10 Ways To Determine If Your Christianity Has Been “Americanized”

[Revmitchell]

So Again I ask, What does it mean to not be Americanized? Does it mean to act like Jim Wallis and denounce America while praising communist countries?

Crabby still has not answered this.

 

[Jordan Kurecki]

1. If you look at the early Christians and are in disbelief over what you find.
If your primary identity is legitimately that of a Christian, you’ll be open to learning about Christianity as it was taught and lived by the earliest Christians. However, from an American mindset, original Christianity and the first Christians appear nuts: they were universally nonviolent (against capital punishment, abortion, military service and killing in self-defense), rejected individual ownership of property in order to redistribute their wealth (Acts 2:44-45, Acts 4:35), and rejected any involvement with the government. When reading about them they seem rather un-American, and this will cause frustration or disbelief among those in Americanized Christianity.

The Original Christians distributed their wealth to help eachother, There are many in my Church who demonstrate this principle by helping me pay for College, This has to do with individuals willingly giving their money to help other CHRISTIANS. I hope you do not try and use this to prove that the government should forcefully redistribute our wealth to largely unbelievers.

2. Your chief concern with Muslims is how to defeat them instead of how to show them the love of Christ.
The chief calling of a Christ-follower is to love others. Whether a neighbor across the street, or an enemy across the world, Christ’s command is abundantly clear: we are to love one another. If your initial posture toward Muslims is that of viewing them as a threat instead of viewing them as people Jesus has commanded we radically and self-sacrificially love, then your Christianity might be Americanized.

from an individual standpoint, we should surely be concerned with how to reach Muslims with the Gospel, but as a nation, we need to protect our own families, For example, as Father's we are to love our wives, if a Muslim breaks into your house to rape and kill her, you should protect her out of love, in the same way we need to love our neighbors in OUR OWN COUNTRY as well as Muslims, and that sadly sometimes includes defeating Muslims.

3. If you can recite more of the US Constitution and Bill of Rights than you can the Sermon on the Mount.
Love the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights because they set the foundation for our country? Well, did you know that the Sermon on the Mount serves the same function for the new, otherworldly Kingdom principles that Jesus followers are supposed to be living by? If you’re more familiar with America’s founding documents than you are the foundation of Jesus’s teachings, your Christianity might be Americanized.

I have to agree with you on this

4. If you’re going to spend more time focused on the presidential election than serving real people around you.
Jesus calls us to get busy serving the least of these– to get our hands dirty, to embrace the position of “servant of everyone,” and to pour ourselves out as we endeavor to change the world right where we are. America on the other hand, invites us to view political power and force of government as the solution to the world’s problems, and that’s a tempting offer for both liberals and conservatives. If you’re more focused on what they could do than what you can do, your Christianity might be Americanized. (And here’s one similar: if you judge the heart of fellow Christians because you don’t like the political candidate they voted for, your Christianity might be Americanized.)

I disagree, The President has a vast impact on our nation, and one way we can serve others is by putting forth time and energy into getting a good president elected. You can serve others by participating in politics. I also disagree with your last statement, if someone votes for someone who promotes sin like abortion, and gay marriage, then it tells us something is wrong

5. If you advocate cutting government programs for the poor but don’t actually tithe yourself.
An American value is small government and low tax rates, but a Christian value is the elimination of poverty– which is precisely why the early Christians shared their wealth instead of hoarding it. However, while many American Christians fight for lower taxes, the average American Christian doesn’t give money to charity. Where the early church shared everything, statistics show that Americanized Christians share almost nothing- less than 5% even tithe to their church. When we reject the Americanization of Christianity, we become focused on how to give more, not on how to give less.

I think it's sad the amount of giving in our church, I wish people would give more so that we could support more missionaries to get the Gospel out.

6. If you say “we’re a nation of laws” in reference to immigrants faster than you quote what the Bible says about immigrants.
For a nation of immigrants, American culture has a shockingly hostile posture toward them. When this bleeds into our Christianity, we see Christians adopt a hostile posture as well– and that’s the last possible posture a Christian should have. The Bible has plenty to say on immigrants, and consistently lists them as one of the vulnerable groups of people God-followers care for. While the government has a right to determine who can come and who must go, the primary posture of a Christian is that of radical love towards immigrants of every type.

we are commanded to Love all, that even includes illegal immigrants, but again, illegal immigrants do hurt our country and thus they have a negative impact on our own citizens, who are neighbors we should love, Now, I do believe we should have an attitude of love toward them, but I don't think that means we have to give them amnesty, and welfare, and other things. We have to think about the impacts it has on our own people as well.

