The issue of economic disparity seems impossible to address effectively within the current US two-party system and accompanying campaign finance mechanisms. If the economic inequalities are an issue of injustice, then it seems that they must be serving justice, as long as they do no harm.
Effectiveness is another question: would it be the passage of the “Robin Hood Tax” (and to what extent would it be watered down), the starting of a movement or the passage of certain legislative reforms that would mark it as successful? I would argue that they have already been effective at focusing attention on the issue. How far will they go? That would seem to depend on their creativity and leadership.
Inviting them in (as with the sanctuary movement) seems like a great way for the church to be supportive.
They are certainly pointing to what increasing numbers of people feel is an over-the-top inequality, though some might not see it as an injustice per se. I agree with you that effectiveness means getting concrete with something like the “Robin Hood” tax, which I believe is the small tax on financial transactions (maybe international transactions) sometimes called the Tobin tax. (James Tobin was an economist who advocated such a tax maybe 30 years ago).
On the leadership, i just read someone encouraging their leaders to be a bit more visible, to admit there are representative leaders on particular areas of concern, people to negotiate with police, etc.
Thanks for the feedback!
The insurance industry and the banking industry are two sides of the same coin. Certainly it is quite clear from the events that have transpired in the U.S. after Hurricane Katrina and in New Zealand after the recent earthquakes in Christchurch would indicate that the same standard of morality applies.