Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Liberals love the progressive income tax because it taxes the rich at a higher rate than other wage earners. By their lights that is only fair since the rich can afford to pay more. Now why didn't God think of that? (Note: By "God" I am referring to the God of the Old and New Testament. If you don't believe in God or subscribe to some other deity then this thread will have no relevance to you).
In the Bible God imposes a flat tax of 10% on all believers--rich and poor alike--for the support of the Temple. Clearly God was not thinking straight; otherwise, He would have known that taxing the rich and poor equally was inherently unfair. Unless, of course, God's measure of fairness differs from that of the progressives.
And likely, it does. The progressive income taxs is rooted in envy and animosity towards the rich. And for that reason progressive taxation is divorced from its purpose, which is to raise revenue to pay for needed government expenditures. Rather, progressives are primarily interested in using the power to tax to punish the wealthy for their good fortune.
God, by contrast, does not bear ill-will toward the rich. Indeed, their wealth (assuming it is not ill-gotten) is a sign of His blessing. It would be odd, therefore, that He would bless on the one hand and punish on the other hand the people whom He has blessed. Therefore God's tax, the tithe, is even-handed: it neither punishes the wealthy nor does it favor the poor.
Which is not to say that the rich are free to enjoy their wealth without regard for the needs of their fellow man. God's blessing is intended to be made a blessing to others: To whom much is given, much is expected. In God's economy, the rich have a moral, not a legal, obligation to use their wealth to uplift the less materially blessed. In that way the giver learns charity and the recipient learns gratitude.
Tell me we would not be better off in a world where charity and gratitude prevails rather than coercion and envy.
When you come up with a plan which results in the wealthy voluntarily giving up enough to run the government and take care of all the poor and disadvantaged, get back to us.
Liberals love the progressive income tax because it taxes the rich at a higher rate than other wage earners. By their lights that is only fair since the rich can afford to pay more. Now why didn't God think of that? (Note: By "God" I am referring to the God of the Old and New Testament. If you don't believe in God or subscribe to some other deity then this thread will have no relevance to you).
In the Bible God imposes a flat tax of 10% on all believers--rich and poor alike--for the support of the Temple. Clearly God was not thinking straight; otherwise, He would have known that taxing the rich and poor equally was inherently unfair. Unless, of course, God's measure of fairness differs from that of the progressives.
And likely, it does. The progressive income taxs is rooted in envy and animosity towards the rich. And for that reason progressive taxation is divorced from its purpose, which is to raise revenue to pay for needed government expenditures. Rather, progressives are primarily interested in using the power to tax to punish the wealthy for their good fortune.
God, by contrast, does not bear ill-will toward the rich. Indeed, their wealth (assuming it is not ill-gotten) is a sign of His blessing. It would be odd, therefore, that He would bless on the one hand and punish on the other hand the people whom He has blessed. Therefore God's tax, the tithe, is even-handed: it neither punishes the wealthy nor does it favor the poor.
Which is not to say that the rich are free to enjoy their wealth without regard for the needs of their fellow man. God's blessing is intended to be made a blessing to others: To whom much is given, much is expected. In God's economy, the rich have a moral, not a legal, obligation to use their wealth to uplift the less materially blessed. In that way the giver learns charity and the recipient learns gratitude.
Tell me we would not be better off in a world where charity and gratitude prevails rather than coercion and envy.
Luke 6
20 Looking at his disciples, he said: “Blessed are you who are poor,
for yours is the kingdom of God.
...
24 “But woe to you who are rich,
for you have already received your comfort.
Matthew 19
24 Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”
Romans 13
7 Give to everyone what you owe them: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.
Luke 6
20 Looking at his disciples, he said: “Blessed are you who are poor,
for yours is the kingdom of God.
...
24 “But woe to you who are rich,
for you have already received your comfort.
Matthew 19
24 Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”
Romans 13
7 Give to everyone what you owe them: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.
And your problem with the OP is...? ("If you owe taxes, pay taxes..." - So we should all pay our 10% taxes, right?)
All right! Another one in favor of leveling and lowering the taxes! Sounds good!
And your problem with the OP is...? ("If you owe taxes, pay taxes..." - So we should all pay our 10% taxes, right?)
All right! Another one in favor of leveling and lowering the taxes! Sounds good!
My problem with the OP is I'm not a believer in the Prosperity gospel. I don't think wealth is a sign of God's blessing. The bible is filled with passages about the extra burdens, responsibilities and difficulties wealth brings. Concepts like the Year of Jubilee when all debts will be forgiven indicates that "God's economy" is different than what many want to believe and or are willing to accept.