7. If you think Paul’s prohibition on female teachers is straightforward, but Jesus’s teaching on enemy love is somehow open to a thousand degrees of nuance.
People often forget that Paul wrote letters to specific churches addressing specific problems that had a specific context. Yet, in a society that is still wrestling with patriarchy and sexism, we take Paul’s letter to a specific church and make it a blanket prohibition for all times and cultures. However, when we get to Jesus saying “love your enemy” and “do not respond to an evildoer with violence” we abandon that same hermeneutic and say, “Well, Jesus couldn’t have meant we’re not supposed to kill our enemies.” Why? It’s Americanization- we interpret scripture in a way that is consistent not with authorial intent, but our own culture.

Not sure what you are implying with this, The bible clearly teaches that individuals should not seek harm to their enemies or to see vengeance as that belongs to God. But the bible nowhere says that nations or governents cannot protect their people using violence if necesary.
Psalm 82:4 Deliver the poor and needy: rid them out of the hand of the wicked.

8. If you only see sexuality in the admonition to be modest.
We are a society that sees sex in everything– and we see it in Paul’s admonitions for modesty as well. However, if you look closely you’ll see that Paul isn’t talking about sexual modesty, but is prohibiting Christians from flaunting their money with expensive clothing and jewelry. However, we don’t see that in the text because Americanized Christianity would reject the idea we aren’t supposed to own expensive and flashy things. So, we make the passages about sexual modesty so that we can enjoy our expensive and unnecessary toys without a guilty conscience– all the while policing women with yoga pants.

I believe that is is wrong for us to be both flashy and sexually immodest.... I don't know why you are making distinction here.

9. If you think defeating gay marriage is the most pressing issue of our time.
Somewhere along the line, the Americanized version of Christianity taught us that defeating gay marriage was perhaps the most pressing issue of our time. Sadly, as Americans we’re taught to be self-centered and this is an incredibly self-centered view that completely ignores the global issues of our time. It is the mistaken identity that our issues are the issues. The most pressing issues of our time? Let’s start with the fact that 750 million people around the world don’t even have access to clean water or that 805 million people are chronically malnourished.

Well, Gay marriage is an issue, whether you want to admit it or not, and God did destroy cities over it, I would say that a much more pressing need than clean water and food is for the need of the preaching the Gospel, The Social Gospel simply makes people comfortable on their way to hell.

10. If your church honors soldiers more than the elderly woman who has been quietly teaching Sunday school for 30 years.
Because of the blending of America and Christianity, many of our churches sure do love them a man or woman in uniform. Back in my military days I remember wearing my uniform to church when I came home on leave– you get treated like you’re the most important person in the room. But you know who is the most important person in the room? It’s the person who is not in the room at all– it’s that little old lady who has quietly and lovingly been teaching the kids about Jesus while the rest of the church forgets she even exists. Americanized Christianity loves to fawn over those who fought, but the Kingdom of God teaches us the real heroes are the ones who are quietly serving in our midst to the point we are almost unaware they’re even among us.

Why not honor both?

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/formerlyfundie/americanized-christianity/

see bolded text for my response.

 

[Jordan Kurecki]

1. They would be able to live without government support.
2. They would buy more, helping corporations make a profit.
3. They would pay taxes ... a net increase for all levels of government
4. Their children would be healthier, thus lowering medical costs to themselves and the government.
5. It would raise many above the poverty level and this would reduce program costs as not as many people would qualify for these benefits.
6. It would raise morale of workers as has been shown in companies that raised the minimum wage. Indeed some are going to raise the wage further as they have found the benefits out weigh the costs.

That's enough for now.

When you raise the minimum wage, the companies must raise product prices, causing inflation in the community.
You mention that they wold buy more and that it would help companies make a profit.. but you ignore the fact that the companies have to pay their workers more, thus taking away from the profit of the owner, it's not really a net gain..

Allow me to give you an simplified fictitious example:

Me and my wife own a farm that produces milk, and we employ one person and pay him a wage of 100 dollars a week, and on average our cows produce 100 pounds of milk a week, our bills and cost of living are 100 dollars a week, so we charge our customers 2 dollars a pound to pay our employee and to take care of our costs, so we bring in about 200 dollars a week.

But then the government mandates that we pay our employee now 200 dollars a week, so in order to compensate so that we can cover our new cost of living per week, we raise our prices to 3 dollars a pound.

