Prabhupada, June 29, 1975, Denver: […] Yes, we are rich man’s son, Krishna’s son. Why shall I work? That is the nature. A rich man’s son never works. He enjoys. We are dancing and taking nice prasadam. Why shall I work? What do you think? Poor man will work. Rich man, why they will work? He will enjoy. Krishna says, bhoktaram yajna-tapasam sarva-loka-mahesvaram [Bg. 5.29]. He is the proprietor of all planets, and we are servants of Krishna, a rich man’s servant. Why shall I work so hard? The ass will work hard, not a human being. And that is the instruction of Rsabhadeva. Full Conversation
[flashvideo filename=http://prabhupadanugas.eu/wp-content/video/MURARI.mp4 width=590 height=320 /]
Music: “Murari” by Chakrini devi dasi http://www.chakrini.com/
_____________________________________________________________________
Is Your Religion Your Financial Destiny? | New York Times
By DAVID LEONHARDT|NEW YORK TIMES — The economic differences among the country’s various religions are strikingly large, much larger than the differences among states and even larger than those among racial groups.
The most affluent of the major religions — including secularism — is Reform Judaism. Sixty-seven percent of Reform Jewish households made more than $75,000 a year at the time the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life collected the data, compared with only 31 percent of the population as a whole. Hindus were second, at 65 percent, and Conservative Jews were third, at 57 percent.
On the other end are Pentecostals, Jehovah’s Witnesses and Baptists. In each case, 20 percent or fewer of followers made at least $75,000. Remarkably, the share of Baptist households making $40,000 or less is roughly the same as the share of Reform Jews making $100,000 or more. Overall, Protestants, who together are the country’s largest religious group, are poorer than average and poorer than Catholics. That stands in contrast to the long history, made famous by Max Weber, of Protestant nations generally being richer than Catholic nations.
Many factors are behind the discrepancies among religions, but one stands out. The relationship between education and income is so strong that you can almost draw a line through the points on this graph. Social science rarely produces results this clean.
What about the modest outliers — like Unitarians, Buddhists and Orthodox Christians, all of whom are less affluent than they are educated (and are below the imaginary line)? One possible explanation is that some religions are more likely to produce, or to attract, people who voluntarily choose lower-paying jobs, like teaching.
Another potential explanation is discrimination. Scott Keeter of Pew notes that researchers have used more sophisticated versions of this sort of analysis to look for patterns of marketplace discrimination. And a few of the religions that make less than their education would suggest have largely nonwhite followings, including Buddhism and Hinduism. Pew also created a category of traditionally black Protestant congregations, and it was somewhat poorer than could be explained by education levels. These patterns don’t prove discrimination, but they raise questions.
Some of the income differences probably stem from culture. Some faiths place great importance on formal education. But the differences are also self-reinforcing. People who make more money can send their children to better schools, exacerbating the many advantages they have over poorer children. Round and round, the cycle goes. It won’t solve itself.
This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:
Correction: May 29, 2011
A chart on May 15 with an essay about how religion might affect financial destiny misstated the percentage of people identified as secular who graduated from college. It is 35 percent, not 45 percent.
A version of this article appeared in print on May 15, 2011, on page MM18 of the Sunday Magazine with the headline: IS YOUR RELIGION YOUR FINANCIAL DESTINY?
Speak Your Mind