Socialism Does Not Favor Abundance

I received an interesting email this morning about socialism. It seems an economics professor challenged a class on the viability of socialism. Young, idealistic minds like to think that sharing equally by taking from the rich and giving to the poor will fix everything. To prove this does not happen, he assigned grades along socialistic lines. All test grades were averaged and every student received the same grade. After the first test, everyone got a B. They all received a D after the second test and an F after the third. Working hard to achieve more was no longer beneficial so no one did it. As a result, all failed and no one was happy. The professor had an abundance of A's at his disposal but they had to be earned.

This reminds me of a verse in the Bible, Mark 14:7, to be precise. Jesus told his disciples "You will always have poor people with you, and any time you want to, you can help them. But you will not always have me." Good News Bible There are some key words in this verse: always, want, and can. There will always be poor people. There are various reasons for this. Sometimes poor people indeed need our help. Jesus gave us the free will to choose who to help and when. In my experience this works far better than forced aid by taxation, or stealing from the rich to give to the poor by the government.

Some people are actually poor by choice. Haven't you heard people say they can't get married or earn more money because they will lose their welfare or social security income? As long as people perceive they deserve to be paid regardless of their productivity, many will choose to be unproductive. And when the productive realize that no matter how hard they work, what they earn will be taken from them and given to those who do nothing, they will lose their ambition. And where is a society when people are no longer motivated to be creative and productive?

Please note that I believe in missions and giving to those with burdens that are too great for them to carry. A good example is Katrina Relief along the U.S. gulf coast. People were hard hit by a natural disaster and needed all the help they could get to rebuid their homes and lives. The last time I was there, however, I saw some examples of people who were not helping themselves but complaining about the government. It actually put a negative thought in the minds of many volunteers who were using their vacation time, money, and energy to be of assistance only to be met with ingratitude. Right now I have a choice about where to go on my next mission.

I have this choice because right now I have the time and resources to be self-directed and spirit-led. If the government strips me of these resources and loses them in a quagmire of bureaucratic red tape, does anyone really benefit? This has happened along the gulf coast. Are there still people there who really need our help? Of course there are. Many didn't qualify for government funds the first time around for whatever reason. In fact every volunteer agency has paid social workers who take applications, fill our forms, and continually follow up to see what help is available and when. And everyone has become despondent because the government proved frustrating to both the poor and those who would like to help them.

You see, the residents there and the volunteers from out of state no longer see themselves and their hard work as the solution. So, I ask you. Are we all better off in a system where everyone has the potential to achieve an A? Or are we as a society better served when no one is allowed an A becaue all must receive the same grade? Remember, socialism does not favor abundance for anyone.