In a shameless ploy for sympathy, I’ll warn you that I’m writing this blog entry while under the effects of delicious, delicious Darvocet. Since my surgery on Tuesday, I’ve been eating it like it was Pez.
Recently I read an article about how the USA may be past the point where we can pay off the national debt. Not exactly cheerful reading, but I don’t think we need things to cheer us up right now. I think we need to take a serious look at how we approach finances, debt, and budgeting – both personally and nationally.
There is a strong ethic in Hellenismos that warns people against racking up debt or spending money recklessly. In ancient times, a main priority was to guard the financial well being of your oikos. The Delphic Maxims told people to Govern Your Expenses/Don’t Fall Into Debt, Guard What Is Yours, Work For What You Can Own. The reason for this was pretty straight forward – a household in debt could be a threat to the entire well-being of the community. The onus was placed on the household to be financially stable and that in turn, created a stable society.
If you want to think of a modern analogy, think of the safety briefing you get at the beginning of each flight. The Flight Attendant tells you to first put your mask on yourself before you assist someone else.
A family who had squandered away their money or had fallen into debt would be unable to make offerings or provide sacrifices to the Gods for the well being of their family and the community. They could not Help Your Friends or Give What You Have, two more Maxims that direct a person to help friends and supplicants. A friend in need was never to be refused aid. Likewise a supplicant was not only never to be turned away, but was to be treated with respect while you helped them. These were sacred concepts – ikesia, xenia, and philoxenia. To refuse to fulfill these requests would be to go against Divine Law and led to amertia (error) and miasma (pollution) for the one who receives and then ignores the petition. That, in turn, could lead to some level of unpleasantness as Nemesis worked to correct the natural order. A financially unstable household, unable to perform its civic, moral, and religious duties, put the entire community at risk.
Right now we are all paying a price for how we have approached finances. I do believe that Nemesis is at work, trying to bring back equilibrium. On an individual and national level we spend far more than we earn, we spend foolishly, we rush to incur debt. It appears, on an individual level, because of the painful times we are going through we are changing our behavior towards money. I wish that were true on a national level.
Since coming to Hellenismos I had been changing my views on debt to be more in line with the Delphic Maxims. The recent recession has only firmed my belief that perhaps these guys from long ago knew a thing or two. My husband and I have been working to decrease our debt while still making a good income. A firm financial base will allow us to perform our civic and (my) religious duties. My most fervent goal is to help Hellenion build a public Temple.
This is not a screed against welfare or against any specific government funding programs. I do think we have placed, and continue to place, our country at risk by spending too much, too foolishly. I believe the first place to cut back is in the area of our foreign expenditures – this includes the current wars we are fighting. Nor am I making value judgments on those persons who are struggling to just survive right now. It is merely my wandering mind thinking about how my religion has affected my views on finances and idle wishing that we could all look at and manage debt a bit differently. Especially our elected officials.
My questions for all of you: does religion affect your views on money/finances/debt/budgeting? How do you feel about the national debt?
I am the exact opposite of the average debtor. I hate owing anyone anything, to the extent that I often refuse help even when I need it. Yet I give. I give without really wanting or expecting anything in return.
I give, and I remain within my means, because I don’t want to feel that I am robbing others in order to live.
Priorities.
I haven’t owned a car that I didn’t buy outright with cash since about 1999, and I bought my house through a land contract. It’s nice not having to worry about someone coming and taking your car or house away because you didn’t make a payment on time.
And hell, now is the best time for individuals to get away from debt, especially debt coming in at high interest from faceless corporations many miles away from you. I mean, take your housing situation as an example. There are houses for sale on my street that I could’ve bought with my tax refund. Seriously. I considered doing it just for the hell of it. And there are _nice_ houses in my town for $10k. Plus, the gov’t will give you 10% of that back to you if this is your first house. Plus, if you want a more expensive house, right now many owners are much more interested than before in things like “owner-financing” and “land contracts.” With the state of the economy, most sellers can’t afford to hope that everyone can get a bank mortgage.
Then there’s your car situation. Do you really need a new car? Do you really need TWO new cars? Ask yourself this: Is a new car worth to you the amount you pay in payments & insurance. If you are in your car a lot, then maybe it is. But for the price of 1 month’s car payment ($500-$600), you can probably find a 1980s Mercedes Benz diesel car that gets 30+mpg and has way more style than some plastic piece of garbage that will fall apart at 100k miles. (MB diesels usually pass the 300k mark with little maintenance…I should know – I’ve owned 3 of them.)
It all really comes down to priorities. I’d rather drive around in an old, but dependable, car…then come home and watch Manchester United beat West Ham (like a BOSS) in HD on my big-ass flat screen. Trust me, I get a lot more use out of the TV than I do the car…and I’m not making payments on it.
Like I said: Priorities.
And in regards to macro-political issues: Again…priorities… We could pay for health-care reform and other social issues a lot more easily if we weren’t in Iraq, or bailing out mismanaged corporations. Health-care is my flat-screen TV, and I bet a lot more Americans will get more use out of money spent there than we will out of billions sent to Iraq…or to the CEOs of some financial institution’s bonuses.
Priorities.
I don’t even own a credit card and wouldn’t take one if you gave it to me. What really worries me is that our largest debt holder, to the tune of over 800 billions dollars the last ime I checked is China.
It was China, but China sold off a good chunk of our bonds…its now Japan at approx. 730 Billion
(salutes)
Excellent post!
