Exactly how have we been convinced

Harrekin

Harrekin

Well-Known Member
Canna Sylvan said:
The elimination of income tax and the implementation of a version of VAT is the most fair.
Click to expand...
Be careful with that tho, it can be a slippery slope.

If it gets too high, it can hit the people that spend a higher % of their income on basic items like food and bills. The consumers get consumed, so to speak.
 
Red1966

Red1966

Well-Known Member
canndo said:
I don't know what you are trying to say here, my point is that studies have been performed indicating that those with abundance behave differently This is commonly accepted. I believe I recall that the poor or middleclass give more away as a percentage of what they have than the rich do. As I said, they are scientific studies, not supposition or anecdotal stories about your ex's uncle.
Click to expand...
Stop it. Your studies don't prove the conclusion you came to. You keep reversing causation and effect to suit your theory.
 
Red1966

Red1966

Well-Known Member
JohnnySocko said:
Correct, but there is a correlation in scope: poor peoples evil is confined to one murder at a time whereas a Jack Welch or CEO of BP can spread cancer causing agents to babies for generations
Click to expand...
So all the mass murders we had could be stopped by taxing those killers? Kinda discredits the anti-gun lobby.
 
B

BigNBushy

Well-Known Member
Red1966 said:
Sadly, all VAT proposals have been in addition to, not instead off, an income tax.
Click to expand...
Although not a true VAT, the FairTax calls for elimination of the IRS, repeal of the amendment permitting an income tax, and a sunset provision. So it can be voted on again in a few years to see if it is still popilar.
 
canndo

canndo

Well-Known Member
Canna Sylvan said:
I read that Huff Post article about the more money you have, the more immoral people become. Yawn. Even if true, I don't give a fuck. I'd rather have money than the friends I don't already have.
Click to expand...
The issue is not whether you or I would not prefer to have money over friends, the point is that an abundance of money tends to alter the way people behave. It was an article that described a scientific study, which makes it somewhat different than an opinion.
 
canndo

canndo

Well-Known Member
BigNBushy said:
Well of course not, there are anecdotal stories I could tell to support your point from my exwifes uncle as well.

It is hard to empathize with something we dont fully understand. Wealthy people tend to forget that the price of something is often an obstacle for most people. They fail to grasp the delima some might face when they have to choose between feeding their children or buying them a pair of shoes.

It isn't that they lack empathy, though that is the result, it is that they are "out of touch" with the reality of what being poor actually is. Despite the fact that many have been poor themselves in their life. We grow accustom to our current situation.
Click to expand...
Explain it how you will, the evidence shows that the rich act differently on a consistent basis, evidence from a number of scientific studies, not projection or supposition. This isn't a matter of who you or I know, rich or poor.
 
canndo

canndo

Well-Known Member
BigNBushy said:
That isn't what that passage means, a screw up in translation. I had this conversation with a Greek orthodox priest who said the real passage basically says that a rich man cannot take his riches into heaven.

In other words, heaven is that socialist utopia so many have dreamed about.

In a religion that offers universal salvation to all who accept Christ, murderers, rapists and other horrible people, you really think it would accept that and exclude someone who made money?
Click to expand...
Your Greek Orthodoxy priest seems to ignore all the other passages in the new testament that go to the heart of the matter of earthly wealth. Christ is saying that you cannot have two gods and it is very likely that if you have enormous wealth, you have placed a God before His/Him. He did not say it was impossible, merely improbable. When a rich man asked Him what he should do in order to gain the Kingdom of heaven, he was told to sell all of his posessions and give the money to the poor. I defy you do explain that as a screw up in translation. I have often seen or heard the rich try to alter the meaning of the admonitions in the bible regarding the rich because they want to claim that God blessed them more than He did the poor. Those want the riches of Heaven AND the riches of earth, in many cases because they are greedy. This very fact seems to demonstrate their inherent inability to comprehend God's word. You don't get to have both unless you are very very very careful and being that careful is not in the inherent nature of the wealthy.

Shall we compare the horrors of rapists and murderers when compared to some - I repeat - some, of the wealthiest? Some of the wealthy gain their wealth by trading arms - so they are in a sense, mass murderers. Some gain it by lying on a massive scale, some by vending poisons or spreading poisons upon the ground or into the air or the water. Can you rightly compare one who kills an entire family with one who sickens entire towns? One who rapes a few women with one who rapes the land itself?

But, this pertains only to those who proclaim to be Christian. Those who are not, well, there is still the scientific studies.
 
canndo

canndo

Well-Known Member
Red1966 said:
The disparity is just a number, neither evil or good.
Click to expand...
The results of that number can be viewed as "evil". I have a great deal of trouble with that word when it is used outside of the direct context of human behavior and I fell into the same trap many people do of labeling "things" either evil or good, the number is neither, nor is the disparity itself, but that disparity does lead to unacceptable results.
 
B

BigNBushy

Well-Known Member
canndo said:
Your Greek Orthodoxy priest seems to ignore all the other passages in the new testament that go to the heart of the matter of earthly wealth. Christ is saying that you cannot have two gods and it is very likely that if you have enormous wealth, you have placed a God before His/Him. He did not say it was impossible, merely improbable. When a rich man asked Him what he should do in order to gain the Kingdom of heaven, he was told to sell all of his posessions and give the money to the poor. I defy you do explain that as a screw up in translation. I have often seen or heard the rich try to alter the meaning of the admonitions in the bible regarding the rich because they want to claim that God blessed them more than He did the poor. Those want the riches of Heaven AND the riches of earth, in many cases because they are greedy. This very fact seems to demonstrate their inherent inability to comprehend God's word. You don't get to have both unless you are very very very careful and being that careful is not in the inherent nature of the wealthy.

Shall we compare the horrors of rapists and murderers when compared to some - I repeat - some, of the wealthiest? Some of the wealthy gain their wealth by trading arms - so they are in a sense, mass murderers. Some gain it by lying on a massive scale, some by vending poisons or spreading poisons upon the ground or into the air or the water. Can you rightly compare one who kills an entire family with one who sickens entire towns? One who rapes a few women with one who rapes the land itself?

But, this pertains only to those who proclaim to be Christian. Those who are not, well, there is still the scientific studies.
Click to expand...
Again, it doesn't actually seem to be the actual accumulation of wealth that is bad, but rather focusing to much of your effort into gaining wealth. Measuirimg self worth by financial worth, it impedes a spiritual path.
 
canndo

canndo

Well-Known Member
BigNBushy said:
1) democrats voted to have bush go into Iraq. Afghanistan has never been controversial as to the decision to go in.

2) then demonstrate it.
Click to expand...
I think he was talking about the majority of donations being union.

I believe it is indeed false, considering union participation is down around 15 percent of the population now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top