Now imagine that there is another family with the same exact situation as us,except let's imagine that instead of milk, they produce pounds of corn, let's imagine their numbers are the same as the ones above, and let's assume that we buy corn from them, and they buy milk from us.

Because we had to raise our prices for milk, they have to raise their prices on corn, so that they can continue to buy milk for their family.

Now... when my family worker goes to a local store to buy corn and milk that we provide, he has to pay more... and likewise there has been a ripple in he prices... Even though he is being paid more, the money he's paid has been devalued.

I know this is a rough illustration, but it gives you the general idea.

 

[JonC]

That is a possibility. However if morale increases or if the new wage attracts better qualified workers productivity may increase enough to offset the increases you mentioned.

I agree. I am not sure that most folk realize that it is profit, not dollars that a company is interested in, at least most companies.

Yes, a company must make a profit to stay in business. However, as I said in the first reply if productivity increases it may offset increases expenses with the result being in favor of the company.

I believe it depends in the attitude of the workers, the motivation of the workers, the skill of the workers and the increased productivity.

Here is a link to an article I believe you will find interesting:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...u-s-minimum-wage-to-11-87-to-retain-workforce

All this is dynamic, not static and it is complex, not simple.

I think you are right that the immediate result of raising the minimum wage would be an increase in both spending and morale. But just as companies are dependent on profit and not cash flow to remain viable, I don’t know if these increases would be sustainable. What I worry about is the increase in above minimum wage salaries as well. Granted, these do not necessarily need to be in proportion to an increase in minimum wage – but anything less would be a decrease in overall compensation (education, skilled labor, etc, would be devalued to a degree). In the long run, I believe things would settle out except the dollar would be devalued. But who knows. You are right that this is a complex issues with many components. I just do not have as much faith that merely raising the minimum wage would do more good as harm (and let's face it, that's what we're running on...the possible effects of people's attitudes, increased morale affecting the economy, etc). Thank you, BTW, for the article.

 

[JohnDeereFan]

[personal attack edited--Please keep posts related to the OP]

 

[OldRegular]

Is the version of Christianity you’re living out the real-deal or is it the Americanized version? Here are ten ways you can tell– but there are undoubtedly many more:

[personal attack edited: Please confine your remarks to the OP]

You, Mr. Crab not only support the "party of death" in this country, the democrat party, but you continually spout its virtues.

That "party of death", the democrat party, celebrates the continuation of the American Holocaust that has murdered more than 56,000,000 unborn children in this country.

Now we learn that the group that slaughters more babies than anyone else in the country, Planned Parenthood, is harvesting for sale body parts from these babies, babies in which extra care is taken in slaughtering the baby so as not to harm certain body parts.

The anointed candidate of that "party of death" refuses to condemn the sale of body parts, which is illegal, from these carefully slaughtered children but instead parrots that disgusting mantra "women's right to choose"!

Perhaps Mr. Crab you are correct to talk about the American version of Christianity since many so-called Christians and denominations support and practice the slaughter of the unborn child.

Consider how clearly this revelation of the sale of body parts defines this country, not as a Christian nation, but more as a pagan nation. The abomination called "women's right to choose" to slaughter their unborn child is legal, but the subsequent sale of the body parts is illegal.[/b]

 

[Crabtownboy]

Ok you never answered my other question according to what I asked:


Should we be more focused on the gospel of Jesus or government coerced wealth redistribution?

Which one?

Believe I answered that. I guess you do not want any responsibility for helping those in need, the sick, the elderly, etc.

Nothing should be more important to you than following Jesus' teachings on how we are to treat others. That will show you have truly accepted and follow him. Do that and get all churches to do that and there will be no need for governmental programs.

Agree?

 

[Crabtownboy]

see bolded text for my response.

Thanks for your reasoned reply. I appreciate it.

 

[Revmitchell]

Believe I answered that. I guess you do not want any responsibility for helping those in need, the sick, the elderly, etc.

Nothing should be more important to you than following Jesus' teachings on how we are to treat others. That will show you have truly accepted and follow him. Do that and get all churches to do that and there will be no need for governmental programs.

Agree?

That does not answer my question. Which focus should take priority, the gospel or coerced wealth redistribution? Which one.

 

[plain_n_simple]

"When you raise the minimum wage, the companies must raise product prices..."
Why?