I feel that our current (and it’s been building for years and years) economic situation has been fed by individual and corporate attitudes toward credit and projected income or profit. Buying (and living) on credit has enabled people to suspend responsibility and gain a false sense of security. Credit company advertising and banks have helped create a culture where it’s more respectable to live in constant debt and keep up with the Joneses than to live within your means and not care whether you’re “with it” or “on top of the heap”. It’s a lack of comprehension of resources not being infinite, and when you get a mindset like that on the huge level of an entire government, it’s a huge mess that is not going to be an easy or fast clean up.
The only reason I even have a credit card is because you can’t get a car or house anymore without a good credit score.
I only ever buy things with it that I know I’ll be able to pay off by the end of the month, so I can keep my score high. Even then I only use my credit card about once a year because it makes me feel dirty to use it.
You and the others on here who only use credit cards as score builders or for emergency situations, and not “instant money” sources are being mindful of that finite resources thing I was talking about. And there are disasters that can’t be helped by any reasonable amount of responsibility or foresight, where you do what you have to. It’s the people who think of credit as a bottomless pit that create problems, and our government is way over quota on them. Maybe you guys could start sneezing on people, and see if your mindset is contagious? ;0)
“Wow, did you guys join the Washington protest march?”
“No, we just took the capitol tour and went around coughing on everything.”
Even as a responsible user, you may wanna look into the new laws that went into effect last week, and how credit card companies are retaliating against their loss of profit. I understand some are creating new definitions of “inactivity” and initiating higher fees for not using cards often, and some may have begun charging interest the day of purchase. They are now required to notify you 45 (?) days before they hike your interest rate, but some companies apparently got rate hikes in before the law went into effect.
NPR has pretty good coverage:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=123950403
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=123909483
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124004510
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=123374278
I will freely admit that I am rather in debt, and I hate it. Absolutely despise it. Working as best I can to get rid of all of our credit cards, and the things we’ve bought with it, with the exception of the house, were totally not worth the hassle.
The only thing is, and this bothers me quite a lot, a lot of things like booking hotel rooms, buying things off the internet, etc all require credit cards – how is one to get rid of them completely and still be able to do certain necessary tasks? (And before you ask, yes, those two things are necessary – I travel a lot for work). Certain employers require credit checks before offering employment, how ridiculous is that?!
Eran stated, “how is one to get rid of them completely and still be able to do certain necessary tasks?”
The only real problems that I have, where a Visa Check Card won’t work…is with car rentals. (Luckily, I don’t do that often.) I keep a credit card around now, for things like that, but for the most part, a check card solves all of those problems for me.
“The only real problems that I have, where a Visa Check Card won’t work…is with car rentals.”
I’ve been able to rent a car, here and in the UK, with a Mastercard debit card, but we have a large retail chain here that won’t take MC debit or regular credit cards, but will take Visa. Never been able to get a reason for that beyond “it’s our policy” . Does anybody know if there’s a practical reason for a business to pick and choose? I’ve always taken anything I could get a confirmation code for.
Different cards take different fees or percentage of the purchase price from the company you are buying something from as their cut. VISA takes the least.
“Does anybody know if there’s a practical reason for a business to pick and choose?”
Very few merchants are large enough to deal directly with credit cards,. Instead, they go through an intermediary (“merchant accounts”). Depending on who they go through, the company they deal with may or may not accept V/MC/AE. It’s usually questions of how much they get charged by the middleman in general, how much they get charged for each type of card, what their monthly volume is, and how good their (the merchant, not the customer) credit worthiness is.
Read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchant_account and Google “merchant account” for details; there are tens of thousands of them out there and a review of what they charge (and how they charge) the merchants you deal with may give you a better appreciation for what the merchants go through.
“Does anybody know if there’s a practical reason for a business to pick and choose?”
There are a very practical reason.
Merchants don’t deal directly (unless they are very, very large), they go through intermediaries (“merchant accounts”). See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchant_account for background.
There are tens of thousands of companies offering merchant accounts. Some accept certain cards and not others, which could be the reason you occasionally have a problem. Some charge differently depending on which card and the merchant’s monthly volume.
A merchant will choose a merchant account which balances the convenience to their customers, the convenience to them, and the charges and fees they face (see the “Rates and Fees” section of the wikipedia article cited above for the bewildering mix of fees a merchant can have to pay for the privilege of taking credit cards).
Overall, these credit card fees can easily amount to several percent of each charge plus initial capital investment (e.g., terminals and application fees) and flat monthly fees. Accepting credit cards is not cheap to a merchant.
“VISA takes the least.”
You may be referring to the “interchange fee” (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interchange_fee). This changes from time to time and, although a significant amount of the total fees, does not represent all the cost to the merchant. The actual costs to the merchant will depend on their merchant account contract and include lots of other fees and charges.
“Certain employers require credit checks before offering employment, how ridiculous is that?!”
Seriously! That exact attitude is part of what that long rant I posted under Two Wolves & a lamb was about. The rationale according to a friend of mine who’s in HR is that people with bad credit make bad choices, and therefore make bad employees.
I don’t do credit cards, and never have. I’ve had jobs refuse to believe that when they run a credit check, and decide I must be falsifying my name and other info somehow. If you’re in debt and trying to get a job, you’re probably trying to fix that problem. How are you supposed to improve your credit if you can’t generate cash flow?
That and people who are under severe financial strain may not be able to concentrate on work. It’s the same reason that employers don’t like to hire parents of special needs kids and other stressful life situations.
I’ve heard that argument too – and I feel it’s a cop-out if you’re dealing with someone who can demonstrate a will and ability to solve problems. I’ve also never figured out this peculiar idea that people stop living when a difficulty arises.
