RSS
More Feeds












God's Politics

A Different Economic Measure: Quality of Life and an Economic Bill of Rights

by Mary Nelson 12-01-2008

I’m tired of all the frantic talk about how much or little consumers are spending over this Holiday time. Something’s wrong with an economy based on consumer spending, with kids thinking the measure of parents’ love is the gifts they get. We need to figure out a new kind of gauge of well-being, of quality of life, not only for individuals in families, but for communities as well. Studies share that people who are rich in relationships, who are involved in sharing beyond themselves, live longer and have a higher quality of life. A recent radio show shared ways to make this Holiday time special for kids … doing things with them, together volunteering in homeless shelters or food programs, baking cookies and sharing them with a homeless shelter. A different measure.

I discovered President Franklin Roosevelt’s Economic Bill of Rights (1944) recently, while preparing a presentation on Economic Justice. I think we need to reclaim it for our times as well and judge success based on how well we live up to these rights.

We have to come to a clear realization of that fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. We have accepted a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all — regardless of station, race or creed. Among these are:

• The right to a useful and remunerative job.

• The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation.

• The right of every family to a decent home.

• The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health.

• The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident and unemployment.

• The right to a good education.

Mary NelsonMary Nelson is president emeritus of Bethel New Life, a faith-based community development corporation on the west side of Chicago. She is also a board member of Sojourners.

Categories: Economics
Share or bookmark this post:
  • email
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Mixx
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
advertisement


Comment Code of Conduct

I will express myself with civility, courtesy, and respect for every member of the Sojourners online community, especially toward those with whom I disagree—even if I feel disrespected by them. (Romans 12:17-21)

I will express my disagreements with other community members' ideas without insulting, mocking, or slandering them personally. (Matthew 5:22)

I will not exaggerate others' beliefs nor make unfounded prejudicial assumptions based on labels, categories, or stereotypes. I will always extend the benefit of the doubt. (Ephesians 4:29)

I will hold others accountable by clicking "report" on comments that violate these principles, based not on what ideas are expressed but on how they're expressed. (2 Thessalonians 3:13-15)

I understand that comments reported as abusive are reviewed by Sojourners staff and are subject to removal. Repeat offenders will be blocked from making further comments. (Proverbs 18:7)

  • neuro_nurse
    “The Church has rejected the totalitarian and atheistic ideologies associated in modern times with "communism" or "socialism." She has likewise refused to accept, in the practice of "capitalism," individualism and the absolute primacy of the law of the marketplace over human labor. Regulating the economy solely by centralized planning perverts the basis of social bonds; regulating it solely by the law of the marketplace fails social justice, for "there are many human needs which cannot be satisfied by the market." Reasonable regulation of the marketplace and economic initiatives, in keeping with a just hierarchy of values and a view to the common good, is to be commended.” Catechism of the Catholic Church 2425
  • seekingdisciple
    My two cents worth: FDR and his "new deal" did not provide for economic improvement in the USA. In fact, it made things worse. What bailed out the US was WWII followed by the boom of the 1950's. Further, his "bill of rights" is not capitalism at its best. Capitalism is what has made America great and until the US Government embraces true capitalism, the economy will suffer. Socialism is the not the answer despite the fact that this site likes to defend it.
  • jonabark
    I was incorrect. You say socialism is driven by envy which is sinful. A small difference and equally unprovable. To ascribe envy to the social systems you disapprove of is just a weak unsupported personal opinion.
  • No, I said that envy is equally as sinful as greed.
  • canucklehead
    Wasn't there a great American who once said, "Give me prosperity or give me death!" ??
  • jonabark
    Socialism is an attempt to manipulate the behavior of a society to do commendable things. But it's still control, and it is still exploitation, it is still manipulation, and it is still driven by envy, which is equally as sinful as pursuing greed.

    If you diagram this sentence you say Socialism (The subject) is ( the verb ) as sinful as greed .
    You may be talking past me but I am paying attention to what you say and pointing out that certain things you say fail to be historically and factually persuasive. No amount of history teachers or books will turn all the countries that have mixed socialist /free-market economies into places of impoverishment or violence . Because it just is not true to reality. Neither do all countries who embrace capitalism become more prosperous and raise the standard of living of its citizens. By posting comments here, you open those comments to response. I personally think you should allow this process to challenge you to make statements that you can support with evidence, and even to be open to rethinking some of the untested ideas you have absorbed.

