- Status
F
fix
Guest
Right, so does that mean that all taxes are just?
S
seekerz
Guest
By no means. What is taxed, how much it is taxed…even why it is taxed - are all legitimate grounds for criticism and even of protest. However, that is a different matter from resisting the very concept of government ‘taking’ these sums against a citizen’s will. The authority of government to tax (and the duty of citizens to pay taxes) is a basic, accepted fact of civilized society.
S
SamH
Guest
Sounds like the Obama adminstration. The government comes for the taxes and they expect someone else to pay them. Given the number of tax cheats in the Obama Administration is seems they took the story to heart.
S
seekerz
Guest
Not sure what you mean. Jesus told Peter where to find the money to pay the tax for them BOTH. I kid you not. It’s in the Bible.
L
Lapey
Guest
This comment is not even worthy of a respose addressing it. Weak, you can do better.
Actually you were the one who brought taxes into our discussion, not sure why; that’s why I made the comment about your response.
Since then you have not made any point about why you brought this in, or how it applies to the CEO who sent the email warning his employees of the dangers of reelecting a failed president.
Just for the sake of the thread I concede, Jesus paid taxes, now please tell who cares? Obama is still a failure and this CEO is right by telling his employees the truth. If we get four more years of what we have had, many more will be on the street and welfare. And taxation will increase, especially on the people who create jobs. Yep, that sounds smart.
S
scipio337
Guest
No, but I’m sure the two cross paths.
There are TWO mentions of tax paying in the New Testament: in Matthew 17, and again in Matthew 22, but the two are very distinct, and different type of “taxes”.
Roman citizens were largely exempt from taxes after the late Republic era. During Augustus’ reign (the time period at hand), Augustus initiated direct taxation on provinces, what in effect was a 1% poll tax, based on population (this is the reason that Joseph in Mary were in Bethlehem, it was a census for the poll tax for Judea).
The only other tax mentioned in the Bible was a local one, the “Temple Tax” (Matthew 17:22-27).
The Temple tax was a part of the Old Covenant, (Ex. 30:13,14)
Christ paid the Temple Tax, but when the Pharisees tried to trick him regarding the Roman Poll tax, (Matthew 22:21) Christ makes a non-answer answer: Render to Caesar that which is Caeasar’s (nothing, it all belongs to God).
You’re misinterpreting the text. Christ was fine paying the Temple Tax, according to Mosaic law, but offered the government bureaucrat squat.
H
He_Man
Guest
I always thought Jesus was talking about the pros and cons of taxis. It never made sense to me.
S
seekerz
Guest
Yeah, for the sake or of the thread, let’s get back to the relevant facts.
- If I accept that Obama is a failure, why should this CEO be upset? Were his ear canals in need of de-waxing when Republicans declared that their prime objective? Why the sudden elevation of interest in jobs and taxes and such? Kinda late to play catch up. In my mind they should declare victory, since their supreme mission could be seen as being accomplished!
- This CEO’s political opinions are of no relevance to his workers, but I’m willing to bet that his intrusion into their private decisions will spur some to do what an earlier conservative poster suggested might have been his response: vote Obama just to spite him.
- Actually, if we get 4 more years what will happen is that the economy will continue to recover PROVIDED that we can get the unemployed re-equipped for the global labor market of THIS millennium. Also, Obamacare will take full effect and, as in Massachusetts, the rise in premiums should begin to slow - the whining of those who might have to downgrade their cars from luxury status, notwithstanding…
- I might get your point about taxes and job creators if I understood what prevents the government from basing business tax rates not just on how much companies make, but how many they employ relative to their income. I’ll be the first to admit not being a tax expert, but if the theory is that less taxation breeds more jobs, surely there must be a way to LINK the two rather than simply to hope and pray that if you leave companies more of their profits it will go to creating jobs rather than to creating golden parachutes. That seems to be the simplest and fairest way to ensure that taxation does not stifle job creation.
L
Lapey
Guest
- done.
