Wouldn’t evangelizing all of these rich people be the answer?David Kuo, the Billy Graham to the rich? You are GOP connected right? And of course David, don’t neglect all of the filthy-rich Democrats stacking that side of congress as well.How many poor and barely-making-it Christians SEND their resources all over the world to help their fellow man? Many, many, many. How many hospitals and universities were built “by” Christians? So many.And notice David, that as those schools go secular, like some kind of moral-carcinogen spreading through them, that the divide between the haves and the nave-nots is growing. So many in the evangelical community put their money where their heart is. Test that. How many filthy rich people work Salvation Army kettles outside the remaining stores that allow the Salvation Army a place to raise money for the poor and needy?(Think about not shopping at Target stores the next time you think this through. Target has no place for the Salvation Army.) Sooner or later David, as you go from icon to leader to role model, you will have to preach the entire Gospel. I hope you have a pillow that will comfot your backside as you are pushed down. Don’t think that I do not applaud your efforts, I do, but railing against James Dobson and Focus On The Family, will not garner any flock that will stand the testing of it.Faith-based groups showed their worth during Katrina. The Christians came through when the secular world wallowed in finger pointing. You have too many progressives standing sand deep all around you. Their idea of helping the poor is condoms, concessions and apathy. Hardly anything Gospel-like.I will pray that when you have turned away from the swaying in the wind associates flocking to your “get the GOP” message – and that is ONLY what they are hearing – that YOU David Kuo, “will feed the sheep.” Too.

I wonder what the wealth distribution was in Jesus’ time. This is not a new problem. Our Lord declared the poor would always be with us. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t help the poor, but income redistribution? Like Mugage, for instance?

“Income redistribution”, better know as tax, simply create an opportunity for corruption in government and generates resentment. And, since the rich are rich, they tend to find or create ways to avoid the taxation, and the burden then falls on the middle class. However, causes could do a better job of creating awareness. Google provides a platform for distribution of free videos; an outreach can create a well thought-out and well produced video, hype it and people will watch it on Google or Yahoo or YouTube. Organizations such as Doctors without Borders do a good job of educating and pulling at the emotional purse strings. And definately, people can give much, much more — and they’d be surprised how far so little goes especially toward causes such as fighting hunger. I once saw a chart showing how far, say $100 goes – you should post something like that. It doesn’t take billions to make a difference (though it helps). Also, people who have an audience can write books — oh, wait: you did that. Cudos

Obviously the point about wealth distribution isn’t about personal charity or the lack thereof in the rich countries– it’s about complex structural problems that perpetuate international imbalance. If you read the fine print of Bush’s ‘free trader’ remarks, that’s what he thinks free trade helps to correct. He may be wrong, but that’s the idea. Cato Institute has dozens of good white papers on this at their website for anyone interested. So talking about how many barely-making it Christians (or Muslims, or Buddhists, or hell-bound secular humanists) toss a buck into the Salvation Army kettle is irrelevant. Donny would like all ills to be caused by secularism, to wit: “as those schools go secular, like some kind of moral-carcinogen spreading through them, that the divide between the haves and the nave-nots is growing.” Of course that statement is (not to put too fine a point on it) pretty idiotic. Go back to a point when all of education was religious– say 15th century France or 18th century England– and you’ll find the gap between rich and poor a yawning chasm hardly conceivable today. In America, the spread of public, secular institutions of higher learning such as land grant colleges tracks very nicely with impressive improvements in economic welfare. (Not that I think the one causes the other…both are the result of an optimistic and liberal view of human potential that swept America after the Civil War.) David raises a large and important point about economic justice and the welfare of mankind in an international policy sense. Donny counters with a small-minded and ill-informed screed about where Salvation Army kettles are allowed. Donny, you’re looking through the wrong end of the telescope. The world of ideas is not as small, nor as simple-minded, as all that.

ForresterFootnotes: Hint– Read original post before replying.The problem raised in David’s post is not income redistribution within a single country (which might possibly be addressed with tax & welfare measures), but rather vast inequality in economic welfare globally. David does not suggest a solution. He does not(pace Donny) suggest that everyone ought to toss more money in the Salvation Army kettle, or that we tax America’s rich to feed the poor of Haiti. He raises the question and says this is something Jesus would care about. The idea that charity of one sort or another is the only, or the best, solution to this enormous problem suggests to me a shocking poverty of imagination.

The article below finds that the richest 2% of adults own more than half the world’s wealth. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,11069-2488836,00.html Anyway, I find it telling that U.S. evangelicals have been known to use Jesus as an excuse for justifying such corruption.Of course the material, lived realities of Jesus’ own life must be deleted from the conversation. Oh, and the decentralized communitarian social & economic governance system of Jesus’ 1st century followers? Certainly off limits in the conversation. Funny how quickly Jesus and his legacy vanishes when it comes time to talk about mammon. Evangelicals have some explaining to do.

I’ll point out one skew factor in the international wealth comparisons– which is the market value of the primary residence. If this is included, which it would seem to be, homeowners in high real estate value areas (Japan, say) will seem to be much better off than people in lower real estate value areas (Brazil, say) but may have much less real disposable income. Of course, real estate is genuine wealth, so excluding it would be questionable, but we all know that it is possible to have a $500,000 house and not “feel” very rich in terms of day to day expenditures.

Notice Matthew 25: 31-46 is about helping the needy, not taking anything away from the wealthy. I’m sure there are plenty of people who fail to help others while focused on building and maintaining their individual wealth, but if everyone of the needy were cared for, wealth is not the same problem as when it’s a symptom of indifference to others.

David, Doesn’t Jesus belong to the top 2%? He owns (by proxy) all Vatican’s riches. A.Lex

Tenoch, Do a little research at your local Churches. Those evangelicals are driving used cars. Some, are very old. They drive those cars to homes where property taxes are like a death sentence carried out slowly.Greed and materialism is consuming American minds and bodies, literally, but the greed is not coming from evangelical Churches or the worshippers who struggle there. Secularism is not and does not help the poor. It just keeps Marxists employed at our colleges and universities, teaching the young how to believe like secularists and act like elitists.

David: the richest two per cent of adults own more than 50 per cent of the world s assets while the poorest half hold only 1 per cent of wealth… Republican: So what’s the problem?