Bump's Stump

For years, perhaps centuries, there has been a huge gap between rich and poor. Usually it is the very poor that complain. There are strong reasons to reduce this gap. Indeed, it sounds like the right thing to do.  On closer inspection we find that a government that attempts to do this by imposing is will - shoots itself in the foot.  Governments must be very cautious in this area. Social engineering of the economic structure of a society comes with undesireable penalties, and the government that tries to reduce the gap between rich and poor reduces or eliminates the aggressive, competitive, and risk taking so necessary in a modern society.  It's just not a good idea to take from the rich   and reward non-productive people for not being productive. The free-market concept is not perfect.  There are flaws, but the competition of a free-market is somewhat self limiting - and produces growth of an economy, which then provides more rewards for both rich and poor. 

There is more information in your  computer than there is in the Harvard Library. Students today have obtained the greatest teaching tool in all of history, the computer. In the span between World War II and now there have been huge developments in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. A giant leap forward in easily accessible knowledge. All over the world peoples are benefiting. Does this not  beg the question: "Why then are there so many problems in the world"? Certainly the number of scientists and scholars has increased exponentially.  Yet, children die for the lack of fresh water, food and shelter. Men continue to shoot at other men. The homeless die in the night. In simple "numbers", more people die every day. Not less.  Surely you say, it's because more people arrive every day, and of course, you are correct. But does that not mean that our ability to improve the life experience is not keeping up? With all of the information available to

Preface: Most of my personal extended family are members of the Catholic Church.  I am not.  I actually know very little about the  Church, certainly not enough to complain about it.  Just enough to be skeptical and curious. With over one billion members, the Catholic Church is the largest of the Christian denominations. It is also the wealthiest  church in the world, and the most inscrutable. Is the church right to have enormous amounts of cash, properties and other assets - while so many of it's members are living in poverty or worse?  The leadership of the Church seems overly impressed with pomp, ceremony and theological power. A relative few leaders take vows of poverty. Most glory in their exalted status. Does that mean an outsider is entitled to be curious and finds significant reasons to find fault with the wealth of the Church?  Am I the only critic of the desperately sick and poor that die on the front steps of huge piles of Catholic gilded concrete and marble