The Christian Economist by Dave Arnott

Social Security is not social, nor secure. It’s not working, because it’s not aligned with God’s design. We were created as social creatures, with the innate need and desire to care for one another. But social security is not a voluntary system, so it denies humans the freedom that God intended for them to have.

Widows and Orphans
James 1:27 says, “Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction.” It mentions those two groups because they didn’t own land. In the agrarian economy of the first century, if you didn’t own land, you couldn’t supply your own needs. Someone had to do it for you. And, that “someone” was the church, which is made up of neighbors and friends of those widows and orphans.
On August 14, 1935, Congress decided the federal government should take over that role, and social security was born. But here’s the problem: The government has no money. It must take before it can give. So it violates the eighth commandment, against stealing. The church, however, can give without taking.
Abraham Kuyper called this idea Sphere Sovereignty. In Biblical directives, the first supplier of needs for the poor was supposed to be the family, then the church. If a breadwinner died, it was his brother’s responsibility to take care of the destitute family. It’s clearly a violation of Biblical principles for the poor to be cared for by the government. And, as I’ll point out later, the program has grown well beyond caring only for the poor.
The government should punish evil but not do good. The church should do good but not punish evil. Those statements by my fellow Christian Economist Art Lindsley make a clear assignment of God’s missions for the church and the government. But, government just can’t keep it’s hands out of the cookie jar. We really should expect that, shouldn’t we? We know government officials are fallen, so some means of control is necessary. In the first 48 years of the program, they were controlled by keeping social security separate. Then, in 1983, Congress was looking for sources of revenue and spotted the Social Security trust fund. They put their hand in the cookie jar, by borrowing against it.
Here's at least two problems with social security: It’s not social, and it’s not secure.

It's not Social
What’s social about forcing people to give up their hard-earned money, so congress can re-distribute it to someone else? I particularly feel sorry for the 20-year-olds in my class at Dallas Baptist University. They are going to pay for MY social security, yet, they will not get any of their money back. As I was explaining to them, just this week, that’s why we like markets, because they are voluntary. Social security is forced. And, if you want a general trend, it is that the Bible favors voluntary exchanges, not forced extractions from unwilling people.

It’s not Secure
Travis Nix authored an article in the Wall Street Journal recently titled Higher Taxes Won’t Save Social Security.
He points out that “The Social Security administration forecasts that without benefit cuts or structural reforms, the entitlement program will run out of money in 2035.” I cited a Congressional Budget office data recently that pegs the year at 2033.
Social Security is currently funded through payroll taxes paid by both the employer and employee at 6.2% each for the first $162,000 earned.

THE Truth, as mentioned in John 8:32, means we should seek objective agreement about economic measures.  Accepting THE truth gives freedom, while multiple truths removes freedom. 

Lies, Damned Lies, and Economics
That’s a rephrasing of the old quip attributed to Mark Twain.  In the original version it reads “There are three kinds of lies: Lies, Damned lies and Statistics.”  
Just a few of the economic mistruths stated by President Biden in his recent state of the union speech.
 

“We created more new jobs in two years than any president did in their entire term.” First, the government does not “create” jobs in the private sector.  They could help “Create” them in the public sector, but those are paid for by taxing the private sector.   And, technically, more people found jobs, but that’s because we were on a recovery from the pandemic.  We count the PERCENTAGE change, and the percentage is nowhere near the best in Presidential history.  Here’s how the New York Times explains it, “By percentage, Mr. Biden’s first two years still lag behind the job growth of his predecessors’ full terms. The economy added 8.5 percent more jobs under Mr. Biden so far, compared with 8.6 percent in President Barack Obama’s first term, 10.5 percent in President Bill Clinton’s first term, 11.2 percent in President Ronald Reagan’s second term and 12.8 percent in President Jimmy Carter’s four years in office.”

 
Oh, by the way: If the President is taking credit for creating every new job, is he also taking credit for every job that was destroyed?
 

The President mentioned the term “Fair share” again: I’ve written and spoken about this many times.  It’s a clear violation of the tenth commandment: Don’t covet.  57% of Americans pay no income tax.  What would be their fair share?  How can paying nothing be fair?  The President said confidently, “By the way, there’s a thousand billionaires, and they pay an average of 3 percent in taxes.”  The New York Times points out that the 400 richest families paid 8.2%.  Almost triple what the President said.  To get to the 3% figure the President quoted, you have to include, as income, stocks and other assets that the wealthy own that they did NOT sell.  So the president is complaining, “The rich only pay income tax on their income”, which is the tax code.  As someone who spent his entire adult life in politics, he’s had time to change this if he wanted.


