Tuesday, January 31, 2006
Public or Private?
Here in Portugal, there is a huge debate right now over the future of the government and its domestic policy. My teachers tell me every day that it is near impossible to get a job in Portugal, and that the economy is really bad and unstable. The current assembly is debating whether greater long term economic growth will come publicly or privately, and whether greater stability will come from public or private intervention. This week has been filled with this debate more through the influence of the Worldwide Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. (By the way Bill Clinton ["I'm still here!"] is there trying to advance international treaties on climate change.)
Portugal was a kingdom from roughly the 11th century until the 20th century. In the kingdom model, the king owns the country and is therefore responsible to manage it. May he do it wisely. Portugal began to change as did all of Europe in the 20th century. They went through a number of painful transitions, including a dictatorship. The dictatorship was replaced by a form of government called a republic, but more like a parliament. In the classic European model, the state continued to be the center industrial and economic activity; in other words, they were a very socialist model. Over the last several years, many private companies have appeared. The undeniable fact is that the government owned and run companies have the advantages and the priveledges in the economy.
What is the role of the economy in the economy? Sweden, Holland, and Germany are examples of very socialist ideas applied across a country. They are contrasted to the USA. All of the numbers, in practical terms, are in favor of the US model (per capita income, gdp, economic growth, etc.). What is not in favor of the US is that the average person in the US will have at least ten career changes from graduation to retirement. This is very unstable.
The sad thing is that in the numbers, a great loss is made. The fundamental assumption that these decisions are made without reference to each individual citizen. The answer has been pre-determined by the framework of the question: "What is or social responsibility in reference to our future?" I personally am skeptical of the term "social responsibility." It demeans each person as an individual, or worse, it denies personal or individual responsibility. I can then help the poor by paying taxes, and not by getting to know them and personally engaging in their lives.
Sadly, the church takes much the same response when it comes to ministry. We get together and pay the pastor and a few missionaries to do the ministering for us, and then go on about our daily lives without thinking about how we could personally get involved.
Portugal was a kingdom from roughly the 11th century until the 20th century. In the kingdom model, the king owns the country and is therefore responsible to manage it. May he do it wisely. Portugal began to change as did all of Europe in the 20th century. They went through a number of painful transitions, including a dictatorship. The dictatorship was replaced by a form of government called a republic, but more like a parliament. In the classic European model, the state continued to be the center industrial and economic activity; in other words, they were a very socialist model. Over the last several years, many private companies have appeared. The undeniable fact is that the government owned and run companies have the advantages and the priveledges in the economy.
What is the role of the economy in the economy? Sweden, Holland, and Germany are examples of very socialist ideas applied across a country. They are contrasted to the USA. All of the numbers, in practical terms, are in favor of the US model (per capita income, gdp, economic growth, etc.). What is not in favor of the US is that the average person in the US will have at least ten career changes from graduation to retirement. This is very unstable.
The sad thing is that in the numbers, a great loss is made. The fundamental assumption that these decisions are made without reference to each individual citizen. The answer has been pre-determined by the framework of the question: "What is or social responsibility in reference to our future?" I personally am skeptical of the term "social responsibility." It demeans each person as an individual, or worse, it denies personal or individual responsibility. I can then help the poor by paying taxes, and not by getting to know them and personally engaging in their lives.
Sadly, the church takes much the same response when it comes to ministry. We get together and pay the pastor and a few missionaries to do the ministering for us, and then go on about our daily lives without thinking about how we could personally get involved.