Everybody is going to have upsets, obstacles, and inconveniences in life. Character is coping with those difficulties to the best of your ability, and teamwork is getting the job done even if you have to take turns taking up each other’s slack, or adapting procedure for people who are willing to get the work done, but may not be able to in the proscribed way.
If we roll toward eliminating everyone who might be at risk for something that could interfere with daily life focus (and I see attitudes like that) we begin resembling the fictional society in “Gattaca”, where people are evaluated on the basis of their genetic disposition to a percentage probability of various health conditions, regardless of whether they’ve shown any signs of developing them or not.
Yep. That’s why I laugh so hard at Dilbert cartoon showing the evil HR manager as Catbert.
Sorry to any HR people out there, I know you take lots of crap.
LOL – I have a buddy (been in HR for 16 years) who has a Catbert plushie. She sewed velcro all over him so she can throw him against the wall of her cubicle and he’ll stick. She enjoys symbolism that can multi-task.
I am an employer – for a staffing company actually. Typically the only companies that run credit checks are ones that deal heavily with financial information or ones where the employee will have access to personal and confidential information such as social security numbers. For instance, we work with a client that conducts pre-employment background screenings and they required a credit check. I am relieved to know that they vet those people to the best of their ability before they have access to my personal information.
However, most companies that do run credit checks aren’t looking at the small stuff. If you have a little debt it is likely never going to be a problem in this scenario. Even if you have big debt in many cases.
Of the ones I’ve encountered, I could only get feedback for two. One for a position as an office and shopping center plant maintenance person, and one for a receptionist position at a car dealership. A hiring manager and the employee who referred me both told me all they do is check your score. Low score = person who has poor judgment and is a theft risk. Neither of them believed that I did not have any credit cards when my report came up as “not enough data to generate score”, which is what happens any time I’m run. It’s taken as gospel that “everyone who’s anyone has credit cards”, and if you don’t, it can only be because no one will give you one. It’s not policy or effective use of time to ask questions; most of them have a large stack of other people they can interview.
This is why I feel the pervasiveness of credit is as much a social standing issue as a financial one, but for the wrong reasons.
I think it is good to have a credit card to establish credit. I only use my card for what I can afford with cash and pay it off each month.
As Byron said, most Internet sites will accept a debit card. Just put it in like any credit card, and it generally works. The money is automatically deducted from your account, just like any debit purchase.
As for employment credit checks, the ONLY place I see such a thing as necessary is for accountancy or perhaps head of financing of a corporation. People who deal with a company’s money should be responsible with their own. People who just want a job and don’t have a credit card, on the other hand, shouldn’t be penalized for not buying into the old, tired “buy, buy, buy” mentality.
This is a great post. Thanks for sharing and you know I love the history. I am structuring my life to be as self sufficient as possible and that is very much a part of my overall spiritual outlook. That being said, the number one topic to me in politics is fiscal responsibility, but not at the expense of important social issues. It is comforting to know there are others who understand that debt is about personal responsiblity.
[process note – I’m using primarily Wikipedia as a quick, convenient source of reasonably reliable data. If you don’t like it as a source, then feel free to suggest others that are also reasonably bias-free; e.g., neither HuffPost nor Fox News]
Although I agree with your central thesis (strive to stay out of debt, both personally and financially) and agree we’re in debt too much, I also believe it’s cyclical. I’ve see both personal debt and the US debt cycle back and forth before; it will happen again. Nor do I believe we’re in an inescapable position.
National
———–
Go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_public_debt and look at the lower graph on the right hand side at the top; note we have been higher and recovered. Although I still believe we’re uncomfortably high, I don’t believe it is unrecoverable. Note especially the difference between the two lines is mostly additional debts due to entitlement programs (and it is the latter line that is growing so quickly). See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_public_debt#Unfunded_obligations for details. “Over the past 40 years, mandatory spending for programs such as Medicare and Social Security have grown as a share of the budget, while defense and other discretionary categories have declined. Between 1966 and 2006, Medicare and Social Security grew from 16% of the budget to 40%.” @ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget#Mandatory_spending_and_entitlements. Note that in 2009, entitlements totaled 56% of the budget; defense, 23% (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget, RH pie chart)
The article you cite (It Is Now Mathematically Impossible To Pay Off The U.S. National Debt) is a strawman. It assumes all the debt must be paid now out of existing cash on hand – analogous to saying that since your house mortgage is more than you make in a year, you’ll never pay it off. Money recycles; it is possible to use some to pay off part of the debt, then get it back through taxes and use it again to pay off more. The US isn’t even in that bad of a position debt-wise internationally; see the list @ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_public_debt and note we’re in the middle (with Japan and Italy being the two worst-off First World countries).
What the current debt overload (at the national level) will require to correct (just like Greece currently, or multiple examples of other countries who have done this over time) is the US will have to run uncomfortable austerity measures, starting with _both_ reducing entitlements and increasing taxes. Both sides will scream (again, see what’s happening in Greece).
Personal
———–
On a personal level, I believe we’re already seeing it happen – people are becoming much more frugal and working on reducing their debt. (anyone have any cites to support or discredit this statement?)
Although if you look at “Household Debt Service and Financial Obligations Ratios” for the last 29 years there is some fluctuation but no huge increase recently @http://www.federalreserve.gov/Releases/housedebt/. Also see the section titled “Consumer Debt in the US” @ http://www.money-zine.com/Financial-Planning/Debt-Consolidation/Consumer-Debt-Statistics/ for a good discussion of DSR and FOR since the Federal Reserve explanation is mostly opaque if you’re not already well versed in the area.