“We’ve reduced the national debt, so far, $1.7 trillion in two years.”  He said debt, but he meant annual deficit.  There’s a big difference.  The New York Times points out, “Total debt has actually increased from $27.8 trillion on his inauguration to about $31.5 trillion as of today.   His former boss, Barack Obama made the same claim some years ago.  Annual deficit was bumping along at about $500 billion a...

Government employees work in a monopoly where the fallen nature is encouraged.  Private employees work in competitive environments which discourage self-interest. 
 
What happened to the term “civil servant?”  Honestly, I have not heard that term used in twenty years.  The idea was that workers who earned their living in the public sector were serving society.  Not so much anymore. 
 
Sand on the Tracks
Roy Orr was a Democrat, who served a term as the President of the National Association of Counties.  I was once part of a leadership group interviewing Orr, and he continually used the phrase, “Sand on the tracks…That’s all we were, sand on the tracks.”  Okay, here’s the explanation: If a train gets stuck on a steep hill, or the tracks are iced over, they throw sand on the tracks for traction.  The sand gets smashed by the extremely heavy locomotive.  During a visit to a policy-making committee in Washington, he was dismayed that the staff was not showing much interest in his proposals.  The bureaucrats told him in private, “You’re just sand on the tracks.”  Meaning: Mr. Orr would soon be gone, and the bureaucrat could do what he wanted.  See why this podcast is titled “The Death of the Civil Servant?”  That’s because they are not serving society anymore, they are serving their own self-interest. 
 
Work is Good
It’s the title of podcast #24, and it earns a spot on the ten Biblical Commandments of Economics in the book titled Biblical Economic Policy that I wrote with Sergiy Saydometov.   When folks work in the private sector, they work in a competitive environment.  That means, they must serve the customer before they get served.  It’s one of my favorite lessons of economics that I will explain to my sophomores at DBU next week.  In a competitive environment, the firm must serve the customer first, before the firm gets served.  In a competitive environment, discrimination harms the discriminator. 
But the public arena is non-competitive.  People work in a monopoly: There is only one street department, one sewer department, one police department, and only one public library.  If you don’t like their service, you have no competitive supplier to switch to.
Okay, certainly there are good people who work in government.  In the Christian worldview, we believe everything was made for God’s good purpose.  But all of it CAN be used for bad purposes.  My point today is that public government jobs encourage the fallen nature, while the private, competitive sector punishes the fallen nature. 
Historically, civil servants were paid less than private servants.  The reason was a simple concept from finance: Risk and return.  Working in the public sector was seen as having less risk, so there was less pay.  Now, that kinda makes sense.  When the economy is bad, as it is today – I could read a dozen business headlines about companies laying off employees – workers in the private sector lose their jobs.  In the public service corps, there seldom are staff reductions.  The assumption is that when others lose their jobs, there is even MORE work for the public sector to do, to make up for it.  In economics, John Maynard Keynes said that the government must “spend against the wind,” and he was right.  Banks and other private institutions naturally retreat in the face of a recession.  If every entity does that, it takes a long time to recover.

Recent pay increases for the poor have out-paced inflation, which is more support for the idea that the market will take care of the poor, if we just let it operate freely.  
The Democrat party has given up on caring for the poor via minimum wage, and the market has taken over that role.  An article in the Wall Street Journal this week declares, “Biggest Pay Raises Went to Black Workers, Young People and Low-Wage Earners.”  The subtitle reads, “Median weekly earnings rose 7.4% last year, outpacing inflation: Some groups notched double-digit gains.”
For decades, the Democrats claimed to be the patron of the poor by calling for increases in the minimum wage.  Then, strangely, they went silent on the issue.  Either they learned some Christian Economics, or had more fun causing inflation that harmed the poor.  I don’t know.
But the economic fact is that the federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour has been underwater for many years now.  When a minimum wage is below the equilibrium wage, we call that “non-binding.”  So for many semesters now, in my econ class at Dallas Baptist University, I’ve been pointing out that the Buc-ee’s starting wage of $12 is well above the federal minimum wage.
 
