I respect your opinion about saying this parable is not about salvation, but I really disagree with you.
If I may, that is not what he said - he said it is not ONLY about salvation.
The genius of parables, proverbs, and other figurative forms of teaching is that they teach more than one thing at a time - it is the listener who interprets that for themselves.
With the parable of the lost son, for example: I've heard one woman talks about at some points in her life, certain situations meant the parables was targeting her as the proud son, other times she identified more with the lost son. Other circumstances made her sympathize with the "unfair" compassion of the Father.
The lost son got "more" than the son who had been faithful and did his duty - it is another parable that is not only about salvation (meaning both/and) but also about being content with the gifts you've been given.
However, it doesn´t mean that Socialism is right and that its rewarding/earning regarding work is fair. I can work giving my best and not complain, but I have all the right to feel this is an unfair model and try to find a job that respects my qualities as a worker and reward me for that.
Certainly! Many of us are only pointing to the parts of the current system that makes it unfair for the poor.
Here in the States, people getting assistance is not the problem, imo. The gov regulations and requirements for that assistance is what's unfair. Because here, IF you try to go to work, and you put in so many hours/wages (which your wages are figured by gross), you get a good chunk of assistance taken away.
Some people may cry "well, that's fair, you don't need it, you're working." Um, no, it's not fair. The reason it's not fair is that you are only allowed, in assets, to have 2000 at one time (car and house doesn't count). In assets, that also includes anything valuable you may have, like expensive jewelry, or antiques. That is figured into your benefits - you have to report all that. And as far as the gov is concerned, it doesn't matter if that expensive ring has been in your family a few generations - it counts against you, because you should just be able to sell it and have some cash... how is that fair?
(I know all this, because I have been there, sat down, and counted the costs, looked at the laws, and tried to formulate a plan).
Now, cost of living is high here. So, I can only save 2000 dollars, before my network AND higher wages cuts into my benefits. Now here's the rub - as I start working, (and while my GROSS income is what is figured, remember I will start paying taxes), I lose more and more benefits. If you do the math, you lose MORE benefits than you gained working. Iow, there is no financial incentive to let go of welfare, because they penalize you saving a nest egg.
So, remember that I only started out with 2000 when I went to work? Well, I gotta use that, with my new income, to pay rent MONTHLY (here ranges from like 300 for efficiency apartments to 600 - for good prices - oh and unless it's gov subsidized, it tends to go up every year or every few years. My old apartment would go up like 25 or 50 dollars every year.), buy food cos my little bit of gross took it all away, maintenance for my car (if I had one - and keeping a car requires insurance - it's law here - upkeep of the car, and gas - that's a large expense), utilities, clothes, household supplies/cleaners, internet (a source of information for finding jobs and such), good ole what-if medical insurance, and so forth.
Now, I'm being humble, getting off my "lazy" butt and working a job "beneath me" and my hours vary, I'm making 7.25 an hour BEFORE taxes, and oh, did I tell you most service work jobs here WILL NOT give you full time?
Beg for more hours, and you're probably NOT going to get them, because the managers don't make the decisions - corporate does. So, the people who actually knows what's going on in the store, who works hard and who doesn't, can't make that decision to reward hard work and penalize laziness. I've actually had a big dog, a district manager, compliment me and say "I've heard good things about you." Compliments are nice, but they don't pay the rent.
One reason people don't like "beneath you" jobs is there is NO incentive to work hard. I think many people don't work hard, because you DON'T GET REWARDED FOR IT. So why break my back doing a good job, people think, when Billy Bob over here doing nothing gets paid the same? Oh and this is corporate American - this happens union or no union (Another factor to this is worker's rights states - WV, where I was, was one of them).
I did it for two years, and got burnt out. Why? Because I get on my knees, I scrub, I was fast, I paid attention to detail, I did very good - but someone over here, who just pushes a broom a little bit, chats with customers, hides in the restroom, makes it TWO positions higher than me, because hard work isn't what's rewarded in those places - it's personality, that you-either-have-it-or-you-don't kinda thing.
And these jobs, service work, is not intended anyway to be a fixed source of income, nor can they be - which is why when people complain about others' "mooching" and not making a living off these incomes like "honest" people, really grinds my gears... because YOU CAN'T.
We are not a producing nation - we once was. A producing nation values hard work, because that is how you get things done. You want a very good product because people saved for it. However, we are now a consuming nation. You borrow to have things, cos you just can't wait and save like your grandparents did, and so, what is valued now is putting on a face, because that is how you get someone to use their credit and buy something from you.
Many people criticizing socialist aspects are older, or grew up with older parents - they saw America at a certain time when certain rules applied. They don't apply anymore. Hard work is not the key, anymore. What you produce - a clean lobby, and fast service - is not the key anymore and I know FROM EXPERIENCE. So, it's easy to get discouraged AND EVEN SO, higher positions from the bottom doesn't pay all that much more anyway, including swing managers.
So I have a hard time getting what I need from my humble, hard working job. "Get another job!" Factor in that for me, I had to ride the bus - no car. So I have to work around that schedule. Also factor in that many companies forbid you to work for their competitors at the same time. McDonald's isn't going to let you work for Burger King at the same time, which would have been a short walk for me between shifts working at both.
"Learn a trade!" How am I supposed to do that with no money for college or vocational school? How do I do that with no direction from someone? Train on the job? Many jobs don't want to train ya - cos that's what school is for! Oh wait, but, I don't have money for school, and frankly, going into debt for 10s of 1000s of dollars I will probably never pay back is not worth it to me when I can take it easy on welfare.
People may say "save up money anyway!" I've had MULTIPLE people tell me, "just hide money in your apartment." Heh, that is illegal, and if you get caught, POSSIBLE PRISON TIME because to tell the gov. you have less than you do, or to not update them on change of income is a little vice called FRAUD and a very serious crime here... people do it all the time, though, and one (though not the only) reason the laws get tighter and tighter.
For mean personally, I found a solution, though I didn't see it to fruition because I feel in love, got married, and bye bye benefits. I used the PASS program - work incentive Social Security. That is how I paid for three semesters of schooling. However the classes I could sign up for where limited cos I took the bus. And the PASS is only available to people eligible for SSI - not the same as welfare. Though people take issue with gov funded education for people on welfare and I don't understand it because that is how you learn certain trades in this country. So, for people who rail against socialism... sometimes I think they more or less rail against the poor than anyone else.
Bottom line - before I meant my husband, being on assistance, I LIVED BETTER. Yes, I did, not in emotional and happiness sense, but finally I was more secure even when I worked - just had to watch my hours. For about a year and a half, both I and my husband worked for the family business, we were paid what the business could afford, and I did better financially under disability insurance, with a check and insurance card. I'm happier now, but the strain is much greater. I am now "one of those" - we make too much for a lot of help, but too little keep up with certain expenses.
And THAT is what an honest, hardworking family looks like compared to someone on assistance. I'm not saying it's right that people stay on it - only that I understand, because the gov. and corporate business makes working unprofitable. That's right, unprofitable.
