The First Step in Economic Justice is Prudence

Dr. William R. Luckey counsels Catholics to practice prudence. Catholic News Agency chronicles his view here.

He observes the following:

In the Encyclical Centesimus Annus, the late Pope John Paul II bemoans the widespread consumerism in Western society. One of the reasons for this consumerism is that the society (i. e., the people around us) places great store on having things, and having them now. The result is that we exchange the money we make today for things today, not just food, clothes or out rent, but bigger stereos, cars we cannot afford, designer sunglasses and such. We frequently go into debt, meaning that we spend our future income, to buy these baubles now. It’s not that we are spending our future income on, let’s say, going to school, which will result in a higher income in the future. No. We are trading, as economists put it, future consumption for present consumption. When we need large amounts of money in the future for an operation, to send our children to college, to buy grandma a vacation or to provide ourselves with a decent retirement income, the money will not be there! One of the more socially detrimental results of this attitude is that those who have lived above their means and failed to accumulate money for the future will demand that the government cover their improvidence by social security programs, government financed college loans, government run retirement homes, government sponsored medical care, etc. But, and this is important, where does the government get the funds to give to the people who have a high time preference? The money is transferred from those who have a low time preference (those who have not spent themselves into massive debt) to those who have (those who spent their money on stereos, fancy cars, etc.). This is done by taxation—what economists call transfer payments. This, then, rewards those who think only in the present and even encourages others to tell themselves, “BAAAH!” I don’t have to put off consumption—the government will take care of me.” The politicians are all too glad to do this because they trade these entitlements for votes.

One of the sad things is that many Catholic clerics encourage this behavior. They incorrectly blame the free market and business for “making” people materialistic and having a high time preference, and at the same time demand that the government extend the social welfare state, which encourages that very thing. No true Christian doubts the value of a government “safety net” as a last resort for those upon whom hard times have fallen. But the virtue of charity is a virtue possessed by individual people. Transfer payments are not the virtue of charity, and can make people worse off.

Now, how's a Fool to square his counsel of spending future income in the future with today's Gospel (Luke 12:13-21):

Someone in the crowd said to Jesus,
“Teacher, tell my brother to share the inheritance with me.”
He replied to him,
“Friend, who appointed me as your judge and arbitrator?”
Then he said to the crowd,
“Take care to guard against all greed,
for though one may be rich,
one’s life does not consist of possessions.”

Then he told them a parable.
“There was a rich man whose land produced a bountiful harvest.
He asked himself, ‘What shall I do,
for I do not have space to store my harvest?’
And he said, ‘This is what I shall do:
I shall tear down my barns and build larger ones.
There I shall store all my grain and other goods
and I shall say to myself, “Now as for you,
you have so many good things stored up for many years,
rest, eat, drink, be merry!”’
But God said to him,
‘You fool, this night your life will be demanded of you;
and the things you have prepared, to whom will they belong?’
Thus will it be for the one who stores up treasure for himself
but is not rich in what matters to God.”

Seems like a contradiction, doesn't it?

It's not.

Dr. Luckey would probably point out that prudently restraining our spending ensures our capacity to better tend our needs and those of our neighbor. If we secure our future through proper investment, we won't require the Nanny State to take care of us through subsidizing our lack of judgement. This frees the government to more properly establish a safety net for those that truly need help through no fault of their own. Plus, the government will have one less person/family for which it must remove the fruits of another person/family's labor in order to care for.

As to how we may use this future income? Well, that's where Monsignor Clark offers some counsel of his own:

The rich man in the gospel was caught in that trap. His definition of success was very simply 'more.' So, when the harvest exceeded all his expectations, his response was to tear down his barns and build bigger ones to hold 'more.' On the one hand that seems so logical, but on the other, why tear down the barns, why not share the excess which he obviously didn't need and certainly hadn't expected?

This man was known as rich, but in fact he was poor, because he didn't know how to make the most of God's gifts. He didn't know that the greatest joy in having something is in being able to share it or even give it away. That's God-like joy, and it's the joy that God wants us to grow accustomed to now, because that kind of sharing of life is what heaven is all about.

Dr. Luckey urges us to not confuse the enablement of imprudence with economic justice. Monsignor Clark exorts us to recall that the capacity to share is the foretaste of the joy of heaven. Together, their guidance reassures us Fools of certain, simple truths.

We do not require a redistributionist state to enact compassion in our name. We are free agents, endowed with the wisdom, fortitude, temperance and prudence to make the most appropriate decisions regarding our financial lives. Including how to share what we acquire.