The Trump Economy Revisited
Quoting from the WSJ article again, “Black workers, young workers and people on the bottom of the income scale were among those who saw the largest pay increases last year, when employers were readily handing out raises in a tight labor market and high inflation environment.”  Tight labor markets are good for the poor.  The last time we saw the poor get rich at a faster rate than the rich got rich was during the incredible economic growth produced by the Trump administration’s tax-cutting.  That swelled the pockets of the poor faster than any government program in history.  The big difference is this: During the Trump administration, inflation was below 2%, and now it’s in the 7% range.
But The Christian Economist rejoices when the poor make progress, especially when they make more progress than the rich.  More data: The median raise for Black Americans employed full time was 11.3%, compared with the prior year. Weekly pay for workers between 16- and 24-years old rose more than 10%. The bottom 10th of wage earners—those that make about $570 a week—saw their pay increase by nearly 10%.
 
Sorry Mr. Piketty
He’s the guy who is always reminding the nimble-minded about the gap between the rich and the poor.  Well, according to the WSJ, it just narrowed.  Oh, Mr. Piketty was busy in 2021, publishing the book A Brief History of Equality, hmmm maybe that history got extended since folks got MORE equal, as reported this week.  And, he made another contribution to free market capitalism by offering the book for sale titled Time for Socialism.  Get the hypocrisy? He’s selling a book for profit, in a free market economy titled Time for Socialism.  If it really WAS time for Socialism, wouldn’t he be practicing the dicta – From each according to his ability,

Gridlock is good, at the national level.  More political and economic decisions should be made at the state and local levels.  The Bible calls for even more decisions at the family and church levels. 
 
A friend asked recently about the “horrible” in-fighting that was necessary to elect Kevin McCarthy speaker of the house.  I responded, “Gridlock is good.”  As the process played out, every day, Congressman McCarthy gave up more power, to gain the election.  This is what the founders had in mind. They did not want a powerful speaker, like Nancy Pelosi.  Power is an economic good: The more of it that is concentrated in the hands of the speaker the less gets distributed throughout the house of Representatives.  So, we have a weak speaker of the House.  That’s good for governance AND for economics.   
One of the best books on this topic is misnamed, but it makes this point very well.  It’s titled Cowards, and it was written by Glenn Beck.  He makes the point that elected government officials are cowards for not standing up to excessive spending that produces national debt.  
 
The Christian Worldview
Michael Horowitz is an agnostic Jew who explains the Christian Worldview very effectively in his book Dark Agenda: The War to Destroy Christian America.  He explains how the founding fathers understood the fallen nature of humans and thus designed a three-part competitive system with checks and balances.  Think about it: If you thought people were NOT fallen, you would give them unlimited power.  But they ARE fallen, so we don’t give them power.  Or, we shouldn’t.
The Christian worldview has three elements: Creation, fall, redemption.  Economics is the study of the production and distribution of goods and services in a scarce environment.  In the garden, we believe Adam and Eve had work to do, but there was abundance, not scarcity.  Scarcity starts with the fall.  That’s where economics starts.  Without the fall, there is no economics.  The third element in the Christian Worldview is redemption.  In economics, we believe God calls us to redeem resources to their creational intent, to serve our neighbors. 
In our current day, it’s very obvious that our economic system is out of whack and headed for a debt cliff.  Why?  The government has denied the fallen nature.  I’m writing a podcast on the subject of how the Democrat party denies the fallen nature, which will unpack more on that subject, but I will concentrate only on spending today.  Fiscal policy includes two elements: Taxing and spending.  The experience of the Democrats controlling Congress, the Senate, and the Presidency over the last two years, has shown us what happens there is agreement and a LACK of gridlock.  I unpack more details in podcast #146 titled Power Corrupts.
OK, I have presented the Christian worldview, because I’m the Christian economist.  But the Jewish worldview also encourages free debate.  The word Israel, means “To struggle with God,” and disagreement is at the core of Jewish culture.
 
National Debt Limits Freedom
The obnoxious spending of the Biden administration, when the Democrats controlled both houses of the legislature and the Presidency, should be ample evidence of why the founders designed a system of checks and balances.

Karl Marx said that workers should own the means of production.  In the digital economy, they do: a computer and a smartphone. 

Karl Marx called for workers to have ownership of the means of production.  When he wrote The Communist Manifesto with Friedrich Engels in 1847 they didn’t.  In 2023, they do.  You see, we’ve moved from a production to an information economy.

