Pope to Davos elite: Do more for poor

reply to post by wildtimes


Obama...he was up against so much ..he was voted in because people believed he was something from your two party system that could make a difference ..he was up against an established power base..I recently read " The Peoples History of the United States" by Howard Zinn..and understand now why things are as they are ..is Obama a pawn for the elites..I don't know ..I do know he is up against a lot of powerful "establishments" and I suspect he will fail

reply to post by wildtimes



Good post ..far more eloquently put that I could write..its a crap situation..how do we trust those that we elect..or believe that they have our interests at heart....for me its the dangling of the carrot before the horse...one day the horse gets the carrot
then all hell ..I think its happening now..people at the bottom of the pile are sick of subterfuge..I just hope no one shoots the messenger

wildtimes

He's only had the job for 10 months!!

Do you know how many people could single-handedly save 'millions of people' also? Apple corporation, for example. One of their executives, when asked why he didn't think it was appropriate to 'share the wealth' (profits doled out to 'shareholders') with the world (which could eliminate hunger WORLDWIDE in one go!), he said,

i look at it this way. He's The Pope. If he said, "Ya know.. I think my catholic church needs to give 5 trillion dollars to this starving nations kids.. I think it's what God wants me to do.. ." No ONE is going to tell HIM otherwise.

reply to post by JohnPhoenix

His aversion to ostentation is already the stuff of legend, so when Francis talks of a "poor church for the poor," people take him seriously.
Francis also has amassed massive deposits of political capital over his first 10 months in office, with approval ratings around the world that politicians and celebrities have to view with unalloyed envy.
....
Catholicism is also the only world religion with its own diplomatic corps, as the Vatican is a sovereign state with bilateral relations with 180 nations. That gives the church a unique platform to act as a voice of conscience in global affairs.

Several world leaders have already met with him, including Putin (Russia) and Hollande (France), and in March Obama will be going there.

In other words, Francis has some serious cards to lay on the table in the high-stakes poker game of global economic reform.

It's easy to say that no one person -- even a Pope who's also one of the most popular figures on the planet -- can bring down entrenched systems of power. Of course, that's what people said about Communism too, before Pope John Paul II set the dominoes in motion in Poland that led to the collapse of the Communist system in 1989.

So, you see, it's not about a one-time 'redistribution of 5 trillion' and the world is voilà...fixed! Forever!

No, it's about changing the SYSTEM. "Bringing down entrenched systems of power."

Whether Francis will have the same luck defending the poor remains to be seen, but it's certainly not obvious that the smart money is against him.

Let me rephrase that so it's more clear:

The smart money is not obviously against him.

Reminds me of a quip my husband made the other day (on an unrelated matter):

If the smart money is against the Pope, there are no "obvious observations that make it clear."

Sure, no one is going to tell him "no" if he decides to drop 5 trillion from a hot-air balloon over Africa or India or his native Brazil - but when that money is used up - what then? Still no jobs, no infrastructure, no education, no skills, no clean water or adequate housing...no food, no hope...no future.

THOSE are the things that need "fixing."

Here’s a man with some uncommon common sense…encouraging the elite rich ( the 85 ) to help the poor.
It’s no secret humankind no longer has excuses for having in its midst extreme poverty ANYWHERE on the planet when we have mass communication unlike anytime in the past. Indeed, people can be sitting down eating their supper of steak and caviar watching children starve to death on a CNN documentary. How vile the existential fact of that is!

In past times, before mass communication there was no easy way that the average person living in, for example, one part of the world could easily know that just in a neighboring country people were starving to death for no fault of their own. Today that is largely impossible.

Only certain philosophies of selfishness and abysmal ignorance do some use to maintain this status quo, as people actually claim the rich are some special kind of people and should be left alone to hoard their wealth and continually be allowed to rig the game so they will not only maintain their ill gotten gain but reap more and more and more.

Any macro economy is like a reservoir that we all share and influence in our own way, those entrusted with wealth have a unique input into this macro economy and have often poisoned this economic reservoir to their own selfish aggrandizement (such as the 2007-8 depression) to the detriment to the whole body of people who have to feed off this economic entity, and the poor and near poor get affected negatively the most when the elite rich do scams like in 2007-8.

In this age of opulent wealth and technological capacity unlike anytime in history poverty is rising up across the world and only people of influence like the pope can maybe persuade the filthy rich to understand that they can’t die with their money, it won't help them in death…so why not lend a helping hand in using this massive horde of resources to save millions of lives.

