Are the Super Rich and there companies to blame for our Economic crisis and plunder?

  • Thread starter Thread starter WilT
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
stinkcat_14 said:
We can dispute whether or not it is prudent, but according to the Church it is not immoral.
Click to expand...
Really? Progressive or not, I take great offense at any government that screws up its own projects with the money I am forced to give it.
 
Lost_Wanderer said:
Really? Progressive or not, I take great offense at any government that screws up its own projects with the money I am forced to give it.
Click to expand...
Just because we don’t like something does not mean that it is immoral. Can you cite some Church teaching that says taxation is immoral?
 
Lost_Wanderer said:
I’m sorry, Mark? Intellectual? The guy didn’t even wear a suit during the initial IPO talks. Let’s not make the geek into a god. Heck, maybe that’s the real problem. We look at success and think of it as unachievable. It’s as if there was something beyond their control.

And it’s because it’s beyond their control that they feel entitled to think they shouldn’t dream and only reap the fruits of those who dare do via their idea of ‘redistribution.’

It doesn’t even make sense! You don’t dream of success but want the fruits of it handed to you? :confused:
Click to expand...
Lost Wanderer, after reading some of your threads and reading your answers I’m beginning to think your in the wrong forum site. Stick to talking about fiction and fantasy. in your other sites: The Water Cooler and the Clubhouse sites. You can continue to talk all about sorcery there if you need to. Also, you may be able to quote scriptures off the bat but living it is another thing. Who else can quote scriptures? Let’s see??? Hummm. I also say your more so a fantasy Catholic and an agitator when you show up to these religious sections. What is that profile pic? It looks evil. It’s not my decision to see you get out of this area. It would be that of the moderators. How are you able to last so long on a Catholic site so long??? 😉
 
stinkcat_14 said:
Actually the Church has never taught that progressive taxation is immoral, so we cannot really call it theft. We can dispute whether or not it is prudent, but according to the Church it is not immoral.
Click to expand...
I suppose I should be a little more precise. The post I was responding to made the statement that tax cuts for the wealthy contributed to income disparity. Following that to it’s logical conclusion we should tax the rich more, not to fund essential functions of government, but rather to reduce income disparity. That is theft.
 
Lost_Wanderer said:
Wow, that’s a nice way to cop-out. Shoe fit that well did it? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
You have no idea of who I am nor my degree of success and yet you have no pause to disrespect. The line was crossed from discussion of the issue to personal attack.

You can roll your eyes all you want but I wont participate in your uncharitable quips.
 
tabycat said:
Some body would have had to use their God given talents. What would you do with the Inherited wealth? Tax it at 100%???🤷
Click to expand...
I have never once said that inherited wealth should be taxed at 100%

But why should it be taxed at 0% If you receive a gift over a certain amount, it is taxed. If you earn over a certain amount, it is taxed. If you make money solely due to inflation, it is taxed. Currently, inherited wealth is taxed based, I believe, on the value at the time of the inheritance. There is a deduction allowed that lowers the taxable amount. And the rate is not 100%.

And generally, taxes are not based on one’s abilities, shucks oh darn. If they were, there are days when I would be receiving a major refund 😃
 
Michael_Mayo said:
Was it theft from 1930 to 1980?