Digital Economics
The term digital Marxism was invented by Daniel Pink in his 2002 book titled Free Agent Nation.  The book is mostly about the rise of the gig economy, which I explained in more detail in podcast #51 titled God’s Gig Economy.  One of the enablers of the gig economy is digital Marxism.
Ok, Marx stated that the workers must own the means of production.  This is based on the fallen nature of humans, which we find in the Christian Worldview.  We believe God created a perfect world, fallen humans messed it up, and we find salvation through the acceptance of Jesus Christ as our savior.  Clearly, Karl Marx didn’t believe in the first and third parts, but he DID accept the fallen nature.  I have more to say about him in podcast # 106 titled Karl Marx and the Devil.  The fallen nature is important to economics, by the way.  Economics is the study of the production and distribution of goods and services in a scarce environment.  Scarcity started with the fall.  And, just about every important economic concept is based on the scarcity assumption.  That’s why digital Marxism is so fascinating. 
So, Marx looked at the fallen nature of demanders of labor in the middle of the 19th century and noticed they were taking advantage of the scarcity they owned: That is, the supply of work.  And, Marx had a lot to complain about: Child labor, terrible, dangerous working conditions, and a six-day workweek were common.  There was more supply than demand for labor, and the factory owners took advantage of labor.  But, then, as the century progressed, things didn’t get worse, as Marx predicted, instead, they got better.  Marx and his patron, Friedrich Engels finally surmised that their prediction was NOT coming true, and workers were NOT going to rebel on their own, so Socialism needed a push, which was provided by the political force of Communism.  Vladimir Lenin enters the picture in the early years of the 20th century, and the economic idea of socialism rightly earns a very bad reputation as it was enforced by political power.  Things haven’t changed much in a hundred years.  Socialism is STILL based in power. 
Karl Marx claimed that workers must own the means of production.  As Daniel Pink points out, in the information age, they do. 
I ask my students at Dallas Baptist University to picture either of their parents at work.  What are they doing?  In the information age, it’s very likely they are staring at a computer or talking on a smartphone.  Three elements are at work here:

Training.  Training is free.  You learn how to run a computer at a tax-supported school that’s free.  
The mechanism.  A computer costs about $500 and a smartphone about the same.  If you can’t afford a computer, you can use one at the public library for free.  If you can’t afford a phone, the government will give you an Obama phone.  And for those of us who know the phrase, “There’s no free lunch,” take a look at your cellphone bill, you paid for it.  
Distribution of information.  It’s free also.  Again: If you use the computer at the library, they are providing internet service for free, and if you have an Obama phone, you get the service for free.


Freedom of Labor
You can work for anyone.

China will NOT become the world’s greatest economic power, because their economic model is not aligned with reality, as the Christian Worldview is.
 
The 18th and 19th centuries could be considered the centuries of the United Kingdom.  And, the 20th was the century of the United States.  The Chinese are claiming that the 21st century is the Chinese Century, both geo-economically and geopolitically.  But, it’s not going to happen.  China will NOT become the world’s greatest superpower.  Not in 2023, nor 2030, nor 2050.  Why not?  Their economic model is not aligned with reality, or as I like to call it, the Christian Worldview.
 
The Yin Yang
First, just a LITTLE philosophy, and it’s a little because I’m not much of a philosopher.  The Chinese believe that good and bad are intermingled, as shown in the yin-yang.  As it turns, good and bad move together.  Their belief is that the US was on top for a century, and now as the yin-yang turns, they will be on the top.  They believe they have less control over their fate than Christians do.  And, they believe good and evil are intermingled, while we believe that good and evil are SEPARATE entities, and that evil is a parasite on good.  
Now, back to economics.  The Japanese Center for Economic Research issues a periodic assessment of trends in Asia-Pacific economies, and as recently as 2021 it forecast that China’s nominal GDP would exceed America’s by 2029. No longer. The Japanese think tank now estimates that the U.S. will maintain a healthy lead over the People’s Republic, with U.S. GDP exceeding $41 trillion in 2035. China’s will be closer to $36 trillion.
 
