Lazarus at the gate.

Today's Gospel can make a comfortable middle-class American squirm. It's the parable of Lazarus, the poor man covered with sores, lying at the gate of the rich man's house, longing just to eat the scraps from his table. As our pastor put it this morning, the rich man didn't actively do anything evil to Lazarus; his sin was one of omission. He just ignored Lazarus. He was too comfortable, too complacent, too self-centered.

So what can we do to help the poor? On an individual level, I think all middle and upper-class Americans (and might I add French, Italians, Canadians, etc.) can give more, which is why I intend to add to my list of "Please Give" sites as time allows.

That's where it starts, with individuals giving more of what they have, as their own conscience dictates, to the charities they support. That's not enough, of course, and it's true that we must do more, but this proposal, for an international tax to be levied and collected by the U.N., is a dreadfully bad idea. I think we should have learned by now that the U.N. is inefficient, ineffective, and corrupt,and shouldn't be trusted to administer a child's piggy bank, much less a multi-billion dollar international tax.

According to this story, the GAO has weighed in on the idea, properly:

The Washington-based General Accounting Office (GAO), a US watchdog body, has said the United States is opposed to any suggestion that the United Nations be granted authority to impose taxes.

"Because the United Nations is an organisation of sovereign states with no independent power of its own, it has no authority to impose taxes within the jurisdictions of its member states," the GAO said.

Exactly. Also, according to this article, the Bush administration (through spokesperson U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Ann Veneman) objected to the tax proprosal on the grounds that "[international taxes] would be inherently undemocratic and impossible to implement."

Of course they would be. But, for having the courage to say so, President Bush will be criticized. Here's what the exemplary Jacques Chirac, he whose country was part of the Oil-for-Food scandal, has to say:

Chirac, who traveled to New York solely for Monday's meetings, said he and Silva would propose new approaches to fund the alleviation of poverty, although the meetings resulted in no specific proposals.

"I believe taxation is a necessity," he said at a press conference following the meeting.

The large number of supporters for the declaration creates "a new political situation" for the United States, Chirac said.

"You can't oppose that forever," he declared.

Already, he's trying to set a trap for Bush.

But, Mr. Chirac, let me tell you, we can oppose bad ideas forever. And this is a really, really bad idea.

If the U.N. was serious about alleviating poverty and hunger, there are many things they could do instead of setting up another huge bureaucracy to try to forcibly redistribute wealth.

They could advocate for democracy and actively oppose tyrants of all types, including communists and Islamofascists, since people living under dictators always are worse off than those in free countries. Best case study of that today: North vs. South Korea.

They could focus the world's attention on the corrupt leaders who steal aid money meant for their starving people.

They could urge countries to reduce taxes so that people are encouraged to take initiative to solve their problems, start their own businesses, invest in their local communities, reduce their dependency on government.

That's what I'd like to see the U.N. do, so that instead of getting the crumbs of the tax money from the U.N.'s table, the Lazaruses of the world could be invited to the party.

But while you wait for that to happen... don't forget to give a little more.