How do we (personally) function in a world that requires credit cards? Very simple, we have credit cards (real revolving credit cards, not debit cards). We charge small amounts on each every month or so to keep them active but pay them off at the end of each month. Yes, we pay annual fees, but consider it part of the cost for the convenience of being able to function (especially since we’re both professionals and travel a lot). We usually also arrange to charge on a card whose billing cycle pretty well fits our company’s reimbursement cycle so we’re not out any of our own money in advance nor do we pay interest on the card balances.
To agree with Byron, neither of us has purchased a new car in years; with auto leasing there is always a good pool of well-cared for used vehicles that allow us to avoid the terrible depreciation of the first couple of years. We had my wife’s last car for 14 years before we had to get rid of it; I’ve had my current one for 9 years.
Summary
————
So overall I agree that we, both as a country and as individuals, need to control our spending and reduce our debt load. It will take sacrifices (on both sides) to do so. Is it a religious duty? Rather depends on your religious viewpoint; is it, for example, part of the Protestant work ethic to avoid excessive debt?
“the US will have to run uncomfortable austerity measures, starting with _both_ reducing entitlements and increasing taxes.”
Absolutely agree with this. Further – I think austerity measures will need to be put into effect by citizens in their daily life. The consumer spending bubble needs to finally deflate, it’s headed that way already. This will cause some more pain in the short-term, but when the recovery happens it will be a more stable recovery.
The recovery we are entering now is a sham, I believe. Commercial property is now going under at a level not seen since the Great Depression and even more business are closing their doors. We will see banks go bankrupt – many more state and community banks and credit unions. All the stimulus, bail outs, and other programs are doing is delaying things from going to crap. While they are delaying they are getting worse and bigger because many of the underlying problems are not being addressed.
http://communities.canada.com/VANCOUVERSUN/blogs/everybodysbusiness/archive/2010/02/23/u-s-recovery-sham.aspx
http://blogs.wsj.com/davos/2010/01/30/summers-statistical-recovery-and-human-recession/
http://blogs.wsj.com/deals/2010/01/15/dimon-utters-the-unthinkable-a-double-dip-recession/tab/article/
There’s a ton more articles out there. Just a few blurbs from different sectors. There are articles that talk about consumers spending less, paying off debt, and saving more. I believe I inked to a few in the main post. I hope that is a trend that continues, although usually in articles they talk about how bad it is that people are saving more.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/02/02/business/main4768780.shtml
http://www.gallup.com/poll/118003/say-spending-less-new-normal.aspx
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/03/business/economy/03experience.html
http://money.cnn.com/2009/12/14/news/economy/holiday_spending_poll/index.htm
As for credit cards. I have credit cards and will continue to have them. But the balance is always paid off every month.
Since my last bankruptcy, I have swore off of credit cards forever, although it is near impossible to buy a car or home without credit. I would not be able to save enough money in my lifetime to outright purchase a home, or a car in time before the old one wears out. All I ask is a decent interest rate and I can handle the basics with no problem, even at my rather low wage. I just wish the government would provide loan programs for solar electric refits and hot water heaters for about the same I am paying for electricity, so that once the loan is payed off I am getting clean energy for free. I would be paying that electric bill anyway, and have been all my life, so why cant such a loan be guaranteed me? Yes, come shut my panel off if I miss payments, but that is incidental. Getting laid off and not being able to find employment in the middle of a depression is NOT a reflection of MY charactor, it’s the failure of my elected representatives to prevent such madness to have occured in the first place. The predatory lending industry is the source of almost all our evils, yet we treat these scumbags as if they are the heart of American capitalism. Give me a break, using commerce and credit like a weapon is societal suicide, yet we rotate that cylinder and keep pulling the trigger. No wonder it’s all falling apart at the seams………
Alex Pendragon stated, “although it is near impossible to buy a car or home without credit. I would not be able to save enough money in my lifetime to outright purchase a home, or a car in time before the old one wears out.”
Seriously though…Lots of owners are more willing to do land contracts or owner-financing nowadays…’cause they know the banks won’t loan on much any more. (BTW, land contracts are like owner-financing…but they are more “official”…) I just saw one the other day that was like $2k down and something like $160 a month. Most renters are paying way more than that. Craig’s List is your friend.
Very insightful post. It does make me think, on a personal and oikos level, about applying the Delphic Maxims to my spending. Particularly now that I’ve been laid off…
I abhor being in debt. Although, handling credit cards responsively can open up options by increasing credit rating and then enabling one to get a house (or in my case) a shockingly low-interest car loan.
The problem, I think, is that the nation as a whole does not follow this philosophy and or think about contributing to the security and improvement of the community. Sad, but true…
“is that the nation as a whole does not follow this philosophy and or think about contributing to the security and improvement of the community.”
Just think what this nation would be like if individuals did see looking after their personal finances as their contribution to national and economic security for the nation. And if they looked at other issues in that light. Now imagine if our elected officials thought the same way about government spending.
OT: Hope the surgery went well and the “Pez” keeps working!
Thank you! I’m trying to cut down on them. Sure, laying around and drooling is fun for a few days, but then it gets boring.
Great post, and great comments. I also want to wish you good health after your surgery and all. Not sure what else I can add to the actual topic, everyone else has pretty much nailed it.
Thank you very much for your good wishes.
I’m one of Cara’s Christian online friends, and have always loved reading her stuff, because even when I disagree, I always know that there has been thought and spirit poured into what she writes.
