A British Christian libertarian blog on why canceling the debt is questionable from a Christian perspective:
“Should Christians be concerned about this [the levels of debt contracted by the government]? One angle on this is the fact that in the teaching of Jesus, sin is often compared with debt. Two obvious examples are the parable of the unforgiving servant (Matthew 18:23-35), and the fact that in the Lord’s Prayer as found in Matthew’s gospel, disciples are taught to pray “and forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors.” (Matthew 6:12) In other words, there is a correspondence between sin and debt.
Many may consider sin not to be serious, but the Christian does. I am reminded of the words of Anselm of Canterbury, addressing Boso in Cur Deus Homo (Book 1, chapter 21) “You have not yet considered what a heavy weight sin is.”
If sin is serious and Jesus compares sin to debt, surely it follows that for Christians, debt is serious as well. And if that is so, government borrowing which will saddle our country with huge levels of debt, possibly for decades, is serious.
Yes, it is true that in the Old Testament, there was provision for the cancellation of debt every 50 years in the Jubilee, but to argue that such a provision means that one of the world’s wealthiest nations (that has incurred its debts by living beyond its means) should have its slate wiped clean is simply ridiculous.
Perhaps the message for Christians who are not horrified by the levels of debt that we are incurring is: “You have not yet considered what a heavy weight debt is.”
I believe the proper way to retire the federal debt is to liquidate federal resources in a judicious and otherwise prudent manner as to protect value. If America loses it’s national parks to various enterprises, at the extreme, they have nobody to blame but themselves.
I do not, however bind federal debts to individual obligations since a great many individuals had no participation in the distribution…in this respect, a self-directed income tax would be a nice idea to find out who supports what (as long as it provided a provision to refuse everthing but the most essential and basic legal funtions.
The banking industry PACKED the U.S. Constitutional convention and, for all practical purposes, took over the US Federal government in 1787; we’ve all been putting money into their pockets ever since, the ripoff getting more and more blatant lately, but not really any different. Consequently, the U.S. “national debt” should be considered “odious” (see “odious debt” on wikipedia) and due and payable by the government administrators and the owners of the banking industry and its myriad “virtual subsidiary” corporations (or their heirs) for whose benefit the debt was created.
Jeff –
I wish…
a self -directed income tax..
that would take common sense – think there’s any left?
think you’d find too much public resistance to public works of any kind being liquidated to enterprises…especially if they were foreign..
I think first and foremost, the major banks need to be prosecuted for racketeering and
then let’s see what happens
Alan –
I hope you don’t think I disagree with you on that.
If there was a way to get the banking industry to pay for it I would.
Retroactively.
I’d like to confiscate the income of everyone involved in the banking cartel, except perhaps the peons at the bottom who probably aren’t culpable and do it for the last 15 years. That would be a start.
Then any industries and individuals who profited indirectly from the racket – which would include the real estate industry, speculators, and a lot of homeowners…
now we’re talking money
Lila,
That was the idea of the French Revolution, which didn’t work out too well unless you happen to be a fan of Napoleon (which I am, but only in a perverse manner). While not a christian, I do understand and accept the principle of absolution, and it is that which will have to accompany a return to national sanity.
Besides, losing power is almost punishment enough, right?
Alan, I agree…sorta. Honoring debt obligations to Spain and France was the honorable thing to do, regardless of whether banks benefitted from it or not. Also, if the US was controlled by a financial oligarchy from the start, how do you explain the various episodes of free banking? (which I wholeheartedly support, btw)…
Jeff –
Absolution comes after repentence..
non human entities can’t receive one or feel the other and its obviously not for individuals who not only don’t repent but think they’re darn right..
Justice is also a part of christianity
The French revolution was indiscriminate
I’m not interested in confiscating the wealth of people who had nothing to do with this..
I am interested in confiscating it from the people who did..
and I am not interested in redistributing it to the masses but only to people who were victimized by the racket..if that were possible.
That said, self defense is not unjust for individuals or masses.
“Absolution comes after repentence.” I have heard that said, but once a very long time ago an elementary school teacher took myself and another kid to see Billy Graham. At the end of his presentation, Graham invited people to come forward whereupon he would forgive their portfolio of acquired sins. My colleague dared me to go and I accepted the challenge.
Thus at the age of 11, I was forgiven, although I was neither asked, nor volunteered any details of past misdeeds. 🙂
Well, God bless Billy Graham
and eleven year olds I am sure have a special spot in the whole scheme.
So no offense, but I’m not convinced.
I recall Jesus (just as good an authority as Billy Graham) said “not one jot or tittle of the law shall pass away”…
He also said you had to “believe on him” – which I take to be rather more than idle lip service….
(see also “these people draw nigh me to me with their lips but their hearts are far away from me”)
but acting in specific ways..
Sorry for deluging you with quotes but if I am a heretic, I am a heretic who has “searched the scriptures”…
Lila said:”I am not interested in redistributing it to the masses but only to people who were victimized by the racket”.
As I’ve said elsewhere “Fault for the credit scam lies not with the banks and borrowers who lost their shirts and homes, but with our predecessors for allowing this SYSTEM to become and remain law, and with ourselves for not getting rid of it earlier.”
As we learned in Quality Improvement Process training, the problem is always THE SYSTEM, never the people. People are always going to be people, a good system needs to account for their failings. Not to mention that everyone is ONLY playing the cards they were dealt at birth: no one is responsible for having been born greedy or stupid…or both.
The people who profitted by the liar loans (and the income-challenged who hoped to) were merely responding to the incentives that our system generously offers to the easily-led-astray. Choosing to punish rather than fix the system seems to me to be a lazy way to do things, precisely the type of activity that created this mess.
So on second thought (and this is why I’m here: to have second thoughts in order to argue with myself about the message I’m going to be taking to the street), I’m with Jesus: turn the other cheek.
In terms of getting the money back, if we charge market participants a small, flat percentage, automatically-collected “infrastructure maintenance fee” (which, like inflation, would be a de facto tax on wealth) in place of all income-based taxation, then over time the “ill-gotten gains” will get recovered.
Would be easier if the debt was all internal, but since it’s foreign, the options are very limited. China is not going to just wipe the slate clean.
However we solve it, we must never again get caught in such an unhealthy and unholy dance with another nation again. Americans are addicts to flat screen TVs, China is the supplier and Walmart the pusher. So for the last 15 years, we gobble all the goods we can, and save at 0% rate. The Chinese however, save at a 30% rate. So then being flush with cash, they just lend it back to us to buy more of their products. And so we;ve been caught in this ridiculous dance with them the last 10 or 15 years. Now we’ve gone bust, and they’re standing there holding a bunch of IOUs. They’re cared stiff that we might try and inflate our way out of it by printing up money, the old Zimbabwe trick. The ol’ third world trick of inflating your way out of dent by making your currency worthless. It really is a mess.
As far as relieving debt internally, debt forgiveness is my desired solution. However this generates a lot of envy in society for those who had to pay. The key to overcoming this envy, if no contact has been broken, but someone is peeved simply because they see someone getting a good deal they didn’t get, is Matthew 20:1-16.