Spirituality
12 Dec 12
Originally posted by sumydidFor every wealthy person who worked his ass off to get there, there are (I'm just going to guess a number here) 1000 people who have worked their ass off and remain poor. Of these 1001 people, we're worried about the wealthy one being "punished"? Talk about priorities being completely out of focus.
This train of thought is completely foreign to me. It, in my opinion, contains a disturbing element of spite and malice.
Think about it this way. These wealthy people (apart from the scant few that inherited everything) worked their fingers to the bone, taking great risk, making great sacrifices, working 80 hours a week for years on end, to get their bu ...[text shortened]... ment, Closing.
Is there a rule that you can cite, that refutes the points made by RC Sproul.
If I was making an argument in front of a judge, I'd just cite the tax code. That angle strikes me as rather uninteresting.
Originally posted by SwissGambitIt's easy... and apparently comes natural, for people to demonize the successful people in society. But the issue isn't whether it feels warm and fuzzy to penalize success. The issue is whether or not it's just and fair. More importantly as far as this thread is concerned, the issue is whether or not it is just and fair for a Christian to support taxing one group at a higher rate than another group. As argued, doing so is essentially taking property--forcibly--from one person and handing it over to another. If that's not theft, then, what is theft?
For every wealthy person who worked his ass off to get there, there are (I'm just going to guess a number here) 1000 people who have worked their ass off and remain poor. Of these 1001 people, we're worried about the wealthy one being "punished"? Talk about priorities being completely out of focus.
If I was making an argument in front of a judge, I'd just cite the tax code. That angle strikes me as rather uninteresting.
Originally posted by sumydidIsn't any and all taxation "theft" if the definition is words to the effect of forcibly taking property from one person and handing it over to the government?
As argued, doing so is essentially taking property--forcibly--from one person and handing it over to another. If that's not theft, then, what is theft?
Originally posted by sumydid"so is essentially taking property--forcibly--from one person and handing it over to another. If that's not theft, then, what is theft?"
It's easy... and apparently comes natural, for people to demonize the successful people in society. But the issue isn't whether it feels warm and fuzzy to penalize success. The issue is whether or not it's just and fair. More importantly as far as this thread is concerned, the issue is whether or not it is just and fair for a Christian to support taxing o ...[text shortened]... one person and handing it over to another. If that's not theft, then, what is theft?
Redistribution?
Theft would be when you UNLAWFULLY deprive someone of their property and have no intention of returning it.
Unless you are claiming that the actions of a democratically elected government are unlawful unless Christians, and in particular your own particular brand of Christian, agrees with it.
Originally posted by sumydidHow do you reconcile Matthew 19:21-24 with this view of yours?
I missed this, PK and thanks for participating objectively. Seriously, thank you.
Ok, again, RC (and I) are not arguing that Christians not be subject to the governing authorities. The issue at hand, specifically, is Christians willfully voting in politicians who, as part of their platform, promise to jack up tax rates against one group and not touch th ...[text shortened]... onary out and settle on the precise definition of theft, I'm wondering. That might help.
Originally posted by sumydidThink about it this way. These wealthy people (apart from the scant few that inherited everything) worked their fingers to the bone
This train of thought is completely foreign to me. It, in my opinion, contains a disturbing element of spite and malice.
Think about it this way. These wealthy people (apart from the scant few that inherited everything) worked their fingers to the bone, taking great risk, making great sacrifices, working 80 hours a week for years on end, to get their bu ...[text shortened]... ment, Closing.
Is there a rule that you can cite, that refutes the points made by RC Sproul.
I've always wondered about this. What are the stats on people who make lots of money. How many of these wealthy people inherited a significant amount of money? How many of these people made a lot of money but had the luxury of being supported by wealthy parents? How many of these people genuinely made a lot of money coming from a poor background?
You're claiming that almost every wealthy person got to where they are the hard way, but can you actually back that claim up?
13 Dec 12
Originally posted by sumydidAnd this is why we laugh at you.
I use the term in reference to Obama because it's true. It's not an insult. It's just a fact.
Obama is a right wing conservative. (small c)
He is actually more right wing (and authoritarian) than David Cameron,
the PM and leader of the Conservative party in the UK.
Go have a look at www.politicalcompass.org
looking at this page http://www.politicalcompass.org/ukparties2010
you will see that a socialist party would be something like the greens (who are roughly where I chart)
or the SSP... ALL the major parties in the UK and USA are right wing and authoritarian.
NONE of them are socialist.
Originally posted by Proper KnobI work in the City of London. I am surrounded by people who are wealthy, some extremely so. My wife comes from a much poorer part of the country. Many of her friends and family work at least as hard, but earn a fraction of their income.
[b]Think about it this way. These wealthy people (apart from the scant few that inherited everything) worked their fingers to the bone
I've always wondered about this. What are the stats on people who make lots of money. How many of these wealthy people inherited a significant amount of money? How many of these people made a lot of money but had t ry wealthy person got to where they are the hard way, but can you actually back that claim up?[/b]
I don't think an average hedge fund manager really works harder than someone holding down two jobs, including nights and weekends, just to meet their rent, and yet gets paid in year what the manager gets paid in a week.
The main difference I see is that nearly all these wealthy people went through a private education system paid for by their wealthy parents.
When they introduced the 50% rate in the UK, you should have heard the bleating as they all threatened to run off to Switzerland in a hissy fit. They were a little disconcerted when most of the population said 'Fine. Off you go then. We thought the point of bring rich was that could live wherever you want to. Apparently it forces you to live somewhere you don't. Bye now.'
Originally posted by sumydidIt is not theft because the rich have representation in government. If they feel the tax code is unfair, they can contact their representatives. They can hire lobbyists to influence Congress.
It's easy... and apparently comes natural, for people to demonize the successful people in society. But the issue isn't whether it feels warm and fuzzy to penalize success. The issue is whether or not it's just and fair. More importantly as far as this thread is concerned, the issue is whether or not it is just and fair for a Christian to support taxing o ...[text shortened]... one person and handing it over to another. If that's not theft, then, what is theft?
Theft is when you put a gun to someone's head and make them give up their wallet. There is no advance notice and no implicit agreement between the parties that they can have their case heard before a court if either is not satisfied with the transaction.
There is also no mutually beneficial relationship between the robber and his victim. He takes without giving anything back. In the case of the wealthy, they reap the benefits of free markets, public stock trades, investment opportunities with favorable interest rates, the advantage of forming a corporation, etc. etc. etc. all coded into law via government. For them to whine about theft after getting all that is an abuse of the word 'theft'.
Originally posted by sumydidwhat are his socialist policies?
Where was it ever "recognized" that the more you make, the higher tax rate you should pay, is more fair?
The amount of disposable income in flat dollars has absolutely nothing to do with this. And even if it did, you should be quite pleased then, that one guy pays 20 million while another, given the same tax rate, would only pay 2 thousand.
A flat tax ...[text shortened]... ly branded a Socialist. He uses Socialist terminology and promotes Socialist policies.