Druckschrift 
Poverty and tzedakah in Jewish law : essays and responsa / edited by Walter Jacob with Moshe Zemer
Seite
61
Einzelbild herunterladen

Alleviating Poverty 61

their fair share, and that there is no need for them to go further through private assistance.

Third, given that the tzedakah-oriented society does not favor redistributive taxes, the notion that a small cadre of very high income earners would actually benefit from a lower effective tax rate is incomprehensible from a halakhic standpoint. Though economic arguments have been proposed to support this feature of the Social Security structure,* neither poverty alleviation nor the interests of justice can be said to be well served by this inequity.

In light of these perceived systemic deficiencies, it is curious that the contemporary movements within Jewish life have not been more engaged in calling for Jewish principles in this area to be applied in the public sphere. Indeed, although the Reform and Conservative movements have passed explicit resolutions on certain features of the Social Security system,*' the core structural concerns of the tzedakah­oriented society have, presumably, been regarded as too ambitious to tackle. Both movements have focused their attention on opposing the utilization of private savings accounts for any portion of Social Security, even though the actual impact of such private accounts on poverty is speculative.*? In terms of the overall parameters of Social Security, the Conservative rabbinate has called for further study of the matter, without expressing direct reservations about the existing system. The Reform rabbinate, in a resolution passed in 1999, explicitly supported the key characteristics of the status quo in these terms:[B]eneficiaries who earned higher wages during their worklife should continue to receive benefits related to their earnings history, but the progressive nature of the program replacing a larger share of low-income workers past earnings as a protection against poverty should be maintained. It is understandable that the Reform movement, albeit contra Jewish tradition, would support the redistributive nature of the program in the name of poverty protection.