Morals and Markets: readings and thoughts on economics

NOTES ON CATHOLIC ECONOMIC TEACHINGS

Dear Friend,

Thank you, most gratefully, for this very thoughtful and interesting compilation of readings (in Catholic Economic Teaching, below).

It seems to me that there is still dispute about fundamental requirements in:

- family & virtue
- redistribution
- needs

And, how the state can do, in these, is disputed. Acton (along with the Koran) argue it should be left to charity. And there is on the other side much, naive, talk of prosocial (read, in my view, "in-group" and "virtue-signalling" or "warm-glow") community action. Which, as far as I have been able to tell, evaporates utterly and completely once family or personal habits are threatened. (In any change..?: but "the cows will stop milking", "I HAVE to drive my child to the swimming pool..", etc)

But, there is little argument or disagreement about wealth creation (or the incentives - in the market system - for frugality and productivity).

While muddling along, with slogans daubed on walls, has got us by up to now, it would appear to me that there are forces who are determined to see a return to regressive models. Both on the so-called "libertarian" side and among the "socialists" also. Principally so as to foster civil strife and impoverishment (or civil war, preferably) in the Empire and among the Colonists.

Also, there is no mention of limits. And the, excruciating (but PC'ly unpublishable), statistics on inequity in consumption: 17 kilograms of OilEq / Capita / day in the USA and Australia (or the 11 kgOilEq/p/d in Europe) - versus 1.4 kgOeq/Cap/Day in Kerala and Sri Lanka with very good (/comparable?) health and wellbeing.

Or any conception of the future that beckons - to me #Walkable + #NoOneLeftBehind. Or the Scorched Earth (climate war) #EdenIsBurning, actually, Eden HasBurnt (!??), that seems inevitable. Given the failure to look into the consequences of the AutoMobile (FreeWays and the AeroPlane) as the pinnacle of human civilisation.

Which is, notably, left out of all of these readings. As is the possibility, or objective, to TEST which theories work, and what their practical consequences are.

READINGS

Economics in the Catholic World | Acton Institute | Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn
https://acton.org/pub/religion-liberty/volume-4-number-4/economics-catholic-world
- wealth creation is all important/ trickle down works/ but "morally motivated unions can be a pillar".

Catholic social teaching must confront the regulatory state | Acton Institute | Philip Booth
https://acton.org/publications/transatlantic/2017/10/24/catholic-social-teaching-must-confront-regulatory-state
- the importance of "unintended consequences" and "dead weight" (both of which can be huge) of regulations and "institutions" ( a la Douglass North).

Who are the Catholic economists? | Marginal REVOLUTION
https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2010/05/who-are-the-catholic-economists.html
- Catholic thinking, in Economics, down the ages. (Pretty limited, but a few more helpful readings).

A Catholic Framework for Economic Life
http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-and-dignity/economic-justice-economy/catholic-framework-for-economic-life.cfm
- US Convention of Catholic Bishops: Official statement (waffley and unfocused), but "many people are being forced to choose between basic necessities like food, shelter, and health care. How can you - and how can our society as a whole - help to provide for [their] needs?" (doesn't answer this question).

Why the wealth gap is bad for everyone | USCatholic.org
https://www.uscatholic.org/articles/201306/economics-inequality-why-wealth-gap-bad-everyone-27421
- community action + status quo will solve all the problems.

Catholic Economics: Alternatives to the Jungle | by Angus Sibley
https://blackwells.co.uk/bookshop/product/Catholic-Economics-by-Angus-Sibley-author/9780814648681

========================================

Redeeming Capitalism | by Kenneth J. Barnes
https://www.eerdmans.com/Products/7557/redeeming-capitalism.aspx
- a "call to reform capitalism as a moral enterprise so it can become a morally steered servant rather than a cruel, amoral master" - very valuable, grounded, and insightful (imho) - not a polemic.

"Good-will" and harsh lessons

-- economic allocation --

Rupert Read (Green Party Transport Spokesperson, and chair of the UK think tank "Green House") says that "we must let go of this 'trickle-down' nonsense once and for all" (Guardian Sustainable Business, 23 March 2014 gu.com/p/46pkd). He identifies fundamental failings in our economic and biological systems, but fails to deal with very harsh lessons that humanity has learned over centuries.

Namely how to adjust for human tendencies to sloth, selfishness and righteous indignation.

As we saw in Soviet countries, and as we see today in South Africa's state education, relying on good nature breaks down. Owing to small indignities and to free-riding by the selfish minority.

A strength of market economies is that they reward productivity and frugality. Today, however, these are perverted with incentives for waste, obesity and imaginary economic activity. In order, I suspect, to keep deficit financing viable (by the government, for those who cannot be productive).

A further problem with rewarding productivity is that, as virtually any economic modeller will tell you, all of the wealth and all of the resources usually end up in the hands of only one producer.

To get around that, biblical writers suggested Sabbath years (when all debts are forgiven and land is redistributed). But this does great harm by eating up incentives to save.

In Islam Zakaat is promoted - where everyone should give, to the poor, 3 percent of their wealth each year. Which leaves grinding poverty among the majority.

Hence it seems to me that the fundamental question should be "How can we redistribute (provide for those who cannot work) - while maintaining incentives for productivity and frugality - and keep families and financing of the state viable?"

All economists agree, I think, that growth (which is inevitably exponential) cannot continue indefinitely. Owing to physical limits on resources. Which we see today in the Guardian's recognition of deadly climate change.

The Green Party, and many economist-philosophers like Rupert Read, do not address the question of incentives. And hold up, the old mirage, of enduring good-will.

Perhaps the Templeton Foundation, the NEF or the Aldersgate Group, will do helpful research on the topic.