Time to lose the tax exemption for religions (choice, before, attend)
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.
How do you think roads and traffic lights and fire stations and police and hospitals even exist to their current levels?
I didn't say I was one of those people...the argument I was responding to is invalid. There is no "birthright" argument for roads and traffic lights and fire stations and police and hospitals, either.
Last edited by mensaguy; 01-12-2016 at 12:44 PM..
Reason: Quoted post edited. Please don't respond to those remarks.
Because you are part of society that agrees that education is a fundamental part of making the site a more viable now and into the future.
Exactly. The problem is, with a lot of religious people, is that they do not value education. They think they shouldn't have to pay taxes for schools, but we should pay for their Sunday clubhouse. Maybe they are just using it to try and make a point, but it is a stupid one at best.
You should WANT to help pay for schools, whether you have kids or not.
I didn't say I was one of those people...the argument I was responding to is invalid. There is no "birthright" argument for roads and traffic lights and fire stations and police and hospitals, either.
No, but whether the semantics of being birthrights or just "what society needs to function"...are you arguing we don't need as many as we do? Or we don't need any taxes and should wait for donations?
I guess that's the problem I have with the anti-tax crowd. I get the sentiment...I prefer to pay less taxes as well. But what is the actual alternative and if its such a great idea...why don't we all see the beauty of its genius?
And there are people who disagree than anything that must be provided by the "public" should be a "birthright."
Especially since even being born is not a "birthright."
I am unconcerned with those people. Those same folks use roads, lights, bridges, fire, police, DMV, et-al. All public services. When those folks start fixing their own potholes, and remove snow on the highway I might look at their objections.
I do not understand how being born, or not has anything to do with taxes and tax exemptions.
No, but whether the semantics of being birthrights or just "what society needs to function"...are you arguing we don't need as many as we do? Or we don't need any taxes and should wait for donations?
I guess that's the problem I have with the anti-tax crowd. I get the sentiment...I prefer to pay less taxes as well. But what is the actual alternative and if its such a great idea...why don't we all see the beauty of its genius?
It's not semantics. When we are arguing "birthright" that means "everything for everyone all the time." Once we place the argument in terms of "what society needs to function," we can talk about making smart selections that are good for society.
Take, for instance, publically funded higher education. Even in the countries where that is done, it's not a "birthright" argument, but a "what society needs to function" argument. Therefore even after deciding everyone needs a publicly funded higher education, society can still stipulate who can get what kind of higher education.
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.