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.
We have low crime (I know that's not a perception of a lot of the rest of the country based on TV and movies , and it's a source of amusement to us on the NJ forum that people looking to move there list "safe" as their first priority as if the default is something other, lol) but we have a long history of crappy and corrupt state government.
There are a lot of advantages to living in New Jersey, but it is expensive to live here because of those advantages, and we are taxed to death. I am still here because I have a nearly-90-year-old mother. If you have no kids in school and you don't need the conveniences and proximity to the city, it might not be worth it. I don't plan to stay here forever. As a matter of fact, I spend almost half my time elsewhere, and I am elsewhere right now.
It amazes me sometimes how much house with lower taxes you can get in other parts of the country.
Q: New York has the highest number of lawyers per capita of any state in the country, and New Jersey has the highest number of garbage dumps. Why?
A: New Jersey had first choice.
P.S. Yes, I lived in New Jehsey for four years, back when.
Except they act very much like "for profit" organizations with large bonuses an payouts to their "executives" and not enough spend on their supposed mission.
Any personal income would be taxable. Where the abuse really occurs is when things owned by the organization are for personal use or fringe benefits. The Republicans just passed a law that would help address this.
Those are off-duty officers that the church pays for out of its non-profit budget.
I'll give you the off-duty officers. Honestly, if they are off-duty then they have no business directing traffic, but we'll bend the rules for churches since we already bend them when it comes to paying taxes.
Quote:
What part of "non-profit" don't you understand?
Sounds like you are making the assumption that churches ARE non-profit. There really is no point even trying to carry on further debate.
Any personal income would be taxable. Where the abuse really occurs is when things owned by the organization are for personal use or fringe benefits. The Republicans just passed a law that would help address this.
In this case, you seem to be focusing on property tax, not income tax. At the base of the argument, I do agree. Churches use the road, have the police protection, etc., of a municipality.
However, the reality is that churches like mine would be forced to close and sell their buildings. While that in and of itself is not the end of the world, it might present more problems than it's worth. First of all, no local politician is going to want to be the one known for closing the doors of all the small historical churches in the area so they can get knocked down and made into more condos.
Secondly, we do provide some value to the community. Five 12-step groups a week meet in our basement. We lose money on this, but we think we should make the space available because it's important. They would have to find another place to meet, and most for-profit entities will charge them. By and large, the people that attend those meetings don't have money.
We also support a food pantry at another church in the area and we provide our kitchen space to a couple of women who "rescue" leftover food and distribute it to the homeless and poor from their truck. They had a difficult time finding a place to do this because of local codes, and they'd be back in the same place.
Forcing a church like mine to close by instituting property tax might make a lot of sense from a purely financial and tax revenue standpoint, but is that really the basis on which we should make every decision?
Again much in the way of "good, bad and ugly" when it comes this subject. You do a good job of describing the good that most certainly deserves serious consideration. Not the whole story of course, but an important part.
What comes to my mind anyway, is other ways people can help people in need that doesn't necessarily involve religion or the church. If the 12-step groups were not meeting in your basement, for example, would this mean they would not meet somewhere else instead? Is part of the church's intention to be there for people who are hurting, in part as another way to add new members to the church? The 12-step group may not help the church financially, directly, but indirectly we all know church members do. Many people will join a church out of despair. Not that there's anything wrong with that...
It seems that religion does motivate people to do good things that perhaps they would not do if not for religious influence. Hard to deny that simple fact in any case...
PS - tax abatement and cuts don't "cost" the United States anything, because taxes take money from it's rightful possessor by force. In other words, he money was never the property of the United States to begin with, so the lack of it doesn't cost them anything, it simply means they stole less.
What profits are being made? LMAO. If you have half a brain and a modicum of work ethic, your salary is likely higher than my church's entire annual budget.
Oh yes, we all know about the mega-churches that are run like businesses with large holdings and incomes. Yep. They are a problem, and I get that it is gratifying to focus on their obvious abuse of the non-profit laws. But I would venture to say that they are far in the minority. Why should the average small parish have to close because of the greed of others?
Fair enough, but to be absolutely fair...
There are many who are church leaders, priests, etc., who are "taken care of" with living accommodations. That sort of expense, along with expenses for real estate purchases, building churches, schools, meeting space..., all the way to what you see if you have the good fortune to visit the Vatican...
Not "for profit," true, but obviously there is a lot of money that flows to churches that goes toward the well-being of church leadership, their members, and most importantly gaining new members, recruits. Right or wrong, that's a lot of money that some might argue should not be tax-exempt, like the significant real estate holdings, for example.
Not sure the right answer is yes or no, all or nothing, but hard not to admit the question(s) are good ones all considered...
Imagine how many of the nations financial problems would be solved by taxing churches.
Churches are supported 100% by charitable donations. Charitable donations are not taxable, nor should they be.
I get that you don't like churches and you are not a believer. Tough. That isn't the church's problem.
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.
, and it's a source of amusement to us on the NJ forum that people looking to move there list "safe" as their first priority as if the default is something other, lol) but we have a long history of crappy and corrupt state government.
