It is inevitable in a country where the money supply comes from credit.

Paycheck to paycheck would be an improvement.  

We lived pay check to pay check for 14 years.  The credit card came when we home schooled and paid off as soon as the bill came.  That is a wonderful life!!!

Speaking of luxury items, I am reading an interesting book entitled On Luxury, A Cautionary Tale, what I find interesting is that it is written from a secular POV and yet still expounds on the problems associated with having a "luxury" mentality.  

I've only just started it but so far he has covered the ancient Roman and Greek attitudes towards luxury.  Even coming from a strictly human understanding the ancient philosophers knew that "luxury" was not good.  They equated it with effeminacy and weakness.  Of course that did not stop the small minority of wealthy individuals from indulging in it, but it did help moderate the society in general.

Marsha

While I'm sure there are many who would love unlimited material goods, I don't think the majority expect it. What I've always heard to be considered a "healthy" financial standing is to have 3-6 months wages in savings.

Paycheck to paycheck makes it stressful when there are unexpected expenses, and while we know how to cope with it spiritually, materially speaking the "ideal" is to have some savings for such events.

It makes sense to me and I don't think that is outside the bounds of being poor in spirit. 3-6 months of savings goes very quickly if there's a job loss or an accident etc... It's far from amassing unlimited wealth.

I don't think that concern for the majority living paycheck to paycheck necessarily means one is attached to luxury, it just means they recognize the difficulties those families will encounter by not having savings, which usually then reflects more difficulty onto the economy in general and fosters a vicious cycle.  

Having said that, I am only going off the comments and do not know the tone of the article. I didn't read it so I can't comment on it specifically, just on the subject generally.

"We have included in the constitution such rights as to the masses appear fictitious and not actual rights.

All these so-called "Peoples Rights" can exist only in idea, an idea which can never be realized in practical life. What is it to the proletariat laborer, bowed double over his heavy toil, crushed by his lot in life, if talkers get the right to babble, if journalists get the right to scribble any nonsense side by side with good stuff, once the proletariat has no other profit out of the constitution save only those pitiful crumbs which we fling them from our table in return for their voting in favor of what we dictate, in favor of the men we place in power, the servants of our AGENTUR

... Republican rights for a poor man are no more than a bitter piece of irony, for the necessity he is under of toiling almost all day gives him no present use of them, but the other hand robs him of all guarantee of regular and certain earnings by making him dependent on strikes by his comrades or lockouts by his masters."


The experience of poverty may come from different sources. The third joyful mystery is for the spirit of poverty ... but not in discord with the faith.

"Scientific" materialism is the secret of global communism and modernism. If that is the reason for poverty, it is not good.

The spirit of Christian poverty is not the spirit of the scam. It is not for any Christian reason that Americans and Europeans are broke, humiliated, and expropriated by the ʝʊdɛօ-Masonic NWO, when they should not be.

The important thing to realize is that Socialism (which not only includes Communism) and Capitalism are both equally scams. The intellectual founders of Capitalism, Adam Smith and David Ricardo (note: you could still make the argument that Capitalism ultimately emerged out of Protestantism, as Max Weber did, but the former were still the main formal promulgators of the theory), were both agents of influence of the British Empire (i.e. the City of London and the people behind it), who spread their ideology throughout the world in order to ensure the economic dominance of "Brittania" across the globe (if you want to look at examples of how they put Capitalism into practice, just look at the historical examples of the Irish Potato Famine and of the British colonial policies in India).    

Capitalism is just the necessary step towards Communism because it destroyed the previous Catholic economic order and laid the necessary groundwork for Communism to grow from.