Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Robbing Pietro to pay Paolo? The zero-sum game in Italy’s welfare state
Robbing Pietro to pay Paolo? The zero-sum game in Italy’s welfare state
Dec 8, 2025 10:25 PM

Robbing Peter to pay Paul. This is an idiomatic expression about bad – or at least disappointing – economics.

Curiously, it was born within the context of the Church’s supposedly poor financial administration of its properties. While there are many sources to the origin of the idiom, there is a famous story from 17th C. England when a bishop was said to have ordered funds transferred from one old church (St. Peter’s Abbey) to another in disrepair (St. Paul’s Cathedral). Thus St. Paul’s was helped but not without St. Peter’s suffering greatly financially.

To play by this “economic switch-a-roo” essentially means to dispose of one debt by simply incurring a similar one – and usually within a shared bad balance sheet, as may have been the case in the same poorly financed English diocese while managing its troubled assets.

Implied in the expression, most importantly, is the close relationship the two apostles Peter and Paul had and that, therefore, should never be strictly disassociated from one another. Both Peter and Paul should be helped together, and not one at the expense of the other.

In economic terms Peter and Paul should be in a win-win, not a win-lose relationship.

Therefore, robbing Peter to pay Paul is often used pejoratively to speak of situations when the economic winners are a direct consequence of the economic losers: a zero-sum game. As Paul celebrates, Peter kicks and screams.

In Rome, where Peter and Paul are co-patron saints and both venerated on the same municipal holiday (June 29), ironically the idiomatic expression is not so well known as it is practiced by locals. Roman politicians and public administrators are especially good at Peter-and-Paul theft!

The latest robbing of Peter to pay Paul was announced earlier this week, making national headlines. It was reported that Roman welfare bureaucrats “stole” from one part of a public entitlement budget, known as INPS, to “pay” for another of its popular benefits – an unemployment program just passed under the current legislature and promoted by the Five Star Movement, Italy’s populist party.

In this specific case, Rome’s INPS managers will be taking away a percentage of retirement benefits worth 250 million euros – especially from “golden pensioners” earning over €100,000 – in order to make promised back payments for “citizens’ wages”, a monthly stipend of €780 now guaranteed to all non-working Italian adults.

In a May 22 La Stampa article Pensioni tagliate a 5,6 milioni d’italiani per ripagare il reddito di cittadinanza (“Pensions cut to 5.6 million Italians pensate owed citizens’ wages”), we learn:

The financial move will hit 5.6 million Italians. This will affect pensions exceeding three times the minimum (1,522 euros gross per month) and applied starting in April. Also, cuts will be made to “golden pensions”, [that is,]… for pensions exceeding 100,000 euros gross per year starting [retroactively] from January 1, 2019 and for five years. In a maneuver from the intervention on pensions exceeding 100 thousand euros, a savings of 76 million euros is foreseen in 2019, 80 million in 2020 and 83 million in 2021.

What else could anyone in Italy expect when the peting welfare programs are promised to citizens yet share the same sickly public finances and without any private means to increase INPS’s overall portfolio? INPS can only redistribute its limited funds “fairly”, by taking from the so-called “less deserving” Italian Pietros and giving to the “more deserving” Paolos.

Where there is no engine for wealth creation within public welfare (the exact opposite of what private panies can do by creatively earning and raising new funds), finances eventually dry up. Even with all the switching and shifting of monies from Peter to Paul and from Paul back to Peter, the state’s welfare pie never really actually grows and cannot ever promise bigger or even equal slices for all.

As famously said by the late Margaret Thatcher when blasting the false hopes of European socialist welfare states: “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.”

