"Why Live Simply?" I’ve been asked accusatorily. "If you really want to help the poor, wouldn’t it make sense to try to make as much money as possible so that you could, in turn, give money in assistance to the poor?"
My response:
1. The Bible and all the world's major religions and non-religious belief systems agree on at least this much: we ought to obey the Golden Rule. We ought to do unto others as we'd have them do unto ourselves.
2. Another way of stating the Golden Rule is that we ought not live in such a Way that we wouldn't be pleased if everyone embraced that Way.
3. This is a finite world, with finite resources.
Are we in agreement thus far? Then continuing:
4. Following the Golden Rule would also imply living within our means; we ought NOT over-consume.
Let’s assume there is an island of finite resources and 10 people live there. Person 1 consumes 70% of the resources. 2-6 consume 25% of the remaining resources, leaving 5% of the resources for the remaining four people. Now, if person 1 gives 10% of his resources away (9% to the church building he made for himself and 1% for the "poor" of the island), the "poor" may say, gee thanks for this 1% of all that you have, but what they really need is for that fella to stop consuming 70% of the resources.
Perhaps the term "Simple living" terminology throws some people off. I'm advocating living responsibly; Living within our means.
If everyone on earth consumed at the rate that the US does, we'd need something like five planet Earths to supply the raw materials. We can't all live as high on the hog as US citizens do.
So to speak in terms of "Dan, if you're REALLY concerned about the poor, you'd work to make MORE money so that you could give MORE to the poor," is missing the point entirely. We simply can't all consume at the rate we do. To do thusly IS to hurt the poor.
The best thing that we can do for world peace and justice, Wendell Berry tells us, is to grow a garden. That is, begin to live in smaller circles. Sustainably.
Recall the many warnings of the prophets about this, including Ezekiel's here:
This is the sin of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters were proud, sated with food, complacent in their prosperity, and they gave no help to the poor and needy.
So, when I talk about living simply, I'm talking about living within our means. As noted in the previous post on Sabbath Economics, we can learn two things about all the Stuff of the world from biblical teaching:
1. Abundance is a divine gift, and
2. Self-limitation is the appropriate response to God’s abundance
I agree with this notion. We can't all live like kings – we just can’t. There ain’t enough Stuff for us to pull off that miracle. And if we do try to live like kings and then salve our conscience by giving a pittance back to "the poor," it still fails to make things right.
To quote famed Baptist theologian and farmer, Clarence Jordan:
What the poor need is not charity but capital, not caseworkers but co-workers. And what the rich need is a wise, honorable, and just way of divesting themselves of their overabundance.
7 comments:
Very nice post Dan. I've started to hear more and more about some churches pushing for the higher income members. Seems more self-serving than god-serving to me. Oh, and thats a great quote from Jordan at the end there.
I read "Better Off" recently. Its an interesting take on living simply. If you have free time, its an easy read too.
Ah, Dan, do I believe my eyes?? Finally a post that somewhat touches on economics! And you didn't label it 'Bible and Economics'.
The conservative sees wealth as something they 'create'. If they end up with $500K, it means they "created" half a million dollars of wealth. In their belief system, anyone can do that. The only reason you don't is because you are lazy or inept or lack gumption. Why would I give you any of my wealth I "created" when you could do the same for yourself!
The liberal views wealth as a vast static resource, a pie intended for all of us slice up and enjoy. The only question to be answered is how to slice up the pie equitably. Currently the greedy rich are cutting a very large piece for themselves leaving too little for the poor.
"1. Abundance is a divine gift," reflects this second view.
Both views are baseless if not downright idiotic. Wealth operates neither way.
Now of days if you sally into a church with your chest stuck out and $500K in your pocket to be the benevolent rich man, that represents $500K of debt someone has agreed to take on. You have squeezed it out of the life of the poor and no amount of "giving it back" will ever ease the guilt of it.
In our modern economic system money (wealth) being created is debt being created. Else, do you think there is $100 trillion dollars worth of gold in the world to back up all the "wealth"? The current housing/debt debacle ought to illustrate it quite well. Where did all the money come from to support all the consumerism of the past 5 years? Because people signed pieces of paper saying they would pay it back. The "wealth" came into existence as soon as someone said they'd be responsible for coming up with some good or service as valuable as they received and gladly turn that over to the lender at some later date. "Gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today" sort of thing.
Let's say in your largess that you have the afore mentioned $500K and you want the poor to be warm this winter so you spend all of it to buy coal for them. That will buy about 4,000 tons of coal and keep a lot of people warm. But YOU, no matter who you are, cannot yourself produce 4,000 tons of coal even in many years of work. By virtue of the fact that you can give this coal away to people who did not produce it when you did not produce it either, means that someone worked their life away producing that coal and did not get the full benefit from it. Likewise anything.
That kind of wealth is evil. The only just wealth is what is produced and owned in an equal manner by those who produced it, individually or collectively.
The beginning of this, as I have opined before, is to drop the notion that the money we have is a gift from God. As a gift from God the money is a magic talisman that can cause fuel, housing, good, medicine, clothing and such to appear from thin air .... after all God made all those things "abundant" did He not?
Rather look at what we ourselves produce for the folk. What did we, with our God given strength, health, intelligence, and motivation, bring into existence that is of benefit and comfort to the folk? That might only consist of us producing enough that we are not tempted to put our hand into the other man's potato sack, coal bin, or closet and take the things we have not earned.
The Bible does not say in vain that "the borrower is slave to the lender."
Thanks, Park, E. I'll check out Better Off - you know the author? Is it the Eric Brende book, Better Off: Flipping the Switch on Technology?
E said:
The beginning of this, as I have opined before, is to drop the notion that the money we have is a gift from God.
Eleutheros, I don't know that I disagree with much of what you said (at least the parts my poor mind can grasp). I will note that when the "Abundance is a gift of God" was referenced, it was most certainly NOT talking about an abundance of money.
In Myers' book, it is talking about The Garden, Manna from Heaven, that kind of thing; Natural abundance of stuff to sustain life on Earth IF we live within our means.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Good point, kmoo. And thanks for the recommendation, Parklife, I've picked up Better Off from the library. I'll let you know how I like it.
Yup.. you picked the right book. Its such an easy read you may have finished it by the time you read this.
Dan:"I will note that when the "Abundance is a gift of God" was referenced, it was most certainly NOT talking about an abundance of money."
And yet, Dan, to whom could this possibly apply? Who among us makes use of said abundance outside the scope of money?
You are familiar with my advocacy of a "direct use" economy. In that one can take advantage of a God-given abundance: seeds and soil rather than the Mart, feet rather than cars, muscle and will in stead of gasoline, etc.
Other than those very, very few practicing a direct use economy, talking of God's abundance makes a pretty story, but has nothing to say directly to people's lives.
Post a Comment