http://taxprof.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c4eab53ef0148c82471fe970c-500wi
Click to expand...
Anytime taxes are taken for anything other than to fund an essential function of government it is theft. If I go up to a mansion, hold a gun to the owners head and tell him to give me money because he has more than me and it’s not fair I get arrested for theft. But if I vote to authorize a group of people to do the same thing on my behalf then it’s not theft? If it’s illegal, immoral and sinful for an indvidual to do it then it’s illegal, immoral and sinful for a group of people to do it. I’ll leave you with a couple of quotes from Bastiat.
What, then, is law? It is the collective organization of the individual right to lawful defense.
Click to expand...
Each of us has a natural right — from God — to defend his person, his liberty, and his property. These are the three basic requirements of life, and the preservation of any one of them is completely dependent upon the preservation of the other two. For what are our faculties but the extension of our individuality? And what is property but an extension of our faculties? If every person has the right to defend even by force — his person, his liberty, and his property, then it follows that a group of men have the right to organize and support a common force to protect these rights constantly. Thus the principle of collective right — its reason for existing, its lawfulness — is based on individual right. And the common force that protects this collective right cannot logically have any other purpose or any other mission than that for which it acts as a substitute. Thus, since an individual cannot lawfully use force against the person, liberty, or property of another individual, then the common force — for the same reason — cannot lawfully be used to destroy the person, liberty, or property of individuals or groups.
Click to expand...
Such a perversion of force would be, in both cases, contrary to our premise. Force has been given to us to defend our own individual rights. Who will dare to say that force has been given to us to destroy the equal rights of our brothers? Since no individual acting separately can lawfully use force to destroy the rights of others, does it not logically follow that the same principle also applies to the common force that is nothing more than the organized combination of the individual forces?
Click to expand...
If this is true, then nothing can be more evident than this: The law is the organization of the natural right of lawful defense. It is the substitution of a common force for individual forces. And this common force is to do only what the individual forces have a natural and lawful right to do: to protect persons, liberties, and properties; to maintain the right of each, and to cause justice to reign over us all.
Click to expand...
But, unfortunately, law by no means confines itself to its proper functions. And when it has exceeded its proper functions, it has not done so merely in some inconsequential and debatable matters. The law has gone further than this; it has acted in direct opposition to its own purpose. The law has been used to destroy its own objective: It has been applied to annihilating the justice that it was supposed to maintain; to limiting and destroying rights which its real purpose was to respect. The law has placed the collective force at the disposal of the unscrupulous who wish, without risk, to exploit the person, liberty, and property of others. It has converted plunder into a right, in order to protect plunder. And it has converted lawful defense into a crime, in order to punish lawful defense.
Click to expand...
From The Law
 
sallybutler said:
But why should it be taxed at 0%
Click to expand...
Why should it be taxed? It was taxed once when it was earned in income, taxed again when taken as a capital gain, and in the case of real estate taxed again with property taxes. Seems to me paying taxes on it three times should be enough. 👍
 
Pope Francis

What can the Church do to reduce the growing inequality between the rich and the poor?

It’s proven that with the food that is left over we could feed the people who are hungry. When you see photographs of undernourished kids in different parts of the world, you take your head in your hand, it incomprehensible. I believe that we are in a world economic system that isn’t good. At the center of all economic systems must be man, man and woman, and everything else must be in service of this man. But we have put money at the center, the god of money. We have fallen into a sin of idolatry, the idolatry of money.

The economy is moved by the ambition of having more and, paradoxically, it feeds a throwaway culture. Young people are thrown away when their natality is limited. The elderly are also discarded because they don’t serve any use anymore, they don’t produce, this passive class… In throwing away the kids and elderly, the future of a people is thrown away because the young people are going to push forcefully forward and because the elderly give us wisdom. They have the memory of that people and they have to pass it on to the young people. And now also it is in style to throw the young people away with unemployment. The rate of unemployment is very worrisome to me, which in some countries is over 50%. Someone told me that 75 million young Europeans under 25 years of age are unemployed. That is an atrocity. But we are discarding an entire generation to maintain an economic system that can’t hold up anymore, a system that to survive must make war, as the great empires have always done. But as a Third World War can’t be done, they make zonal wars. What does this mean? That they produce and sell weapons, and with this the balance sheets of the idolatrous economies, the great world economies that sacrifice man at the feet of the idol of money, obviously they are sorted. This unique thought takes away the wealth of diversity of thought and therefore the wealth of a dialogue between peoples. Well understood globalization is a wealth. Poorly understood globalization is that which nullifies differences. It is like a sphere in which all points are equidistant from the center. A globalization that enriches is like a polyhedron, all united but each preserving its particularity, its wealth, its identity, and this isn’t given. And this does not happen.

catholicnewsagency.com/news/pope-francis-interview-with-la-vanguardia—full-text-45430/