    If my comments seem intense it is because I care about truth, about factualness, about accuracy. Partly I care because I see how much damage comes from what the Bible calls false witness. I do not think you are purposely false, but I do think you have inherited some ideas that need to be questioned. Part of why I come here is that it forces me to question, research and re evaluate what I think and why.
  • neuro_nurse
    "Sub-Saharan Africa is struggling because they don't have enough stable democracies in the region."

    How many democracies is enough? Can you tell me which African countries are democratic and which are autocratic?

    How long have any of the current states in sub-Saharan Africa, or in any part of Africa, existed?

    How much time have you personally spent in sub-Saharan Africa? How much have you read about sub-Saharan Africa?

    I’ve spent a total of two years in Africa so far. I’ve worked there, and I plan to go back. I hear a lot of people hand out “reasons” why Africa has all of the problems it does. Most of those people really don’t know much about African history or geography, its societies, its health problems, or its economic problems, nor do they seem the least bit interested in learning about Africa.

    Maybe you’re an exception.
  • DITE
    It has nothing to do with which climate zone we live in. Famines or floods can happen anywhere. Sub-Saharan Africa is struggling because they don't have enough stable democracies in the region. This makes it more difficult for them to get resources like drinking water.
  • neuro_nurse
    "We have been told for generations that we are running out of resources, but we never do."

    That’s easy for you to say, living in the temperate zone, but in sub-Saharan Africa and other parts of the tropics, there is a growing shortage of water.

    http://www.nrdc.org/international/summit/summit...
  • dlowen
    And all those who had believed were together and had all things in common; and they began selling their property and possessions and were sharing them with all, as anyone might have need.

    This isn't Karl Marx. It's Acts 2. Is the American church more American or God's church? If we believe in the American system of governance, then we should believe what the US Constitution tells us as it begins "We the people." Governmental power derives from the people, and the rights that Roosevelt identified are not given by the government, but rather to be recognized by the government as inherently existing. This is not "dependency," but rather a responsibility that the government owes to the people, who are ultimately responsible to one another as fellow citizens.
  • jeffp
    To suggest I think Jesus does not know what he is talking about is insulting and ends our conversation. I suggest you study this on your own and learn respect for others and the value of dialogue
  • Jonabark, I never said your outrage was wrong, I was merely pointing out what seemed to be the tenor of your writings. I also never said those countries were "sinful."

    Your perspective of history is undoubtedly shaped by the reading you do, the history teachers you had, and in part by your own biases. My perspective is probably shaped similarly. Our discussion won't take us very far because we're talking past each other.
  • erbe
    Economic security and independence seem too worldly to me. Seems like something an ad from a brokerage house or investment firm would direct to people thinking about their retirement. As if your real security could be provided by money or investments. And of course we need independence, from others and from God. Who wants to depend on others or God?
  • jonabark
    "As for a system promoting prosperity, a free society has always prospered more quickly and more thoroughly than a controlled society. That's a simple historical fact."
    xfree9

    Often that prosperity has benefitted one group at the expense of another. What are the free societies you speak of? The ones who murdered and disposessed native peoples of the Americas, taking their land, their food, their gold? The ones who sold opium to the Chinese and killed to enforce their free trade, the corporations who leave billions of dollars of ecological and health devastation in the form of oils spills, arsenic poisoning, toxic drinking water.

    If I saw the free market and private corporations and businessess solving these problems and bringing what you call freedom to more people maybe I would admire it more. But what i see is desperate measures to buy political power so they can evade the accountability for their crimes and mistakes and to allow them to continue to pollute, to exploit workers, to manipulate markets to their advantage, and yo bail themselves out with taxpayer money when they foul their own waters.
  • neuro_nurse
    DISCUS/GOD’S POLITICS MODERATOR

    A number of other people have commented that they are unable to respond to posts. I am adding my voice to that complaint. It usually occurs after the first time I click on “Show more comments…” at the bottom of the screen.

    Erbe,

    I really do not understand where you are going with your comments.