Move the Labor Force
When I was a PhD student in the early 1990’s, experts were saying that China couldn’t grow because their infrastructure was undeveloped.  They didn’t have the roads, water & sewer, electricity, telecommunications, nor railroads systems.  They overcame those logistical hurdles by moving the labor force from the countryside to the burgeoning Pearl River delta cities of Guanzhou, Shenzen, and Donguan.  That was pretty easy.  Just make stuff near the port, put it in a sea-going container, and it can reach any port in the world in a few days. 
They have experienced what economists call the “catch-up” effect.  It’s kinda like, if you want to be the most improved basketball team in the conference, you start out as the worst.  China started out as an undeveloped economy when they were freed from Communist Socialism starting in about 1978.  They put their foot in the door of free market capitalism, but now under Xi Jinpeng, they are slamming it shut.  Their economy reportedly grew at 9% for about 20 years.  This year it’s down to five percent.  Okay, mostly because of Covid, but that’s concealing the problem of centralized government.   But the Japanese Economic source I cited earlier, thinks China’s growth will be 2% or lower by 2030, because of the authoritarian rule of President Xi and the one-child policy that has shrunk the labor pool.  That 2% growth compares with 3%, which the US has averaged for over a hundred years.  
 
Economic Freedom
Frederick Hayek made the point that freedom is the underlying concept of an effective economic policy.  It’s the first of the Ten Commandments of Biblical Economics that S...

#154 Predicting the Future
 
Christians should look forward to the future with great anticipation.  Of course the future is uncertain, but that’s what gives us economic freedom.
 
Predictions are difficult, especially about the future.
That quote from Danish physicist Neils Bohr was about the uncertain future use of nuclear power.  But, it certainly applies to economic forecasts.  Almost everyone on Wall Street and in Washington got 2022 wrong.  Well, economically, the folks in Washington are not supposed to have anything to do with the economy, and until about a hundred years ago, they didn’t.  Try finding a newspaper article from 1910 about the economy that blames ANYTHING on the government.  It just didn’t happen.  The economy was seen as a force of nature that humans could not control.  Then with Economic Humanism, which I explain in podcast #21, we decided that WE were in charge of the economy.  
It’s correlational, and maybe it’s causal that the founding of the Fed in 1914 –  which was supposed to deal with monetary policy – coincides with the growth of fiscal policy.  The founding of the Fed was followed by severe regulatory fiscal policy from Franklin Roosevelt, who essentially stole power from the legislative branch to empower the presidency.  
 
Securities are not Secure
“Secure” came into English in the 1530s, from Latin securus. When applied to persons, securus could mean "free from care, quiet, or easy.”  The original meaning in English was “free from danger.”
Initially, the word was applied to property pledged for a loan. That’s logical because the property was intended to make the loan “free from danger” to the lender. Somewhat later the word began to be applied to evidentiary documents verifying loans and collateral, and eventually, all documents that proved financial rights.  Okay, you have a secure LEGAL right to the property in a limited liability corporation, but there is no FINANCIAL security.  Anywhere, anytime, as a matter of fact.  It’s just a fact of human nature.  Nothing is secure, except of course, most Christians view our salvation as secure.  But, we still use the word “security” in finance.  Collateral is security for a loan. Stocks and bonds are securities.
Since we have a human nature that demands security, it gets supplied by many things in life: Money, stocks and bonds, relationships, and self-esteem.  But none of those are secure.  People find happiness when they learn to live in that insecure environment. 
The generation of my sophomores at Dallas Baptist University are the richest generation ever.  I mean…..in the history of the world.  There has NEVER been a richer generation.  Then why do they feel so insecure?  And by “they” I mean the generation.  Why do 22% of them report that anxiety affected their academic performance?  It’s because of today’s topic: They are unable to predict the future.
Currencies are called notes.  During the Gold Standard, they literally were notes.  The British currency is called the pound because it represented a pound of silver.  The Polish currency is called the Zloty because the word means “gold.”  How about the dollar?  It’s from the low German word “daler” which means a coin made from silver from the Joachimsthaler silver mine in what’s now the Czech Republic.  
But,

#153 How to Destroy an Economy
Four policies are attempting to destroy the US economy.  Let's pray they don't.
 
In the history of mankind, countries, and economies have come and gone.  We know what destroys them.  I’m sorry to observe that the United States economy, the greatest economy in world’s history, is taking steps toward destruction.  
I’m an academic, and I’m pleased and proud to give citations where necessary.  Today’s idea comes from an article in the Epoch Times by Victor Davis Hanson titled, If you really wanted to destroy the US.  He knows more about political history than I do, and his article goes in that direction.  My observations, predictably, are about the economy.  
 