I think the Bible is silent on the issue of Progressive taxation. I think if we wanted to base secular government taxation based on Biblical principles it would argue in favor of a Progressive tax.
19 “There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in luxury every day. 20 At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores 21 and longing to eat what fell from the rich man’s table. Even the dogs came and licked his sores. 22 “The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham’s side. The rich man also died and was buried. 23 In Hades, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. 24 So he called to him, ‘Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.’
25 “But Abraham replied, ‘Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony. 26 And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been set in place, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.’
27 “He answered, ‘Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my family, 28 for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.’
29 “Abraham replied, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.’
30 “‘No, father Abraham,’ he said, ‘but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.’
31 “He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’”
When you come up with a plan which results in the wealthy voluntarily giving up enough to run the government and take care of all the poor and disadvantaged, get back to us.
Until then, taxation is a necessary evil.
1) Making a plan and voluntary giving, while not mutually exclusive, defeats the purpose of the OP.
2) It's not about running the gov't. It's about supporting those who can't help themselves.
My personal opinion is that if the rich (and even parts of the middle class) were not taxed as much, they would have more money to donate. A forced "donation" (i.e., taxes) means less money to give overall and less feeling of obligation to give since we already know the gov't is taking care of the needy, and then some. We already know our churches are helping the truly needy with our tithes and any extra donations we can make. I take the same stance as Glenn Beck on this topic, the gov't is not around for charity, and if we could increase church attendance to appropriate levels, and have everyone tithe 10% the way they're supposed to, we would have enough money to support the needy and fund projects for kids, etc.
However, we still need our roads, military, fire and police, etc. So that would have to be dealt with still.
1) Making a plan and voluntary giving, while not mutually exclusive, defeats the purpose of the OP.
2) It's not about running the gov't. It's about supporting those who can't help themselves.
My personal opinion is that if the rich (and even parts of the middle class) were not taxed as much, they would have more money to donate. A forced "donation" (i.e., taxes) means less money to give overall and less feeling of obligation to give since we already know the gov't is taking care of the needy, and then some. We already know our churches are helping the truly needy with our tithes and any extra donations we can make. I take the same stance as Glenn Beck on this topic, the gov't is not around for charity, and if we could increase church attendance to appropriate levels, and have everyone tithe 10% the way they're supposed to, we would have enough money to support the needy and fund projects for kids, etc.
However, we still need our roads, military, fire and police, etc. So that would have to be dealt with still.
Increase church attendance and tithing? LOL Let's see your plan for that! What are we gonna do? Make that mandatory instead of taxation? Every preacher in the world would like to know how to do that!
What all this talk about charity and taxation really boils down to is that people like y'all simply don't want to take care of the poor and, even if you had more money in your pocket, you still wouldn't. We have tax payer funded charity now because voluntary contributions aren't meeting the need and it won't meet the need in the future either.
Moreover, since God's been dragged into this conversation, let's see what He has to say about a nation which has the wealth, but refuses to support the poor:
Eze 16:49 Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy.
Luke 6
20 Looking at his disciples, he said: “Blessed are you who are poor,
for yours is the kingdom of God.
...
24 “But woe to you who are rich,
for you have already received your comfort.
Matthew 19
24 Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”
Romans 13
7 Give to everyone what you owe them: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.
How about this one... Give to ceasar what is ceasars.
And, since you (presumably) read the bible, you will know that tax collectors are considered serious sinners.
So, it seems that God wants the rich people to give to the poor. Otherwise they remain rich, and that is their only consolation.
Why should rich people pay more taxes to greedy tax collectors?
1) Making a plan and voluntary giving, while not mutually exclusive, defeats the purpose of the OP.
2) It's not about running the gov't. It's about supporting those who can't help themselves.
My personal opinion is that if the rich (and even parts of the middle class) were not taxed as much, they would have more money to donate. A forced "donation" (i.e., taxes) means less money to give overall and less feeling of obligation to give since we already know the gov't is taking care of the needy, and then some. We already know our churches are helping the truly needy with our tithes and any extra donations we can make. I take the same stance as Glenn Beck on this topic, the gov't is not around for charity, and if we could increase church attendance to appropriate levels, and have everyone tithe 10% the way they're supposed to, we would have enough money to support the needy and fund projects for kids, etc.
However, we still need our roads, military, fire and police, etc. So that would have to be dealt with still.
I agree in principle. But, the Gov't continues to waste our tax money. It would be better by far if we lowered our taxes
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