I absolutely agree that ANY debt, be it for countries, religious institutions, families, or individuals, is absolutely a religious issue. It’s really a question of stewardship, and though the wording may be different between your religious tradition and mine, I think the spirit behind it is similar. Basically, the money that you’re using to pay interest is money that could be used to do good for others. For Christians, the word stewardship comes from the old practice of having a household steward that managed the family’s finances and such. The steward was entrusted with taking care of what was not their own. Further, the Hebrew Bible was very explicit about the importance of giving back to God, and giving to those who had need. When you’re in debt, you’ve put yourself in a position where you’re not able to to that as well as you could…you’re not stewarding the resources with which you’ve been entrusted to their fullest potential to serve the world.
Same holds true with our national debt…or with unnecessary government spending. There’s so much good our country could do for our people, or for the people of other nations, that we’ve simply put ourselves in a position that we CAN’T do because of the debt we’re continuing to rack up.
Cara mentioned “oikos,” which as followers of a greek religion I’m sure many of you recognize as the word for “house.” Interestingly, the word “economics” is a compound of two greek words: “oikos” (house) and “nomos” (rule or law). Economics are the rules of the house–and the very word speaks to what happens when your economics are out of whack. It’s not just losing money…your house is out of order.
From my tradition, Jesus boiled down all the law into two commandments: love God, and love your neighbor. And when asked “who is my neighbor,” his example was of a Samaritan–someone from a group his hearers hated and would have nothing to do with–and it was THAT person who fulfilled the “love your neighbor” commandment by helping an injured Jew. I’m a pretty firm separation of church and state guy, though I would still argue that debt gets in the way of a nation keeping that first commandment. But “love your neighbor…” especially living in the most prosperous nation on earth, even though we do so much for others anyway, it’s saddening to think of how much more we could do for our neighbors, be they friends or be they our own 21st century version of Samaritans, that just isn’t possible because that money is going either toward skyrocketing interest or even just paying down principle on the debt. It’s shameful.
Very thoughtful comments on how religion affects how you look at finances and debt. Thank you and good to see you on here!
GO BIG RED!
“An it harm none, do as ye will.”
Burning your house down would cause you harm. Having so much debt that you lose your house has much the same effect.
Unpaid debt causes harm to the debtor. If the bank gives you a credit card, and you max it out, then default on it, you have basically stolen money from the bank.
Interest rates that you can handle are not necessarily “harm” anymore than a slice of chocolate cake for dinner is harm. Sitting there and eating the entire cake is another story.
Those who say the Wiccan Rede is a free-for-all to party have not looked deeply at how it applies in common sense situations.
Self-Reliance is one of the Nine Noble Virtues. Staying out of Debt is part of that. We all hit snags every-once-and-a-while, but you should stay in the black much more often than in the red. This applies to individual and national finances.
I’ve been loving all the responses explaining how religion affects your views on something generally considered so nonspiritual – finances.
For me, I don’t know that it really counts as my religious views–I had exactly the same views of debt when I was Christian. It is deeply engrained in my psyche that wastefulness is wrong, whether it’s throwing away leftover food or buying a bunch of expensive junk you didn’t need and won’t use.
A good thoughtful post on a subject that I seldom see addressed. Heathenism teaches the value of moderation. The sagas are full of object lessons: moderation is extolled and the consequences to those who are intemperate are lovingly described. I dislike profligate wastes of money; I carefully consider not only material costs but opportunity costs of actions I am going to engage in. How much is my time worth? How do my potential savings conflict with the amount (and price) of gas I will expend returning one item and shopping for a cheaper (but identical) item?
At the same time, I understand the necessity for a national debt – for any debt really. We live in a world where we can’t find homes or cars without going into debt to obtain those things, and life can be difficult without a car. I’ve lived without one. I managed, but it was quite unpleasant at times. But that’s not to say that I believe money should just be thrown away, or that we should willy nilly and mindlessly throw ourselves into debt – ourselves or the nation. We have to consider the cost of everything, and the ramifications of spending or not spending on that particular item.
I had a fire years ago – lost almost everything I owned that had not already been lost in a divorce – and I learned from that experience that I can live without “things.” I missed my things, but life went on. My life did not stop in their absence. I realized that there are things I need and things I want. Sometimes they are the same; often they are not. It’s a matter of discipline, I suppose. It’s a decision to be made every day in the same manner we decide to be good every day. And sometimes we’re more successful than others.
The standard modern answer is that there are valid reasons for borrowing–generally, to make a long-term investment which couldn’t otherwise be made, or to raise cash in an emergency. But people’s overall emotional state plays into their borrowing behavior, and when people feel rich they tend to borrow too much and spend profligately, and when they feel poor, they tend to borrow too little, and undertake unnecessary privation. The traditional warnings tend to aim at borrowing too much: unrealistic optimism is usually much more common than unrealistic pessimism. However, they fail in bad times, when pessimism takes over.
In the current crisis, I would look at the ethics of the lenders. Let us take a little trip to Greece. No, not ancient Greece. We have here a short note on the Greek financial disaster, and the conduct of the big investment banks from the knowledgeable pseudonymous, “Bond Girl”:
We can also look nearer to home and talk about the mortgage crisis, the financial system collapse, and the on-going governmental complicity, largely in the Senate. We’ve had 30 years of financial system deregulation, and an unregulated financial market is part of the road to ruin. In the boom and bust cycles of an unregulated economy, there are no winners and no ethical choices that will protect you and yours: borrow or not, you will most likely be caught out by the cycles.
