emphases].

Thank you! Tragic article about the homeless-- you should see how many homeless there are in other parts of our nation – also very high in the southwest-- and so many men. Yes, any problem or I like the word challenge instead of problem can be solved with the grace needed and people believing they can change things. Peace!

Wow! Do you sound defensive – maybe he already has — :frowning:


We see in Acts 4:34-35, in A Catholic Commentary On Holy Scripture, Thomas Nelson and Sons, 1953:
(This) shows “that property was sold, from time to time, by the owners of it, according as the Church’s need dictated. The sharing of goods was always voluntary. The story of Ananias and Saphira, cf. 5:4, makes it clear that they were not bound to sell, and that after they had, the price was still theirs. When Barnabas gave all his property, such exceptional generosity was chronicled. There are examples of houses held privately in Jerusalem, !2:12; 21:16. St James, in his Epistle, reveals the existence of rich and poor there. The community of goods does not seem to have been very successful, 6:1, and other churches had continually to send alms, voluntarily, ‘each man according to his ability’, to Jerusalem, 11:29.”

In Christians For Freedom, Ignatius 1986, p 46, (with a new edition, since), Dr Alejandro Chafuen has examined carefully the teaching of Christ and wealth. Some misrepresent Acts 2:44-47, where the faithful lived together and owned everything in common. These so-called “Apostolics” were condemned by St Thomas and the Late Scholastics, who quote St Augustine. Why?
In his* Summa*, II-II, Q. 66, art. 2, resp., St Thomas quotes St Augustine: “Augustine says: ‘The people styled apostolic are those who arrogantly claimed this title for themselves because they refused to admit married folk or property owners to their fellowship, arguing from the model of the many monks and clerics in the Catholic Church (*De Haeresibus *40).’ But such people are heretics because they cut themselves off from the Church by alleging that those who, unlike themselves, marry and own property have no hope of salvation.”

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit