Income Inequality?

[Sparko]

That's the question I'm asking you. What possible reason might he have for doing so and for thinking that doing so is just and/or fitting?



The owner is the one who makes the judgment, but he must make the judgment in accordance with virtue, not simply whatever he can get his workers to agree to. That shouldn't be a difficult concept.



The key element of this story that you're missing is that every worker walked away with the daily wage-- which was, for the worker, enough to sustain him for another day. They weren't about to save up for retirement on that wage (that's what your kids were for), but they (and their families, including elderly parents and young children) could get through another day.

No, the key to the parable is that the owner paid what he wanted to with his own money and what the workers agreed to. They had no right to complain that others got paid more per hour than they did. They got what they agreed to.

[Spartacus]

Let's not get ahead of ourselves (to use your own words)

You never answered my post:

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...l=1#post112047

#520.

[Sparko]

#520.

found it and edited my post.

[Spartacus]

No, the key to the parable is that the owner paid what he wanted to with his own money and what the workers agreed to. They had no right to complain that others got paid more per hour than they did. They got what they agreed to.

It's a parable primarily about the kingdom of God, not economic practices, and even if we make the mistake of analyzing it solely from an economic rather than theological standpoint, I see no reason why my interpretation should fail. You fail to consider WHY the owner wanted to pay the other workers more... which was the same question I asked 3 posts ago and you still haven't answered

[Sparko]

It's a parable primarily about the kingdom of God, not economic practices, and even if we make the mistake of analyzing it solely from an economic rather than theological standpoint, I see no reason why my interpretation should fail. You fail to consider WHY the owner wanted to pay the other workers more... which was the same question I asked 3 posts ago and you still haven't answered

I know what the parable is about. It is about those who may become Christian early in life and work hard all their lives and gain salvation being jealous of those who might become Christian near the end of their lives and still gain salvation. The point remains the same, the landowner (God) gives the same wage (salvation) to those who he hires (saves) early in the day (their lives) as those he hires late in the day (their lives). It is his choice and his salvation or wages to give to whomever he chooses and when.

The landowner owns the land and sets the price. The workers agree to that wage and so have nothing to complain about later.

A business owner owns his business and sets his wages. The workers either agree to work for those wages or go somewhere else. It is the business owner's money to do with as he wants. If the business owner is an honest and good man, he will want to pay an honest wage as much as he can afford to. If he is not, then he won't. But then he runs the risk of nobody wanting to work for him at the wages he is offering.

[Spartacus]

When are you going to answer the actual question? It cannot be the owner's moral right to do something unless he would be morally right in doing it. Why would he even WANT to give someone more than their due?

Also, you're trying to de-allegorize the parable in an improper way. just sayin'.

[Bill the Cat]

The only thing that the left is accomplishing is to reduce the gap between the lower middle class and the lower class.

[Spartacus]

The only thing that the left is accomplishing is to reduce the gap between the lower middle class and the lower class.

Would that be the effect of the wage cap some of the posters here have suggested?

[Sparko]

When are you going to answer the actual question?

I thought I did answer the question. Ask it again.

It cannot be the owner's moral right to do something unless he would be morally right in doing it.

Huh? not sure what you mean by that.

Why would he even WANT to give someone more than their due?

Are you talking about your example where the owner wanted to pay the worker $15/hour even though it was not justified by the worker's work? If so, who said he would? It was your example. I can't help it if it doesn't make any sense.

Also, you're trying to de-allegorize the parable in an improper way. just sayin'.

A parable has no meaning unless it can be compared to something real in someone's life. The whole point was that the owner could do with his property what he wanted to, and the worker's who agreed had no complaint or leg to stand on to whine about it.

Are you going to tell God that he was unjust because he wanted to give the same salvation to someone who was converted on their deathbed when you have been working for God all your life?

Same with a business owner. If he wants to pay Homer $6/hour and Homer agrees to it, and then he hires Mary at $7/hour, then Homer has no reason to cry how unjust it all is. He can ask for more money, or he can go somewhere else. But the business and what the owner is willing to pay is up to the owner, not Homer, and not you, and not the government.

[Jedidiah]

It's a pretty standard measurement, used by economists of all shapes, sizes and political affiliations. Modeling the economy ain't easy but that doesn't mean such models are useless. Nobody is arguing that productivity has not increased over time and nobody is arguing that minimum wage, adjusted for inflation, has decreased over time. Those are the two factors at issue.

I am not sure about economy wide, but fast food places, and their ilk, do pretty much what Darth say's - the same thing as in years gone by. To over simplify - burger flippers have not made any great strides in productivity.

Snip American workers are more productive...whether by automation or otherwise. I like to think that most Americans (but certainly by NO means ALL) have the pride and drive that causes them to excel. snip

This is different than my experience, my wife's experience, and my granddaughters experience. People - especially in fast food places seem to want to do as little as possible and are not reliable in attendance.

[Jedidiah]

The owner is the one who makes the judgment, but he must make the judgment in accordance with virtue, not simply whatever he can get his workers to agree to. That shouldn't be a difficult concept.

You are correct in saying that the owner should make his judgement in accordance with virtue. Every judgement made by every person on earth should be made in accordance with virtue. How do you make that happen. You do not do it by trying to make the government tweak every little detail. Doing that all you get is the mess this nation is in today.

[Sparko]

You are correct in saying that the owner should make his judgement in accordance with virtue. Every judgement made by every person on earth should be made in accordance with virtue. How do you make that happen. You do not do it by trying to make the government tweak every little detail. Doing that all you get is the mess this nation is in today.

What? You can't legislate charity and virtue?

Amazing.

Did anyone tell the democrats that?

[Spartacus]

I thought I did answer the question. Ask it again.

Huh? not sure what you mean by that.

Are you talking about your example where the owner wanted to pay the worker $15/hour even though it was not justified by the worker's work? If so, who said he would? It was your example. I can't help it if it doesn't make any sense.

If it doesn't make sense to you, it's because you have the moral imagination of a cartoon villain... or Ayn Rand protagonist.

A parable has no meaning unless it can be compared to something real in someone's life. The whole point was that the owner could do with his property what he wanted to, and the worker's who agreed had no complaint or leg to stand on to whine about it.

And it almost always subverts something about that real-life scenario. Do you really think shepherds would leave a flock of 99 to scatter, unattended, to try to hunt down one lost sheep?

Are you going to tell God that he was unjust because he wanted to give the same salvation to someone who was converted on their deathbed when you have been working for God all your life?

Are you going to tell the government that it's unjust because it wants to give as much of a reward to a rank-and-file employee as to a CEO who has been working for the company since he graduated high school? Don't answer that question.

Answer this one instead: if God said that He wanted all eartlhy laborers to be compensated at the same rate regardless of how hard or long they worked or what sort of work they did, from burger-flipper to CEO, would you call that unjust?

[Littlejoe]

Would you like it if the government capped your pay? Once you reached your cap, would you bother to continue to strive for better performance? Or would you sit on your butt and say "well I can't make anymore, so I might as well just sit here and keep just doing my daily job." - isn't that what you have been complaining about in the first place? That the company has effectively capped your pay and you don't like it so you are looking for another job?

I didn't use the word capped. I said limited to a multiple of an avg worker. That's not the same thing. If they want a raise, they just raise the overall wages so that everyone benefits.

[Cow Poke]

What would be wrong with limiting CEO and top executive pay to a multiple of an average workers pay? 10x or 20x? When a CEO makes $30 mil a year and the workers are pulling down $12 an hour, it's not hard to see who's going to get rich in this scenario.

If I'm the CEO of a company I started, and I want to be able to fund another company that hires a lot of people, why punish me for my hard work, and my risking my own money to build a company?