“Recently I read an article about how the USA may be past the point where we can pay off the national debt.” The article is what is technically called, “nonsense.” And, more morally, fear-mongering–very much a part of the advocacy for unnecessary privation. Paul Krugman calls this “The Dogbert theory of the debt”:
I believe it was in an issue of Mad Magazine from back when I was a teen, one story had a comment that (roughly said) “So, in order to get a loan from this bank, I first have to prove to you that I well-of enough not to need it?”
Lol – nail, meet hammer!
(salutes)
“I believe the first place to cut back is in the area of our foreign expenditures – this includes the current wars we are fighting. ”
Wars are very expensive and the single biggest reason for large national debts. But other than that, foreign aid is actually a very small part of the Federal budget–well under 1%, and even only 1.6% of the discretionary budget. Yet in a 2001 survey from the reliable Program on International Policy Attitudes found that the public estimate of foreign aid is 20% of the Federal budget (study.) Cutting foreign aid, in other words, is only a drop in the bucket of US spending.
I feel that this discussion of personal and government debt leaves out some important issues.
(1) Taxes. Tax policies from Reagan onwards, such as the Reagan and Bush II tax cuts, have favored the rich and the corporations at the expense of the government budget, with a disproportionate impact on the middle class and the poor, that is, the people who actually NEED government services. The income gap between rich and poor has grown calamitously in the last 30 years. Governments have not had enough revenue to provide effective and needed services, causing many to lose trust in government. Government programs to aid the poor have been slashed, such as Legal Aid and Welfare, while government programs that give juicy contracts to important corporate interests like defense industry and more recently, security service companies have continued to swell and offer immense profits to those running those industries. Your solution seems to be to slash government. Mine is to give our government the funds it needs to do important things like rebuild infrastructure and pay for world-class public education by raising taxes, not on the middle class and poor, but those who can afford it: the super-rich and hugely profitable corporations.
(2) If you are concerned about the budget and government spending, I would recommend you look at the military sector as another possible place where we could make some really substantial money-saving cuts. Our combined military is 20 times larger than that of any country in the world, and a lot of that money goes to fat contracts for the defense industry, and shadowy mercenary groups like Blackwater (now calling itself XE to try to distance itself from its own track record). I am suspicious of movements like the Tea Party groups who want to cut cut cut government programs that help poor people in the USA but never talk about cutting back our bloated military.
(3). Infrastructure. America’s infrastructure is falling apart, including bridges, highways, public schools, sewer systems, water systems. If we drastically cut back the federal government, how are these things going to be addressed? Local and state governments cannot afford to deal with these matters. If there is not a strong effort at the national level, on the scale of FDR type programs during the Great Depression, America risks becoming a third-rate nation. Do you think we can really on the private sector and corporations to rebuild our infrastructure? The trend in recent years is that corporations expect local and state governments to build infrastructure for THEM, and throw in some multi-million dollar tax breaks and subsidies as well, before corporations will consider setting up operations in a given state or community. Corporations will not rebuild our infrastructure. Maybe we can rely on churches and charities? Not likely either. Meanwhile, European and Asian countries are continually, constantly building or rebuilding infrastructure, meaning they are better equipped for future economic opportunities. Go experience the transportation system in South Korea or Singapore, compare the high speed trains in France or Japan with our trains, and tell me you still feel confident about our future. I would argue that we need to say massive spending at the federal government level to save our infrastructure or we are doomed. Sometimes you have to spend money to make money; infrastructure is a critical investment in our future. It will be expensive, but necessary. For more, do a Google search on Governor Ed Rendell of Pennsylvania and see what he has to say about infrastructure. It may give you indigestion and insomnia, but it is worth pondering.
I offer these thoughts because I feel the discussion on this site has been too slanted toward a libertarian to conservative, anti-government position, and I wanted to offer an alternative view that would include some important issues not previously addressed.
Michael stated, “I offer these thoughts because I feel the discussion on this site has been too slanted toward a libertarian to conservative, anti-government position, and I wanted to offer an alternative view that would include some important issues not previously addressed.”
That’s CRAZY TALK, Dr. Strmiska!
(Seriously though, this site does certainly seem to be disproportionately Libertarian/Conservative, especially considering that even those on the Right that post here have stated numerous times that they know that they are in the minority with regard to most Pagans.)
“I offer these thoughts because I feel the discussion on this site has been too slanted toward a libertarian to conservative, anti-government position, and I wanted to offer an alternative view that would include some important issues not previously addressed.”
Offering different points of view is very welcome here and you are correct that my views in this section of PAGAN+politics will be a conservative, small Federal government view. However – in the blog project the view is evenly divided between Left, Right, and Center – and was set up that way to allow a variety of views to be presented. The blog writers only start the conversation – it’s up to all of YOU to keep the conversation going and provide insight and comments that you wish to be heard. I know some have felt surprise at how much the Right is represented in this project, but that seems to be because they are unused to hearing the Right represented in Pagan groups at all – let alone equally.
As for your points – they are interesting ones and I’m hoping that you can relate them back to your religion in some way – as THAT was the conversation I was hoping to start – How does your religion affect your views on personal and national budgeting/debt/finance issues?
For example – is there a teaching in your religious beliefs that affect how you feel about taxation? Or on maintaining infrastructure? Or is there something that causes you to believe that the military should not be funded as highly as it is? I would be very interested in hearing that.
(I am unaware that Tea Party groups want to cut programs for poor people and are refusing to cut military spending – I am aware that many of them want to close down overseas bases, stop spending money to defend other nations, halt continuous foreign aid, and wish to pull out of our current two wars. Domestic spending that they seem unhappy with are things like TARP, the second bank bail-out, some of the Stimulus Bill, and the current Healthcare Bill)
Cara stated, “I know some have felt surprise at how much the Right is represented in this project, but that seems to be because they are unused to hearing the Right represented in Pagan groups at all – let alone equally.”