I hope this thread will not become another ideological fight but rather a positive indulgence in ideas that humanity can do to eradicate extreme poverty.

Where talking about the kind of poverty that kills millions of children across this world every year and makes life absolutely unbearable for people.

“According to UNICEF, 22,000 children die each day due to poverty. And they “die quietly in some of the poorest villages on earth, far removed from the scrutiny and the conscience of the world. Being meek and weak in life makes these dying multitudes even more invisible in death.” www.globalissues.org...

This is not about bashing the rich it as based on love, not hate.

Since it isn’t ONLY the rich the world needs to assist in eradicating extreme poverty, we all can do our share to raise humanity up to a level of prosperity where all human beings can have a shot at happiness and be free from the vicious suffering of poverty.

I hope we hear more from this pope on this issue, and Obama, and other influential people among ALL political persuasions, for this issue transcends politics and ideology, imo.

reply to post by Willtell


I'm glad you c/p your OP.....

Again: I agree with you.

reply to post by wildtimes


He is trying at least... @ times 1 feels the data within Vatican archives in relation to ancient past and present as well as future has information that the WORLD may be affected by and so as scheduled they are interacting with the EA*RTH populace in preparation. This is 1z subjective analysis.

God Luck

LORD... what doust they SEE with the LUCIFER data scope?

NAMASTE*******

When the Vatican is the poorest nation on Earth he can talk about helping the poor.

When every dime that flows into the church flows out to the poor he can talk about giving more.

When the Pope no longer wears clothes made of GOLD he can talk about giving more.

When the Vatican Bank is not one of the largest financial institutions he can talk about giving more.

He is the hand and voice of God on Earth. He should come before men in sackcloth and rags, humble and asking for alms as he should have nothing left to give.

The Church tells the RICH to give to the poor (to earn salvation).
The Church tells the POOR to give to the church (to earn salvation).

The Pope has three homes that are palaces.
The Vatican is decorated with billions of dollars worth of art.
Untold millions of dollars worth of art and literature are held in Vatican vaults.
The entire country owned by the RCC is made of marble palaces and cathedrals.

Yet, the evil rich business owners should part with more money for the poor of the world?
Makes perfect sense.

reply to post by Willtell

Here’s a man with some uncommon common sense…encouraging the elite rich ( the 85 ) to help the poor. I heard Bill Gates attacking redistribution the other day, which is actually a change in tone for him. That Oxfam report about 85 people have the same wealth as half the world has hit hard in the culture at large.

That makes me mad, but the problem with that report is that the inequality has two solutions: 1) make half the world richer somehow. 2) Burn all the assets of those 85 people. (a whole lot of stuff, which many people rely on for their income) Both makes it go away, but one brings no benefit. Meanwhile gates is arguing about all the good he's doing with his foundation and is generally going on, saying all nations will be "rich" by 2035. The philosophy of Buffet, him, and the rest of the giver billionaires seems to be that with that wealth comes a social responsibility, which is good. These guys are presumably smarter than most of us - so having them manage help for people could be a good thing. And there could be a truly moral argument for this system and inequality... But they could just be greedy too. It could be a facade, for a ridiculous inequality situation.

What we need are ABSOLUTE metrics of well being for seeing how well things are working. Capitalism, insofar as it represents a system where a very few own a vast amount in terms of managing assets we all use (and this is close to how it works) could be the ideal system. But when its exploitative and destructive, it shouldn't be hidden. The key is for all of us to be able to see what's going on. That gets rid of the have/have nots antagonism that will come when we take our eyes of the absolute metrics of the quality of our lives. Or it will make the injustice of the status quo so obvious that the needed changes will be made.

reply to post by 200Plus

When the Vatican is the poorest nation on Earth he can talk about helping the poor.

When every dime that flows into the church flows out to the poor he can talk about giving more.

Oh, right, because a destitute, homeless beggar who tells the rich to give to the poor is always so influential.

I could say the same about every CEO who is paid annual bonuses that would make Solomon blush - when they distribute those bonuses to their workers (NOT THEIR SHAREHOLDERS), and every dime over a reasonable salary they earn is paid out to the employees and their families - and to others who the system forces to go without, then they can bitch about the Vatican.

