
I probably shouldn’t expect anyone forty or so, no matter what supposed position of authority to know anything about how economics works. Even those who — as this one did — announces they’re not socialist and communist have their brain eaten up by all the Marxist cr*p they were fed in school.
I know because I was fed the same, and it took till my mid forties and a lot of reading to thoroughly rid myself of it.
However one of these days I’m going to stand up in church and correct the sermon. And then all h*ll is going to break lose. Probably literally.
The poor man was trying, I grant you, but his point to begin with was super-stretched. He was trying to say a thing on being in the world but not of the world, and decided to go with both feet into his description of Roman society. This was bad enough, because it wasn’t exactly accurate. Or was profoundly strange. Like he seemed to think the Romans were uniquely bad because of slavery. (Lowers head into hand and moans.) When of course every society of the time had slavery. At least by and large (with exceptions, because, well) Romans didn’t practice human sacrifice, or not in batch lots. At least not anymore.
Yeah, yeah, gladiators. But again, every society of the time had something like. We are different only by virtue of being able to fake guts and blood well enough no one needs die. There is enough of the animal with us we do enjoy watching violence.
But then his attempts to say we, in America, in our time, are as bad as Rome. (Slaps forehead.)
Look, no. Just no. No, gangbangers shooting each other is not like gladiator fights. No one is applauding it or paying them for it. It’s just the price of doing business outside the law. It’s the same in every society throughout history.
And then…. and then saying we, like the Romans who overindulged in food, then threw up to indulge again, are “indifferent to people starving on the streets.” Dude. Duuuuuude. The only people “starving” on the streets of America are doing so because Meth is a hell of a drug, not because people AREN’T pushing food at them at every possible turn. On the contrary. Remember the guy who moved to a new town with no job and $5 and within three months, without applying for official help had a job, a furnished apartment and a beater car? And he didn’t have more because he kept turning away official assistance.
As for people starving in the rest of the world? It’ s complicated. I’ve read articles by Africans telling us to stop sending them food and money. Mostly because apparently the most lucrative career an African in most of Africa can have is driving NGO people around. Which means what their brightest people do is…. work that doesn’t advance anything or provide anything local.
For my money, my lefty brother was right about one thing: China has done more for Africa than the West has. Instead of giving them our surplus and choking their own native attempts at industry and agriculture, with our free or much cheaper stuff, they built factories, roads and airports. Yes, it was done with the intent to exploit the natives. But Africa is Africa and the Chinese soon found that tribal societies have trouble with national agreements. On the other hand, infrastructure will remain here and there beyond the next local war, and might help them. Certainly will help them more than bags and bags of food.
Oh, you want to help people starving? Well, in the modern world people starve because their rulers steal everything and or, like in Cuba, enforce their not picking up food literally from the environment (purses searched for shrimp. Not a joke.) You want to help them? Topple their horrible government. Then topple the next one and the next one, and then maybe, afterwards something will emerge. Or not. Cultures are complicated and cultures that have been under the heel of tyrants too long might not recover well. Really the only way is to kill everyone over the age of three, and then raise those in our culture.
Any religious man up for that? No, I didn’t think so.
So, you know what we can do? Stop feeding them and let them topple from inside. Because international charity is hard. It involves cultural things, and different priorities, and we do more harm than good. Oh, make international adoption easier. It’s better than opening the borders, and then the kids — under 3 please — will be raised in our culture. That might do some good. And makes up the population shortfall without facilitating invasion.
But of course, the churches are all in on facilitating invasion. We got told that illegals are working under horrible conditions because they can’t complain. Apparently our minister is unable to think through the obvious point: if this weren’t better than how it is at home, they wouldn’t be here. Our country, with its standard of living and its social net is an attractive nuisance. Which is why we need strong borders. So pitch them out and reinforce the border. What are the chances he’d be for that?
And I’m aware that a lot of industries simply can’t function at the current minimum wage. Just can’t. Agriculture, and some manufacturing. It’s impossible to stay in business and pay all the money to people who are untrained plus pay the government mordida in the form of various fees. It’s cool. Maybe if we seal the border, we’ll finally make “no minimum wage, and no government monkeying in the economy” viable. But I bet you the minister wouldn’t be for it either.
And then there was his assertion there is no slavery anywhere in the world, but children in sweatshops sewing sneakers. This man needs an economics book flown in ASAP. Because he’s stupid and ill informed. (TBF earlier he admitted to listening to NPR and got booed by the congregation, so he hasn’t done it since.)
Yes, there is slavery in our world. Uygurs and others in China. OTOH those “children in sweatshops” are replicating our own industrial revolution. They are making more money and likely eating better than in their dirt-poor villages. Which is why they take their jobs. You let it work itself out and they’ll be the new middle class and demand better for their kids. Let’s not impose our standards on a society that has no alternative but kids working, and working at dirty and dangerous jobs too. Because we are the product of generations doing that, and that’s why we’re well off enough for adults — EDUCATED ADULTS — to be completely ignorant of the facts of life.
And then — and then — he comes up with how sports figures make so much money, when so many people are subsisting on minimum wage, and …. inequality!
Oh, dude, G-d love. Someone has to and your head being full of rocks makes it hard for us in the real world not to throw things at you.
Yeah, some people make more money than others. Usually people of unusual ability and talent, who nonetheless also had to work very hard and sharpen their natural gift over a lot of time to get where they are.
It is people who create inventions or companies that produce things (business is a type of talent. I know, because I don’t got it) who drive the wealth that allows our “minimum wage” workers to live like kings compared to most of the world.
Why should anyone work hard at developing a talent or at creating something if their reward is the same as someone doing a poor table-waiting job at the local dead-end-diner? (There are good diners. And there are abysmal ones.)
That’s not justice. That’s crazy cakes.
While you’re at it, why should a writer write books if he doesn’t get paid more than minimum wage? And I don’t know about you, but I’d rather Larry C. doesn’t go and work as an accountant again. Because sometimes I need a break, and I need stuff to read. Because reading stuff gives me hope.
Now, I don’t get watching sports. Never did. I guess it’s because I’m not spacial-visual. I can watch it, but there’s no wonder for me. BUT that’s tastes, okay? My dad used to spend his weekends watching sports. It was his page-scroll break.
Why should he do that if the athletes were people pulled off the street? And that’s what they would be, if there were no money in it.
Let people pay what they think someone is worth. Stop trying to control how others live.
Because at the bottom of that, it’s just envy.
And your attempt to “do good” turns into evil. Which I believe was something something about a lesson in a garden somewhere.
Then you wonder why the pews are empty. You know, we can get our Marx, undiluted, from CNN and the New York Times. And these days, they too are having trouble keeping their metaphorical pews full. Because we’ve seen the fruits of their “compassion.” And they’re rotten.
I mean, every Odd empathizes with ‘be in the world but not of the world’ but if you must preach that we be of another, completely imaginary — and not in the sense of having faith in something beyond, but in the sense of making up a reality because this one doesn’t suit you — world we’re going to have some problems.
And sooner or later, I’m going to stand on the pew and talk back.
Which will just cause talk.

































































