 

[OldRegular]

Is the version of Christianity you’re living out the real-deal or is it the Americanized version? Here are ten ways you can tell– but there are undoubtedly many more:

1. If you look at the early Christians and are in disbelief over what you find.
If your primary identity is legitimately that of a Christian, you’ll be open to learning about Christianity as it was taught and lived by the earliest Christians. However, from an American mindset, original Christianity and the first Christians appear nuts: they were universally nonviolent (against capital punishment, abortion, military service and killing in self-defense), rejected individual ownership of property in order to redistribute their wealth (Acts 2:44-45, Acts 4:35), and rejected any involvement with the government. When reading about them they seem rather un-American, and this will cause frustration or disbelief among those in Americanized Christianity.

First, The distribution of wealth was simply a phenomenon of the early Church under persecution in Jerusalem. There was no Biblical commandment for this practice and no other reference to the practice elsewhere in the NT.

Second, We cannot look at the practices of the early Church and assume all these practices were Biblical. For example there was a period when many Christians taught martyrdom, certainly not sanctioned by Scripture. In fact it smacks more of Radical Islam!

Third, Can we all assume that you will no longer support the "party of death", the democrats. Certainly abortion is contrary to Scripture!

Fourth, Jesus Christ instructed His disciples to: Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s.

Fifth, In a dictatorship, monarchy, just how does the individual get involved with government?

2. Your chief concern with Muslims is how to defeat them instead of how to show them the love of Christ.
The chief calling of a Christ-follower is to love others. Whether a neighbor across the street, or an enemy across the world, Christ’s command is abundantly clear: we are to love one another. If your initial posture toward Muslims is that of viewing them as a threat instead of viewing them as people Jesus has commanded we radically and self-sacrificially love, then your Christianity might be Americanized.

You incorrectly state that "The chief calling of a Christ-follower is to love others." The chief calling of the Christian is to: And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment. If we go to the book of Revelation we see that Jesus Christ rebuked the Church at Ephesus because they had left their first love.

Furthermore the commands of Jesus Christ to love one another was given to his disciples:

John 13:34. A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.
John 13:35. By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.
John 15:12. This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you.
John 15:17. These things I command you, that ye love one another.

There are numerous commands in the Epistles that we are to love one another. Most of these are clearly commands given to believers. The parable of the good Samaritan can be used to support loving your neighbor. But Islam is not my neighbor.

It is clear, at least to me, from the example of Jesus Christ cleansing the Temple of those who defiled it, that our love is not necessarily to extend to Islam!

Strange that you preach love to Islam but cannot preach love to the unborn.

3. If you can recite more of the US Constitution and Bill of Rights than you can the Sermon on the Mount.
Love the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights because they set the foundation for our country? Well, did you know that the Sermon on the Mount serves the same function for the new, otherworldly Kingdom principles that Jesus followers are supposed to be living by? If you’re more familiar with America’s founding documents than you are the foundation of Jesus’s teachings, your Christianity might be Americanized.

Ability to memorize is not a test of discipleship.

4. If you’re going to spend more time focused on the presidential election than serving real people around you.
Jesus calls us to get busy serving the least of these– to get our hands dirty, to embrace the position of “servant of everyone,” and to pour ourselves out as we endeavor to change the world right where we are. America on the other hand, invites us to view political power and force of government as the solution to the world’s problems, and that’s a tempting offer for both liberals and conservatives. If you’re more focused on what they could do than what you can do, your Christianity might be Americanized. (And here’s one similar: if you judge the heart of fellow Christians because you don’t like the political candidate they voted for, your Christianity might be Americanized.)

According to the above the Government should not attempt to solve the nations problems. It follows that the government should leave helping the poor to the true believers. Good to see you reject Socialism Mr. Crab!

It is not my task to judge the heart of anyone. God will judge those who practice and support the slaughter of the unborn child. However, as Paul teaches in 1st Corinthians 5 the Christian is to judge the moral behavior of those within the congregation. Other Scripture deal with doctrinal infidelity!

5. If you advocate cutting government programs for the poor but don’t actually tithe yourself.
An American value is small government and low tax rates, but a Christian value is the elimination of poverty– which is precisely why the early Christians shared their wealth instead of hoarding it. However, while many American Christians fight for lower taxes, the average American Christian doesn’t give money to charity. Where the early church shared everything, statistics show that Americanized Christians share almost nothing- less than 5% even tithe to their church. When we reject the Americanization of Christianity, we become focused on how to give more, not on how to give less.

First, The tithe is not required of the Christian.

Second, The affluent Churches generally tear down their barns and build bigger ones, not help the poor.

Third, You incorrectly carry the example of the sharing of wealth in Church in Jerusalem to all Churches!