So, is it disproportionate regarding the small minority of Right-Winger Pagans or not? I believe that you (IIRC) have even complained in the past about rarely running into Conservative Pagans. ???
Oh yes, I would say that having 2 out 7 bloggers is not in line with the percentage of Pagans who identify as Conservative. But the goal wasn’t to be representative according to percentage (especially since we don’t have hard numbers on what the percentage break down is) – it was to have an equal variety of voices from the political spectrum to show the diversity of political views within Paganism, especially how our religion impacts our political views. As of now, there are 3 Left, 2 Centrist, and 2 Right. In the future this may expand to include other political voices who don’t identify as Right, Left, or Center.
It’s also a welcome nod to diversity that we have a good number of reconstuctionist/revivalist-type Pagans blogging here, instead of mostly Wiccans (which are the majority of the Pagan community).
But no, I didn’t complain about rarely running into Conservative Pagans. I have said that Right of Center Pagans often don’t voice their opinions within the Pagan community because they are concerned with (possible) negative reactions from other Pagans. They are a minority, but less of a minority than perhaps is thought since so many are still in the closet about political affiliation. It is my hope that this project, with all the various bloggers and people commenting, can open up respectful conversations about political issues in general – and also help end some of the stigma that Right leaning Pagans face within the community.
2 of 7? Let’s see: You and Daniel are obvious…but Duane really ought to be included as well. Now we’re up to almost half. Plus, if I wasn’t here in the comments section supporting the Liberal view, it’d pretty much be Hrafnkell carrying the flag for the most part.
I can’t speak for Duane, we all self designated where we are politically. I hope we all surprise each other from time to time, though. Make each other think, not just about issues, but about how we think people in various camps think.
As for the comments – I really meant what I said in my first post – what PAGAN+politics becomes is up to all of you. For myself, I’ll be commenting less and less as the weeks go by. What other bloggers do as far as comments, I don’t know. But while the blog is young, I have been commenting to help keep conversation going.
Wait a minute…I am definitely not a conservative. I have liberal views on some things, conservative on others, anarchist on some. Anti-government would be close to reality. Just have not yet broached subjects that I share the liberal views on. I let Jason place me with my explanation that I thought both parties were corrupt beyond repair and responsible for the shithouse we find ourselves in. I’ll take up a social issue here in a post or two and piss off the entire right, I promise you.
Will there be popcorn? Ain’t comin’ if there’s no popcorn.
I had the thought (Quick! Everybody DUCK!) that one of the things that might come out of this project is that slapping a one-word political label on most peoples’ foreheads and sticking them in a box isn’t an accurate way to determine where people stand.
Also, another point. Those who advocate cutting back federal government out of concern for the federal budget deficit should be aware that they are, perhaps inadvertently, following a script created by anti-government conservatives from the 1980s onwards. It was the stated intention of Ronald Reagan’s budget director, David Stockman, to use tax cuts to cause a shortfall in revenues, leading to an alarming deficit, in order that the deficit could then be used as justification for cutting back social programs disliked by conservatives. Some year later, Grover Norquist, head of the anti-tax “Club for Growth,” explained that his ultimate political goal was to shrink and weaken the government to the point where it could be “strangled in a bathub.” My point is, there is a long tradition of people who passionately HATE government who have been using the deficit issue as a way to kill government programs that they consider evil and socialistic, and the Tea Partiers and their like are following in their footsteps, without thinking through the consequences of going down this road. The Grover Norqusts of the world would like to strip the government down to nothing but police and military. They don’t care about poverty, as it never touches them. They don’t care about public education, as they prefer private schools, religious schools and/or home schooling anyway. They don’t care about public housing, because they live in McMansions and gated communities. They don’t care about public transportation, because they have very nice cars that they have no problem paying for. They don’t care about public health, as they have plenty of money to pay for doctors and specialists. They don’t care about Social Security because they have plenty of money for their own for retirement. They object to the minimum wage because it cuts into the profits of those who own businesses. They would love to strip away all the layers of government that help the less privileged, because they have no need for it, and would be richer without having to contribute to paying for those things. They do support police, military and prisons, but not much else. Are you really with them? Do you really want to see a society with no public services?
These are the big picture consequences of hating and stripping down government.
Well..that’s an extreme oversimplification that commits the sin of omission.
Yes, I do think that the Federal government should be weakened. Correspondingly, State and local governments should gain in power as the Federal government loses it- and that is the part you omitted.
Control should be as local as possible – power should be as close to being in the hands of voters as possible. Too much power now rests in the hands of the Federal government and there is little that voters can do about that. They don’t feel able to be involved in the decision making and they feel that their government isn’t accountable to them. And at the Federal level – it isn’t. At the State and Local level voters feel more able to make their voice heard and ensure that their government is accountable to them.
Interesting poll – http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/02/26/citizens.rights.poll/
A majority of Americans think the federal government poses a threat to the rights of Americans, according to a new national poll.
Fifty-six percent of people questioned in a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Friday say they think the federal government has become so large and powerful that it poses an immediate threat to the rights and freedoms of ordinary citizens. Forty-four percent of those polled disagree.
11% of Americans don’t believe that President Obama is a US citizen.
It doesn’t prove that he isn’t. It just proves that some people are idiots.
( http://www.dailykos.com/statepoll/2009/7/30/US/320 )
Okay?
