How can anyone honestly oppose the American Judeo-Christian Capitalist model?

No, thank you for the effort.....but I was looking for verses in the new testament that espouse capitalism over collectivism.

 

christmas.

 

False. The sociopolitical and socioeconomic ramifications of Judeo-Christianity’s moral system of thought as applied to secular/civil government are not collectivistic at all. You're confounding the communal organization of the early, First Century church, thusly organized at first out of necessity, with the ultimate imperatives of growth and outreach. The early settlers of America soon discovered that communalism does not and cannot work on a large scale for long. They abandoned it, rediscovered the bedrock principle of individually owned property under God asserted from the Old Testament on . . . and the rest is history.

It is no accident that bible-believing Christians are among the most stanch defenders of free enterprise in America.

 

christmas

 

Ya know.......not like anybody asked.....but...

It seems as though the OP has come up with a concept, and now they're working backwards to shoe horn all kinds of nearly irrelevant stuff into it support it.

Normally you accumulate evidence and data to support something, then present it.

 

Then honestly, we are doomed, unless we can somehow go back to being stupid and ignorant.

 

Stonehenge FTW

 

Hello!........(tink tink tink).........hello (echo echo echo)

(banging on pipes with wrench)........hello............

How come everybody vanished when I wanted to see bible verses from the new testement that espouse capitalism?....must just be a coincidence....

 

This is true. They've been pretty significant in Afghanistan.

 

They have a thick blue line/block reputation too when just a few are set between guerrilla forces. Canada is a top tier country all around. Except healthcare wait times.

 

Sure, but again, if you look at the Enlightenment period as a whole and at the Founding Fathers as well, you can see where Greco-Roman principles played a bigger part for things like advocacy for representative government.

For most of its history, Christianity has been more supportive of feudalism.

 

Yes trade predates but if the West was very different what other civilization might it have resembled? Which of those countries/ civilizations has our freedoms, laws (property rights important here), values people equally ect or one that spawned capitalism as we did? We may have ended up under Islam or some other oppressive system like much of the world. Good luck having our free, capitalist system then. All the ingredients needed to be there, from freedoms, law, property rights, health, education, work ethic and so on. For mine its hard to assume we'd be anything even like what we are today when we look at what the rest of the world was. Below is a book review that covers some of these points pretty well imo (save me all the typing ).

No doubt the Romans and Greeks were into science, architecture ect so id certainly agree we were always headed in a direction to be advanced civilization and without them we wouldn't be here either. Im thank full for that too. I just dont assume we'd be here with our values that made Western Civilization with many of the important ingredients missing.

 

Their healthcare system's problem is a lack of private competition.

If they had France's system, they'd be doing great.

 

One of the main reasons we evolved into the level of freedom we now have is the separation of church and state. Secularization of government is vital to designing any free society.

While some of our values could be seen as Christian, it took quite some time for people to alter their interpretations of the role of religion in government in order to get where we are today.

When we look at things like the Catholic Inquisition or the various Protestant witch hunts, that shows the danger of uniting religion and government. It's no different from the dangers of Islamism.

So, I would argue secular influence is actually a much greater contributor to civil liberties in the West than Christianity.

 

Why not just go all private and voucher medical health insurance for people who can't afford it? Or for everyone if they want to go that route?

 

Vouchers with medical service would be a rather expensive route.

And we've already seen what our system has done with the private route. Oligopolies develop in local areas, which leads to price collusion.

Healthcare isn't a normal good, because if you choose to abstain from it, it can often lead to death or a greatly decreased quality of life. As a result, producers have all the power in the market.

With most goods and services, there's more of a balance of power. Producers compete with each other for customers, and consumers have to weigh the option of entering the market vs. choosing not to purchase the good or service.

With healthcare, there's not much of a choice for the consumer other than pay up or suffer.

This is why prices have to be handled differently.

 

What do you think about a public utility model, hospitals operated by contract with local municipalities. Other care fully privatized. Most big care costs come at hospitals and public utility models are good at efficient prices and fixing the price collusion issue. It also removes the insurance layer. No treatment denied unless too small sort of system. It is to the left of what I like, but it sounded interesting to me.

 

I would definitely support that over our current system.

 

I feel like you could fix malpractice that way too. Cap damages because it is at the county level, but no more sealed settlements. Lets get the bad doctors out and keep pressure off the good ones. Doctors would still get paid well, like energy professionals, just profits wil be set and the only incentive would be to stay in business with good results. Healthcare management teams removed etc..

Me I still prefer vouchers for those who can't afford insurance, loosen up the regs and call it a day.

 

What makes you think that? The Catholic Church (which was a very powerful political institution that just used religion as an excuse to gain power for themselves) during medieval times supported feudalism, not Christianity itself.

 

Well, maybe I should clarify. Official institutions of Christianity were more supportive of feudalism.

Of course, if we're talking about Christ himself, he was basically a socialist.

 

I am not a utilitarian, so to borrow your metaphor I do not judge a tree by the fruit that is bears. And even if I were, I am not sure it would be a good idea to judge systems that way since it would start out our rational search for the best social order by irrationally ruling out any order that has not yet been invented or implemented under a broad number of different circumstances so as to reveal some of their potential outcomes. That is to say, you have essentially asked of us to name a rightist order preferable to the one favored by conservative folk in the United States.

To step beyond those restraints, I do have an alternative but cannot argue effectively on its behalf on the terms you laid forth since, at least so far as I am aware, an order of the type I advocate for has never before existed. Some of its more prominent features would include:

- Constitutional republicanism, with constitutional conventions convened on a scheduled basis

- Federalism, with federal powers strictly limited and focused upon the upkeep of social rights

- Market socialism, with cooperativization and economic policies mostly akin to ordoliberalism

- Egalitarian shift in income distribution through workplace democracy, not state intervention

- A citizenship/denizenship duality enabling folks to opt out of taxation and pay their own way

- Five branches of government - adding one for workers' interests and another for academia

- Replacement of the President/executive with a Presidium wielding less concentrated power

- Secular government with the People - not any God or Creator - as its sovereign and master

- Greater decentralization of authority and less burdensome regulation on trade and lifestyles

- Foreign and domestic aims focused upon individual freedom and access to the "good life"

Respectfully, I'd dub this an alternative of Liberal-Individualist Socialism to your Judeo-Christian Capitalism.

 

Well obviously I'd take you out before you could even formulate a plan, but sure.

 

internet tough guys are silly

 

Then you'd get something like military care. They hand you motrin for everything and tell you to get back to work. Of course, most of the military medical personal I dealt with weren't especially ecstatic about their job, either, and that makes a huge difference in the kind of service you get.