Fourth, It is a fact that Republicans and Conservatives give far more money to charity than do liberals.

Fifth, Where in Scripture does it say that a Christian value is to eliminate poverty. Jesus Christ tells us: For ye have the poor with you always, and whensoever ye will ye may do them good: but me ye have not always.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/formerlyfundie/americanized-christianity/[/QUOTE]

Continued!

 

[OldRegular]

Is the version of Christianity you’re living out the real-deal or is it the Americanized version? Here are ten ways you can tell– but there are undoubtedly many more:

6. If you say “we’re a nation of laws” in reference to immigrants faster than you quote what the Bible says about immigrants.
For a nation of immigrants, American culture has a shockingly hostile posture toward them. When this bleeds into our Christianity, we see Christians adopt a hostile posture as well– and that’s the last possible posture a Christian should have. The Bible has plenty to say on immigrants, and consistently lists them as one of the vulnerable groups of people God-followers care for. While the government has a right to determine who can come and who must go, the primary posture of a Christian is that of radical love towards immigrants of every type.

It is false to say that we are a nation of immigrants.

I could make the same argument about most nations but it would be false. For example one could argue that Israel of the Old Testament was a nation of immigrants since the children of Israel TOOK the land of promise after spending 400 years in Egypt. Certainly most of Israel when it was formed as a nation were immigrants. But we don't call it a nation of immigrants.

Another example that comes to mind is England. The Anglo-Saxons displaced the Celts, the Normans defeated the Anglo-Saxons. According to some anthropologists the Native Indians in North and South America crossed a land bridge from Siberia to Alaska and migrated southward. Yankees are still migrating southward!

7. If you think Paul’s prohibition on female teachers is straightforward, but Jesus’s teaching on enemy love is somehow open to a thousand degrees of nuance.
People often forget that Paul wrote letters to specific churches addressing specific problems that had a specific context. Yet, in a society that is still wrestling with patriarchy and sexism, we take Paul’s letter to a specific church and make it a blanket prohibition for all times and cultures. However, when we get to Jesus saying “love your enemy” and “do not respond to an evildoer with violence” we abandon that same hermeneutic and say, “Well, Jesus couldn’t have meant we’re not supposed to kill our enemies.” Why? It’s Americanization- we interpret scripture in a way that is consistent not with authorial intent, but our own culture.

The above is basically BS and it is only the liberal/left who get wrapped up in the war on women i.e., sexism!

8. If you only see sexuality in the admonition to be modest.
We are a society that sees sex in everything– and we see it in Paul’s admonitions for modesty as well. However, if you look closely you’ll see that Paul isn’t talking about sexual modesty, but is prohibiting Christians from flaunting their money with expensive clothing and jewelry. However, we don’t see that in the text because Americanized Christianity would reject the idea we aren’t supposed to own expensive and flashy things. So, we make the passages about sexual modesty so that we can enjoy our expensive and unnecessary toys without a guilty conscience– all the while policing women with yoga pants.

BS

9. If you think defeating gay marriage is the most pressing issue of our time.
Somewhere along the line, the Americanized version of Christianity taught us that defeating gay marriage was perhaps the most pressing issue of our time. Sadly, as Americans we’re taught to be self-centered and this is an incredibly self-centered view that completely ignores the global issues of our time. It is the mistaken identity that our issues are the issues. The most pressing issues of our time? Let’s start with the fact that 750 million people around the world don’t even have access to clean water or that 805 million people are chronically malnourished.

The above is a gross exaggeration since many so-called Churches have endorsed homosexual marriage. If endorsement of homosexual marriage is not an issue for true disciples of Jesus Christ then what is. Jesus Christ taught:

3. The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?
4. And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
5. And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?
6. Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

And what does homosexual marriage have to do with "the fact that 750 million people around the world don’t even have access to clean water or that 805 million people are chronically malnourished."

10. If your church honors soldiers more than the elderly woman who has been quietly teaching Sunday school for 30 years.
Because of the blending of America and Christianity, many of our churches sure do love them a man or woman in uniform. Back in my military days I remember wearing my uniform to church when I came home on leave– you get treated like you’re the most important person in the room. But you know who is the most important person in the room? It’s the person who is not in the room at all– it’s that little old lady who has quietly and lovingly been teaching the kids about Jesus while the rest of the church forgets she even exists. Americanized Christianity loves to fawn over those who fought, but the Kingdom of God teaches us the real heroes are the ones who are quietly serving in our midst to the point we are almost unaware they’re even among us.