(Photo Credit: mons)

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
The End of Secularism and the HHS Mandate
The primary point of my first book, The End of Secularism, was to demonstrate that secularism doesn’t do what it claims to do, which is to solve the problem of religious difference. As I look at the administration’s attempt to mandate that religious employers pay for contraceptive products, I see that they have confirmed one of my charges in the book. I wrote that secularists claim that they are occupying a neutral position in the public square, but in reality...
Gleaner Technology
Gleaning is the traditional Biblical practice of gathering crops that would otherwise be left in the fields to rot, or be plowed under after harvest. The biblical mandate for the es from Deuteronomy 24:19, When you reap your harvest in your field and forget a sheaf in the field, you shall not go back to get it. It shall be for the sojourner, the fatherless, and the widow, that the LORD your God may bless you in all the work...
Befuddled Bureaucrats on the Bayou
I’ve tried to stay on top of the federal government’s response to natural disasters here at Acton. I’ve written a number mentaries, blog posts, and a story in Religion & Liberty covering the issue. “Spiritual Labor and the Big Spill” specifically addressed the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill. For extensive background on this short clip of Bobby Jindal at CPAC 2012, see my post “Bobby Jindal on Centralized Disaster Response.” ...
Gleaner Tech #1: Solar Bottle Lights in the Philippines
[Note: This is the first in an occasional series on gleaner technology.] In the Philippines, the cost of electricity often means poor citizens are left in the dark—even when the sun is shining. Social entrepreneur Illac Diaz e up with an indigenous and ingenious solution for lighting problems in the country’s e areas: He use plastic bottles, water, and chlorine to lighten up the dark homes of poor. The solution provides both a cheap source of lighting and environmentally friendly...
Creeping Crony Corporatism
In this week’s Acton Commentary, “Corrupted Capitalism and the Housing Crisis,” I contend we need to add some categories to our thinking about political economy. In this case, the idea of “corporatism” helps understand a good deal of what we see in the American system today. Adding corporatism to our quiver helps us to make some more nuanced distinctions than simple “socialism” and “capitalism” allow. Take, for instance, Mitt Romney’s contention this week while campaigning in Michigan that the bailouts...
Politicians and the Pursuit of Happiness
In this week’s Acton Commentary I conclude, “The American people do not need politicians to tell them what happiness is and how it should be pursued.” I admit that I didn’t have this quote in mind (or I would have used it!), but Art Carden (follow him here and read him here) notes the following from Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations: What is the species of domestic industry which his capital can employ, and of which the produce is likely...
How Conservatives Fight Poverty
At Public Discourse, Ryan T. Anderson reviews Lawrence Mead’s From Prophecy to Charity: How to Help the Poor: The loudest voices in our national debates about political economy tend to be libertarians and social welfare statists. To our detriment, most public policy discussions are filtered through these two lenses. At the same time, we tend to conflate the policy issues facing our nation as if they were one and the same. But consider the range of America’s political-economic challenges: How...
Subsidiarity vs. Soft Totalitarianism
While the recent contraceptive mandate controversy has exposed the Obama Administration’s disregard for religious freedoms, it has also reveled their natural disdain for subsidiarity. As George Weigel notes, this incident tells us “something very important, and very disturbing, about the cast of mind in the Executive Branch.” It is no exaggeration to describe that cast of mind as “soft totalitarianism”: an effort to eliminate the vital role in health care, education and social service played by the institutions of civil...
Welcome to the PowerBlog, Joe Carter
When we launched the PowerBlog in 2005, we had little idea that it would grow into one of the Acton Institute’s most popular and munications channels. Nearly 4,000 posts, and ments later, the PowerBlog is still going strong. And for that, we heartily thank our many readers, contributors menters. Now we have for the first time a dedicated editor to help sustain and grow the blog for the advancement of the “free and virtuous society.” Veteran journalist Joe Carter is...
The “Right to Be Insured” Trumps Religious Liberty?
New York pundit Al Sharpton and California Senator Barbara Boxer agree: The “right” to insurance paid for by an employer trumps freedom of conscience and religion. Senator Boxer warned yesterday that if the HHS contraception mandate was repealed it would set a dangerous precedence of religious rights trumping the right to be insured. On MSNBC’s Politics Nation with Al Sharpton last night, Boxer affirmed that under the proposed amendment proposed by Sen. Roy Blunt, an employer would not be forced...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved