Economics #2

Socialism does not and cannot function properly in this society. First off, it would encourage everyone to be a lot more lazy. For instance, if someone knows they will get money equally with those who work hard, they will not work hard. It encourages people to work as little as possible in order to get as much as those with a full time- hard labor job. The government would not be able to function because they wouldn't be able to find enough people that were actually willing to work hard and do their jobs. If there is no motivation there is no result. I agree that the government could change a bit and help find more jobs for those that are unemployed or do more to find opportunities for struggling individuals to gain a healthy amount of pay, but distributing the wealth evenly is both unfair and disastrous. Sharing is a good deed, and so is giving of yourself, but when it comes to giving everyone free money all the time, without any chance of them attempting to work for it is just wrong. Ambition will decrease heavily, and so will productivity. Overall, the government could not withstand all the consequences that would come with this kind of distribution.

Economics #1

First off, comparing all "major religions" can be a major downfall. Not only does this man compare Jesus to the founding fathers of America, but he seeks to prove that we all religions should be able to come up with one universal moral and ethical code. Seeking to do so will never be accoplished, certain religions are always going to have to compromise some part of their belief in order for it to line up with the others. Although most human beings are born with the innate judgement of basic rights and wrongs, law cannot become so specific to the point where it will line up the ethics of all religions. There is no way to completely satisfy all types of religions with one set of laws. Also, he completely made a false truth claim in stating that socialism is democracy. This is obviously incorrect, they are two completely different types of government. He tries to support his claims by the back up of all religions, saying that the majority of the people believe this, which is an extremely disfunctional argument in which the Bible never complies with the idea that democracy is socialism. All of the religions he mentioned have a completely different take on what government should be.
Marx stood for violence, while Christianity stands for justice and grace. He twists his argument to reach the majority of people, saying that these religions reference his argument. Not once does the Bible say that the rich are meant to sustain people with no ambition. Giving to the poor is a different thing, but the idea of socialism is on a whole other level that is not even referenced by the ideas he presented as facts.