Destroy the Dollar
I unpacked some of this idea in podcasts #101 titled Inflating Inflation, and in podcast #62 The End of Fed Independence. 
As covid was ending and demand was rising, the government used fiscal policy to spend trillions.  The Fed kept interest rates low, as they increased the money supply.  That’s a classic formula for inflation.  If you increase the supply of dollars and keep constant the products they are buying, the currency will depreciate.  Inflation harms the poor, who we Christians care about.  The last two quarterly reports had inflation at 8.5%, then 7.1%.  You realize, that’s four times the goal of 2%.  Think about it: If a sophomore in my econ class was hoping for a B, by earning 80%, and she actually earned 20%, would a parent be proud of that achievement?  But that’s what the administration is doing: They are bragging that, at 7.1%, inflation is only four times what they want it to be.  See if your kids are happy with four times fewer toys at Christmas.  
Why is the dollar still strong on the foreign exchange?  Because, even though the US is doing terrible, the other developed countries are doing terriblier.  We are the best house in a bad neighborhood.  
 
Increase the National Debt
When my sophomores at Dallas Baptist University were born, the national debt was about $5 trillion.  It’s now $31 trillion.  But, millions, billions, trillions, it all gets confusing, so let me give you some context.  When my sophomores were born, the debt to GDP ratio was 56%.  It’s now 121%.  It has more than doubled in twenty years.  And, the last six years have been really frightening.  National debt has ballooned from $20 trillion when my sophomores were in high school, to now $31 trillion, and they’re only half way through college. 
SOME debt is not so bad, it depends on what you do with it.  Using debt as leverage is good.  That’s where Dave Ramsey and I depart.  He says you should have NO debt.  It seems to me that debt as leverage makes you richer.  Of course, there’s risk.  There is always risk.  But the current debt that the United States is accumulating is not being used to build capital infrastructure that creates more value, it is being used to maintain social programs.  Which, by the way, the church is supposed to do, but I’ve spoken quite a lot on that in the last few weeks.  
This year, the government will take in almost $5 trillion and spe...

#152 Giving to the Poor
The Government is populated by people who serve their own self-interest, by spending other people’s money.  Churches are populated by people who have committed to serve the interest of others, with their own money.
 
Should we give to the poor, or help the poor?  That interesting question was posed by one of you, who listens to the Christian Economist podcast.  
 
When Helping Hurts
The first answer comes from the book When Helping Hurts by Corbett and Fikkert.  I was pleased to meet Brian Fikkert at a meeting of the Christian Economic Forum.  Partly to thank him for his very good book, but also, to discover there IS a Christian Economist taller than me: I’m about 6-foot-4, and Brian is about 6-foot-7.  Oh, the other source is a very good series of videos hosted by Michael Mathison Miller at the Acton Institute, called Poverty Cure.  
I could state numerous scriptures, here are just a couple. Proverbs 29:7 reads, The righteous care about justice for the poor, but the wicked have no such concern.   Matthew 25: 35: For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in.  
There’s pretty good agreement that Christians are supposed to care for the poor. The question is, “How”? 
 
God’s Sovereignty &Man’s Responsibility
When I posed this question in my Dallas Baptist University class last week, I asked students for a better theological term to describe what I was talking about.  I didn’t get very good answers.  So I will use this title, given to Ginger and I in a Sunday School class some ten years ago.  God is Sovereign and can do whatever He wants.  If he wants to help the poor, he can do it via His miraculous power.  But, for some reason, He chooses to do his work through humans, which means it is man’s responsibility.    So, he puts poor people in front of us, and expects us to care for them.  When do we turn away from the poor and say “God will take care of them,” and when do we jump in and help because it’s man's responsibility?
 
Too Much Freedom
OK, this one is difficult for me, because when Sergiy Saydometov and I wrote Biblical Economic Policy, the first of the Ten Commandments of Economics we found was People Should be Free.  And, as I have studied and learned more in the two years since we wrote the book, I have become even more convinced that the intersection of Christianity and Economics is freedom.
But, you can’t find any society where people are perfectly free.  I’m going to have more to say about this in a future podcast, where I will attempt to explain the term Expressive Individualism, from the best book I’ve read this year, The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self by Carl Trueman. 
But for now, let’s accept that you can’t have a perfectly free society.  And that’s where a recent article in the Wall Street Journal comes in.  Titled