The Pope does not wear gold clothing. He wears a white cassock, and his old regular brown shoes.

Do you not see how someone with as much power as he has will be far more respected than a poor, starving mother of starving children saying the same thing to these global elites? I bet you were unhappy when Buffet (I think it was) said, "Yes, you should tax me more."

Tax havens and loopholes, off-shoring, Wall Street gambling, and obscene salaries for the 'very, very few' are what ruined the economy. As WanDash said:

a 1% TAX on all transactions would take care of a lot of it. People go to casinos knowing the game is rigged against them - they know that playing the lottery actually contributes to social justice - and they do it anyway, usually with only what they can spare and not 'miss'. These bejillionaires wouldn't miss what they are being asked to contribute.

JohnPhoenix
This Pope could single handledly save millions of people.. yet does he.. nope.. Evil fart.

That's dead wrong. The pope isn't a dictator.

The Vatican is not only the power center of the Catholic church but it's also a country. It has a Secretary of State and a bank run by a host of officials. The pope isn't dictator. He can't write executive orders that have to be followed throughout the country (or city-state .. either one) without question and without adherence to the law. There are channels that the pope has to go through when it comes to property and finance of the country. And there are banking laws that have to be followed. And property laws.

He doesn't own the Vatican. He doesn't own the Vatican museum. He doesn't own the Vatican bank.
While he is much like a POTUS, he doesn't have dictatorial control over any of that.

And there is no reason for the Vatican to sell off the items in the Vatican museum. That's absurd.
It's their museum. The pieces are well kept and people from around the world can come to see them.
Tourism is how the vatican makes money. (legitimate money ... which is a separate issue than the Vatican bank).

For someone to say that the pope could 'singlehandedly end poverty or save millions' by acting like
a dictator .... that' just wrong.

reply to post by wildtimes


Actually I was shocked (and a little inspired) when Buffet said he should be taxed more.

A destitute mother and the leader of the Holy Mother Church are two very different things. As I have no doubt you are well aware.

One cannot get an audience with the heads of the business world and if she did her pleas would be seen as simply asking for handouts for her own sake.

The other can get an audience with the heads of the business world and his pleas are seen as asking for assistance for others.

That being said, as long as the RCC maintains palaces they have no right to condemn anyone for spending their own money as they see fit. Christ himself overturned the tables of the money changers on the grounds of the temple. There is no difference. The arrogance of the Catholic elite has reached undreamt of levels (except maybe under the Borgia's).

reply to post by FlyersFan


What is "legitimate money"?

reply to post by 200Plus


Yes, I am aware.
I just heard a story today about California's state legislature who upped income taxes ON THE RICH, as well as sales taxes on everyone, to help their education system. GOOD FOR THEM!!

If the Federal Govt is not going to implement "fair trade" actions that limit salaries and REMOVE tax loopholes and havens, then the States can do so....

California now has a $4 BILLION dollar surplus (and if you recall, they were completely bankrupt a few years ago).....and they are giving the school districts the power to spend their 'allotments' as they see best fit.

There is NO REASON on God's Green Earth that ANYONE needs to have more than, say....I don't know....a million dollars.
There is, to my mind, an obvious (and should be legislated) 'limit' to how much money a person needs to survive comfortably!!! Multi-billionaires are WAY above their quota.

That being said, as long as the RCC maintains palaces they have no right to condemn anyone for spending their own money as they see fit.

"They" (Pope Francis) isn't "condemning anyone" - he's calling for the message of altruism and 'love' for one's neighbor that Jesus supposedly (reportedly) preached (taught). And Jesus was NOT the first one to say so. It's common sense.

Unless you're a greedy, hoarding billionaire who doesn't give a rat's ass about other human beings.

reply to post by wildtimes


While I can understand why you say there should be a cap on a person's earnings, I do not think that will solve many issues.

A billionaire is greedy yes. He has more than he can ever use. No body doubts that.

Look at the poorest nations. The one's that suffer the truest plight and famine. A man will have 15-20 children by multiple wives in the hopes than 5-6 survive. This cycle continues for generations. A "rich" man their has children not money.

Can you honestly think that if the rich gave half their money and supplied food and aid to the poorest countries, that this would change? No.

These other "rich" men would simply have 30-40 children by more wives and then the wealthy would be called on to give up 75% of their earnings.

The mindset on both ends of the spectrum must change in order for balance to be reached and maintained.