I believe many Christians understand that were it not for the military we would not have the freedom to openly worship God. In fact that right is slowly being restricted by the leftist democrats and their comrades in the courts and media.

I have said on this BB that I do not believe the American Flag should be in the worship center. Furthermore, there is no such thing as a Christian Flag!

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/formerlyfundie/americanized-christianity/[/QUOTE]

 

[OldRegular]

[personal attack edited: Please confine your remarks to the OP]

You, Mr. Crab not only support the "party of death" in this country, the democrat party, but you continually spout its virtues.

That "party of death", the democrat party, celebrates the continuation of the American Holocaust that has murdered more than 56,000,000 unborn children in this country.

Now we learn that the group that slaughters more babies than anyone else in the country, Planned Parenthood, is harvesting for sale body parts from these babies, babies in which extra care is taken in slaughtering the baby so as not to harm certain body parts.

The anointed candidate of that "party of death" refuses to condemn the sale of body parts, which is illegal, from these carefully slaughtered children but instead parrots that disgusting mantra "women's right to choose"!

Perhaps Mr. Crab you are correct to talk about the American version of Christianity since many so-called Christians and denominations support and practice the slaughter of the unborn child.

Consider how clearly this revelation of the sale of body parts defines this country, not as a Christian nation, but more as a pagan nation. The abomination called "women's right to choose" to slaughter their unborn child is legal, but the subsequent sale of the body parts is illegal.[/b]

The OP is a personal attack!

 

[OldRegular]

"When you raise the minimum wage, the companies must raise product prices..."
Why?

So they can stay in business and continue to employ people.

And where in the Constitution does the Federal Government get the authority to set wages?

 

[plain_n_simple]

So they can stay in business and continue to employ people.

It is so they maintain the same profit. Greed overrides concern for others. If a business owner is only in the interest of himself, he forgets the responsibility God also gave him. "Love one another" has been replaced with "my rights" and "good business sense".

 

[JonC]

"When you raise the minimum wage, the companies must raise product prices..."
Why?

Companies are not charities; they are in business to achieve a certain profit margin. A small company may not have to pass the increase on to the consumer. Many will simply downsize the number of employees. Most small businesses run at a fairly low margin of profit and depend on keeping overhead down. Part of overhead is sustainability (companies need to stay in business even when business is slow). A company will pay much more than $5 an hour to give an employee a $5/hr raise. Not only will a company have to pass on this increase to the consumer (or decrease employment while trying to maintain productivity), but a company will also have to pass on whatever increases they have to pay for materials to do business, transportation cost increases, etc. This will snowball. We know this will snowball because we see it happen when small increases are involved merely in product (take chicken, for a recent example - but realize an increase in wages across the board is less temporary).

 

[JonC]

It is so they maintain the same profit. Greed overrides concern for others. If a business owner is only in the interest of himself, he forgets the responsibility God also gave him. "Love one another" has been replaced with "my rights" and "good business sense".

You are assuming that the average business is raking in the money. Your assumption is wrong when applied to small businesses.

 

[OldRegular]

It is so they maintain the same profit. Greed overrides concern for others. If a business owner is only in the interest of himself, he forgets the responsibility God also gave him. "Love one another" has been replaced with "my rights" and "good business sense".

You make the false assumption that all businessmen are followers of Jesus Christ!

But if a businessman is a Christian he still must make a profit to stay in business and employ people.

 

[Crabtownboy]

JonC, there is one other thing that needs to be shown. The productivity of the American workers has increased greatly. One problem is that wages have not increased at anywhere near the rate of that productivity. From the 1940's until about 1970 the two tracked very nicely and this is as it should be IMHO. The American worker is producing much more but, in reality, receiving less for being the best workers in the world. The chart below illustrates the growing gap between productivity and wages.

Here is a second chart showing how the gap accelerated in 2000. I wish the chart continued until 2013 or 2014.

 

[JonC]

JonC, there is one other thing that needs to be shown. The productivity of the American workers has increased greatly. One problem is that wages have not increased at anywhere near the rate of that productivity. From the 1940's until about 1970 the two tracked very nicely and this is as it should be IMHO.

That is a good point, CTB. I wonder how that chart would look if it included a population and inflation graph for the same time period. The issue is, as you pointed out, complex. Technology (to include the cost of technology) also complicates things.

My own economic philosophy also comes into play (capitalism vs. socialism). I believe that historically, neither are completely sustainable in their purest forms in and of themselves.