ECONOMIC COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT I.The Ideal ìIt seems fair to say that the context of discipleship/service makes all the difference. People should give, not because they are compelled by humans but because they are compelled out of their debt to God or their love for others.î II. The Counter-Ideal A. Current Context îBut what about the context that de Toqueville was writing out of--a political context that seems to be placing faith in God as a secondary issue? (Arguably the case America finds itself in today.) Can 'We the People...' allow something like laise-faire "liberty"--i.e., opportunistism, selection, adaptation, etc.--run the day?î B. Resulting View: Victimization (judging ourselves by ourselves: 2Cor. 10:12) Isn't, as Engles said, the profit of the rich built upon the backs of the poor? Is there not a 'closed' economic system wherein every opportunity taken by a successful business person is crafted by taking advantage of someone else? III. Ideal vs. Reality Or is America truly a "meritocracy" where those who succeed do so because they were somehow more skilled or better prepared? Do the poor deserve it? Do the rich? IV. The Gaping Result And if there is not a 100% correlation between what an individual "has" and what they've "earned" where is that difference made up? V. Purpose in the Gap Is it God's will that some are poor and others rich? VI. The ëHowí of Purpose Is it the responsibility of the rich to help the poor? Is it the responsibility of the government to enforce redistribution of wealth? Or should the government lower taxes, cut programs like welfare (or privatize them), and only spend tax dollars on things that "everyone" uses anyway, like roads, sewer systems, international space stations, M1A1 Abrams tanks, and elementary schools?