Dear TIA,

I have been reading the Organic Society and Capitalism posts with great interest, and had the following observations and questions:

In my opinion, it seems that the introduction of the two income household as the "norm" allowed for prices of items to increase, as those families now have more income than a traditional family would. Now we are in a situation that a family with only one income struggles to make ends meet. The higher prices for items also means that people need loans for things, which make it nearly impossible for the average person to pay off. For example, even if one didn't go to college, the lack of apprenticeships makes trade schools expensive. Do you think these observations are accurate?

What would you say regarding the traditional role of insurance with regard to an organic society? It would seem that naturally, perhaps through a guild or neighborhood association, people could contribute money to a "disaster" fund should someone have an unfortunate loss. What are your thoughts regarding the insurance industry? I am studying to become an actuary, and so I am interested in ethical guidelines regarding insurance.

     Very truly yours,

     M.R.



TIA responds:

Dear M.R.,

Thank you for your consideration regarding Prof. Plinio's teachings on Organic Society.

Without having him to answer your questions, and without ourselves being experts in economics, it nonetheless seems to us that your observation that families with two incomes contribute in some way to high market prices is quite reasonable. It may well be an indirect factor among others to rising prices.

The practice of some kind of insurance would seem to be according to Catholic Morals. It was always a custom in the past for men from different professions to put money aside to help their wives and children after they pass away.

However, some peoples - such as we Americans - have a psychology that leads to a surplus of insurances. Since Americans have the tendency to panic in face of crisis or unexpected situations, they take out insurance policies to cover for every possible risk. Here, we have life insurance, health insurance; violent accident insurance; house and goods insurance in case of fire or theft, mandatory car insurance; job insurance; crop insurance, and so on. Certainly there is a real risk in some of these various situations, but it seems to us that the fear of loss has become exaggerated in many cases.

For instance, when a husband and a wife both take out life insurance naming each other as beneficiary, it is certain that when one dies, the other will receive only the amount provided in the one policy. Most of the time, however, the full amount the couple paid during their entire life is more than the amount of the policy the one party receives. Why don't they simply save that amount and have it at hand for the one who lives longer? Or they could use the money to buy an extra property, which they can rent out and then use the money to better enjoy their lives together; the property will also be a security for the one who outlives the other. It seems to us that life insurance is not always the best option.

Similar considerations could be made about many of the other insurances that constitute part of the American life. Americans pay a lot to avoid disasters that in the majority of cases don't occur.

We believe that this panic over future economic uncertainties is in large measure a consequence of the dissolution of the large family. In times past or in other countries, the wealthier members of large families helped the poorer ones in their needs.

These are some unpretentious considerations that we offer in an attempt to answer your questions.

We hope they will be of some assistance.

     Cordially,

     TIA correspondence desk

Dear TIA,

Thank you for all that you do to restore Catholic Civility. I enjoyed Please Say Children Not Kids. The picture of the little girl delivering a bouquet to the priest is charming.

What as its source? I would like to obtain a copy.

M.J.W.



Dr. Horvat responds:

Dear M.J.W.,

Your kind words about our work in Catholic Culture are much appreciated.

The amiable picture you mention is titled The Priest's Birthday, painted by V. Chevilliard (1841-1904) in days when such wholesome and beneficial relationships were still the order of the day in many villages in Catholic Europe. It is displayed in the Josef Mensing Gallery in Hamm-Rhynern, Germany.

A canvas print of this picture suitable for framing can be purchased at All Posters.

Cordially,

Marian T. Horvat

Dear TIA,

I read the article on your site about the pregnant man. It inspired me to do some research and I found this link to be of interest. I have often wondered about the extreme increase in this phenomena of babies being born with both sexual organs or transgender children in addition to homosexuality.

I had a dear Catholic friend (God rest her soul) who was on the hormone stilbestrol when she was pregnant back in the 40's. Three out of her nine children became homosexual 2 boys 1 girl. I strongly believe there is a physiological connection and effect caused by the numerous poisons we are ingesting through our food, water and environment as well as vaccines and pharmaceutical drugs that may be contributing to these perverted sexual deformities.

I refer to the book Your Health and Sanity in the Age of Treason" by Dr. Clymer. It is a must read and he reveals the hidden agenda to bring mankind to world enslavement through diet, injections and inunctions (what we receive secondarily through the animals).

I hope you had a very blessed New Year.

With prayers in Maria,

S.G.

Follow us

  Two Opposed Poles of Society:Prestige and Money

  Critique of Capitalism from an Organic Perspective - Part I

  The Harmful Mentality of Borrowing Money - Part II

  Please Say Children Not Kids

  Fast Food Is Protestant

  What America Eats - A New Tendency Sprouts