Peace
 
Seraphim73 said:
Why should it be taxed? It was taxed once when it was earned in income, taxed again when taken as a capital gain, and in the case of real estate taxed again with property taxes. Seems to me paying taxes on it three times should be enough. 👍
Click to expand...
Based on that, I should never have to pay sales taxes, since my income was already taxed. Nor should I have to pay property taxes, since I would be paying with money that was already taxed.
 
sallybutler said:
Based on that, I should never have to pay sales taxes, since my income was already taxed. Nor should I have to pay property taxes, since I would be paying with money that was already taxed.
Click to expand...
Sounds good to me. The fewer taxes the better. I’m all for eliminating income and property taxes and replacing them with a simple consumption tax.
 
sallybutler said:
I have never once said that inherited wealth should be taxed at 100%

But why should it be taxed at 0% If you receive a gift over a certain amount, it is taxed. If you earn over a certain amount, it is taxed. If you make money solely due to inflation, it is taxed. Currently, inherited wealth is taxed based, I believe, on the value at the time of the inheritance. There is a deduction allowed that lowers the taxable amount. And the rate is not 100%.

And generally, taxes are not based on one’s abilities, shucks oh darn. If they were, there are days when I would be receiving a major refund 😃
Click to expand...
I did not post that you said that inheired money should be taxed; I was asking if that was what you were saying. You seemed to have been implying that inheirted money was not earned by anyone, therefore I was asking if you thought it should be taxed and by how much. 🤷
 
tabycat said:
I did not post that you said that inheired money should be taxed; I was asking if that was what you were saying. You seemed to have been implying that inheirted money was not earned by anyone, therefore I was asking if you thought it should be taxed and by how much. 🤷
Click to expand...
What I was saying is that not everyone that had wealth earned it through God given talents. Unless you consider being born to wealthy parents a God given talent. I put it right up there with buying the winning lottery ticket.
 
sallybutler said:
What I was saying is that not everyone that had wealth earned it through God given talents. Unless you consider being born to wealthy parents a God given talent. I put it right up there with buying the winning lottery ticket.
Click to expand...
But the question here isn’t luck. We all have varying degrees of talent, drive, intelligence etc. The question here is a fundamental moral question. Do I own myself and the wealth I produce or does someone else own me? Do I have a God given right to life and liberty or are these actually privileges conferred at the pleasure of others? If I own me I can give any amount of my property to whoever I want, whenever I want for any reason I want. That’s exactly what an inheritance tax is in principle. It’s the government saying that it actually owns me and my property and that it gets to decide how much of it I can dispose of myself.
 
Michael_Mayo said:
You have no idea of who I am nor my degree of success and yet you have no pause to disrespect. The line was crossed from discussion of the issue to personal attack.

You can roll your eyes all you want but I wont participate in your uncharitable quips.
Click to expand...
I agree:thumbsup:
 
I won’t comment on taxes since I’m not into economics and deeply into politics, but I can say that 1) If it’s by greed and moral abuse that the Super Rich have made their money, then they will have contend with God. Mt 6:24 'No man can serve 2 masters. He will either hate…you cannot serve God and Mammon (wealth).
 
Seraphim73 said:
Anytime taxes are taken for anything other than to fund an essential function of government it is theft. If I go up to a mansion, hold a gun to the owners head and tell him to give me money because he has more than me and it’s not fair I get arrested for theft. But if I vote to authorize a group of people to do the same thing on my behalf then it’s not theft? If it’s illegal, immoral and sinful for an indvidual to do it then it’s illegal, immoral and sinful for a group of people to do it. I’ll leave you with a couple of quotes from Bastiat.

From The Law
Click to expand...
Instead of Bastiat why not spend more time reading Church teaching:
  1. Tax revenues and public spending take on crucial economic importance for every civil and political community. The goal to be sought is public financing that is itself capable of becoming an instrument of development and solidarity. Just, efficient and effective public financing will have very positive effects on the economy, because it will encourage employment growth and sustain business and non-profit activities and help to increase the credibility of the State as the guarantor of systems of social insurance and protection that are designed above all to protect the weakest members of society.
vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_doc_20060526_compendio-dott-soc_en.html#Action%20of%20the%20State
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top