You stated that “56% of Americans believe…”
So? I bet a large portion of the American public believe that the Earth is 4000 years old, and that “Satan” put dinosaur bones in the ground to trick us into believing in Evolution. Doesn’t make it so. Just shows that America, like the rest of the world, is filled with predominantly stupid people.
Besides, you want a smaller gov’t? Move to Colorado Springs. It’s working just swimmingly there! ( http://www.wibw.com/nationalnews/headlines/85741292.html ) They’re removing 1/3 of their streetlights, and cutting back on basic services…but their taxes are low! Hurray!
And furthermore, in the spirit of the OP:
“Share the load of the unfortunate (????????? ????????)”
So there. Which Delphic Maxims “trump” others? Of course, they don’t. They aren’t comparable to the Judaeo-Christian “Ten Commandments” or anything in that respect.
And frankly, I see preserving the natural world…funding National Parks, saving endangered species, reducing our effect on the environment, etc., as far more of a “religious” obligation than watching my spending or debt.
BTW, the (????????? ????????) above was where the original Greek characters did not come through. It’s #135 from the same website that Cara posted in the OP. ( http://www.flyallnight.com/khaire/DelphicMaxims/maxims.htm )
Yeah – foreign letters don’t come through and I’m not sure how to help with that.
As for what you are talking about – yes, I talked about that in relation to debt in my original post. I’m unclear what you are saying. Are you saying that you follow the Maxims as a part of Hellenismos and that going into debt (personal and national) to save the natural world is how you live by the Maxims? I didn’t realize you were Hellenstai.
Hmmmm….the Maxims are there for each of us to interpret for ourselves (That’s part of Know Yourself and Seek Wisdom). Could you expand on your interpretation?
No, I’m not a Hellene. (Though I do read/write Ancient Greek and love Greek history…)
You’ve stated on this topic that you want gov’t to be as little as possible and accomplish as little as possible. The original thrust of the article was that you applied “DAPANON ARCHOU” (*Sorry, best I can do without Greek letters…) to both personal and national debt.
I say that the maxim “ATUCHOUNTI SUNACHTHOU” (“Share the load of the unfortunate”) essentially could be interpreted as a Liberal ethos.
Basically, my point in regards to the Maxims is that it’s all up to interpretation. I see now that you weren’t offering that as the _only_ interpretation. (Though I’ve certainly run into Hellenes who thought they were the final arbiters of all interpretations of Hellenic thought and ethics…as if there was any kind of monolithic ethical philosophy to them or something…Gods!)
Sorry, I get a little worked up when people start talking about “small gov’t,” because to me, that’s about the quickest way to destroy everything that is good about America.
No need to apologize – I’ve met those same Hellenestai. *grin*
As for this – “Sorry, I get a little worked up when people start talking about “small gov’t,” because to me, that’s about the quickest way to destroy everything that is good about America.” I believe the exact opposite – except I would add that I believe in a small and limited Federal government, not just small government period. But I can also understand why people believe as you. I just don’t agree.
I don’t really see how Dinosaur bones apply here, nor do I see how the Citizenship status of the President is relevant.
I enjoy when conversations move into directions organically, but this is a bit far off on a tangent for me to go with.
Being in debt puts you in a position of weakness. It’s like being out in the ocean with a leaky boat. Every storm or even just a strong wave presents a threat.
I’ll be 51 in May, and here’s my formula for staying out of it:
You will have to – big surprise – spend less than you make. Pay your bills on time every month. If you use credit cards, pay them off every month you do NOT want to ever carry a balance. PUT MONEY INTO SAVINGS EVERY PAY PERIOD, and put in as much as you can. Get into the habit of putting money away. That way when an unexpected expense arises, you’ll have a cushion and won’t have to resort to a credit card.
There are wonderful ideas for saving money on-line. “Going green” is often also going less expensive. Look at where your major expenses are and see where you can trim them. And when you DO buy something, be mindful or where you spend your money. Support your local Pagan community as much as possible. For example, when I need candles I buy them at a Witch shop and not at a “regular” store. Even though they are more expensive there, my money is doing more good than if I bought them elsewhere. I also buy as locally as I can; from local Farmer’s markets as much as possible. I buy organic whenever it’s an option. Even if you don’t have a lot of money, have a care of where it goes so it can do the most good for you, our Pagan community and the Earth.
[...] addition, Cara Schulz asks if debt is a religious issue, and is exploring if Pagans can have a voice within the Tea Party. “There may be a window of [...]
“– and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”
The problem isn’t that we spend too much, it’s that we tax too little…
It’s we the people who offer education, it’s we the people who offer food stamps for those who might have trouble affording food, it’s we the people who give aid to the unemployed, social security for the elderly… the actions of government are an ugly consensus 99% of the time, however that consensus is one that we the people have entered into willingly in order to do that which we believe to be right.
We need to understand that there are many who would rather see power stripped away from the people and handed over completly to the top 1% who already own roughly 40% of all wealth. There is and has always been class war, and the working and middle classes are losing because they refuse to acknowledge it. Those who benefit most from our society and it’s economy should also be responsible for most of the taxes. Public lands, institutions and services should not be taken away from the people and placed in the hands of for profit corperations.
Very late note on this topic: Simon Johnson (former IMF chief economists) and James Kwak (entrepreneur & grad student) cover ethics and debt (among other topics) in their blog Baseline Scenario. On the feed today we have:
They Saved the Big Banks But Kind Of Lost The Economy Doing It
and
European Monetary Fund, Arriving Soon
http://baselinescenario.com