    I have a very clear understanding of what Christ is saying in the Gospels, and have a clear understanding of how Christ expects us to live our lives. You questions seem more than just tangential, they seem pointless to me.

    DITE: “Why don't you have faith in human nature when they are individuals, but you have faith in their human nature when they are part of the state?”

    BlueDeacon: “That's not necessarily true. But there's one word you overlook: Sin.”

    I will add that the individual generally lacks a motivating factor that the state has regarding providing for the welfare of the society: accountability.

    DITE: “First, I'm not against a basic government safety net for those that are incapable of work. But when the government provides "welfare" for the "underprivileged" it usually subsidizes poverty, discourages work, and encourages government dependency and unproductive behavior. The poor are helped by creating wealth and, in the long run, hurt by transferring it.”

    What do you suggest as an alternative?

    Jonabark- "Which of these rights are you so frightened of and why, eerbe, Kevin, Dite, xfree?"

    DITE: “All of them. Speaking just for myself, of course.”

    Does that include the right to a good education?

    I don’t have children, but I have never once complained that my tax dollars go towards public education.

    ando: “We have promoted democracy around the world, and I do think that for some people that world is a safer and better place to live.”

    I’m sorry, I believe the exact opposite is true.
  • jonabark
    You are far too willing to ascribe conditions to others. First envy then outrage. What is obvious to me is that your initial statement was challenged as dead wrong and now you are changing your tune to say countries who provide a social safety net are sinful. That is a much safer fantasy argument because it cannot be factually tested. It is all-purpose nonsense and reinforces my assertion that what you are saying about economics is based neither on history, biblical writings, or factual evidence , but is a religious belief. The Mormons believe that the Americas were settled by tribes from Israel called the Jaredites and Lamanites and Nephites and that Joe Smith read about them with magic glasses from the angel Moroni. Many Right wing Republican Evangelicals believe capitalism and the republican party are God's plan and "liberals" are "of the devil". The Masons belive their teachings are directly handed down from Solomon the wise. I regard all these ideas to be about the same in their connection to economic reality, historic reality, the teachings of Jesus, or any verifiable reality.
  • jonabark
    This is against individual wealth not community wealth, against stinginess not enjoyment of life's abundance.
  • Nathan Bedford
    And His own private jet.
  • ando
    I think the two sides are talking extremes. The one side believes in capitalism at all costs. No regulations. Total freedom. If some people get hurt in the process it is only because they are not able to adapt to new innovations. It's unclear how long America can sustain this high level of living. We've been around for well under 300 years, and there are signs that our consumption/lifestyle cannot keep on this pace, let alone the rest of the world.

    The other side is highly critical of the United States. Yet, the free marketers do have a point in that we have been a beacon for the rest of the world, and that many countries want to emulate us. We have promoted democracy around the world, and I do think that for some people that world is a safer and better place to live.

    That said, to much is given, much should be expected. We have the most fertile farmland in the world. Over 20 percent of the earth's fresh water supply. Abundant forest resources. I don't see how, with all our wealth and power, we cannot do more to aid the less fortunate of the world. No excuses. We have also not always wielded our power justly. We have benefitted at others' costs, both outside and inside the country.

    So, I believe it's a two-way street. But, alas, because of our stubborness and dogmatic viewpoints we will probably continue to talk past each other. Fortunately, the truth will set us free.
  • erbe
    What do you think the rich ought to do if Jesus says it will be harder for them to enter the kingdom of heaven than for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle?

    Wouldn't you think that comment is an incentive to get rid of your riches, as He told the rich young man to do?

    Or don't you think Jesus knows what He is talking about?
blog comments powered by Disqus
click here for comments tech support
advertise here
  • MOST VIEWED
  • MOST COMMENTED
  • MOST RECENT
advertise here
advertise here
advertise here
advertise here


HOME | SUBSCRIBE | DONATE | TAKE ACTION | MAGAZINE  
SOJOMAIL | BLOGS | MEDIA | EVENTS | RESOURCES | ABOUT US  
Sojourners | 3333 14th Street NW, Suite 200 | Washington, DC 20010  
Phone 202.328.8842 | Fax 202.328.8757 | sojourners@sojo.net  
Unless otherwise noted, all material © Sojourners 2008