- there’s no point in continuing.
- did I mention done?
S
seekerz
Guest
I’m not misinterpreting anything. If the concept of taxation was wrong, at any level, Jesus would have dealt with it, not left it as a multiple choice question. The Church, its Fathers and its Saints, have never opposed government taxation and have indeed administered it when in positions of civil governance.
S
seekerz
Guest
I’m curious as to why 4. leaves you with no response. Surely if your theory is that water sprinkled on the leaves will ‘trickle down’ to the root before evaporating, a device to match sprinkler flow to soil moisture, would be warranted, no?
S
scipio337
Guest
Well, thanks for dismissing any historical context out of hand. Progressive Income taxes as we know it didn’t exist in the 1st century. I don’t see a large amount of support in The Church, its Fathers and its Saints, particularly at current levels.
CCC 2240 can certainly be interpreted different ways as to what is “due”. Even the historical “Papal Income Taxes” were usually only about 1/40th of income, and that was over a thousand years after the death of Christ.
If we want any idea about what type of taxes are excessive in the Church’s eyes, we always have RERUM NOVARUM to fall back on.
vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_15051891_rerum-novarum_en.html
(On a side note, there was no US income tax in 1891, when RERUM NOVARUM was written, but the top rate in the first year of income taxation in the US, 1915, the top rate was 7%)
S
stinkcat_14
Guest
Just remember, fooling some of the people some of the time is the key to staying in business for a consultant.
While it may be prudent to mortgage your house to finance your business, I think what this guy did was a whole different category. He set out to build a 90,000 square foot house, but he didn’t have the money, something that he should have checked into before he started, it would have saved him millions.
S
stinkcat_14
Guest
I would say that many of the people experiencing foreclosure are fools. People bought houses they couldn’t afford, with very little downpayments and very little in the way of rainy day funds. That is pretty foolish if you ask me.
S
seekerz
Guest
I’m not dismissing any context, what I am doing in NOT mixing apples and oranges. I will restate: levels of taxation are fair grounds for debate - even for protest. The concept of taxation however, is morally sound and has been accepted as such for millennia. Progressive taxation as in paying based on the proportion of your wealth…if I’m not much mistaken, that particular concept was alluded to by Jesus Himself in the story of the widow’s mite (yes, I know it was not a tax paid to the government but I’m talking about the concept of paying based on how much you possess, as opposed to considering the absolute amount paid)
M
markomalley
Guest
Oooooooooohhhhhhh … the eeeevvvviiiiilllll Koch Bros.
Per Yahoo’s “The Ticket”:
Koch Industries, other CEOs warn employees of layoffs if Obama is reelected
Koch Industries, the Wichita, Kan.-based company run by the billionaire Koch brothers, sent a voter information packet to 45,000 employees of its Georgia Pacific subsidiary earlier this month.
In it was a letter, dated Oct. 1, from Koch Industries president Dave Robertson implicitly warning that “many of our more than 50,000 U.S. employees and contractors may suffer the consequences” of voting for President Obama and other Democrats in the 2012 elections, a list of conservative candidates the company’s political action committee endorses and a pair of editorials: one, by David Koch, supporting Mitt Romney, and the other, by Charles Koch, condemning Obama.
“While we are typically told before each Presidential election that it is important and historic, I believe the upcoming election will determine what kind of America future generations will inherit,” Robertson’s letter–first published by InTheseTimes.com–begins. “If we elect candidates who want to spend hundreds of billions in borrowed money on costly new subsidies for a few favored cronies, put unprecedented regulatory burdens on businesses, prevent or delay important new construction projects, and excessively hinder free trade, then many of our more than 50,000 U.S. employees and contractors may suffer the consequences, including higher gasoline prices, runaway inflation, and other ills. This is true regardless of what your political affiliation might be.”
It’s a good thing that they are warning employees of the consequences of the continuation of the Obama Regime.
Per Yahoo’s “The Ticket”:
Koch Industries, other CEOs warn employees of layoffs if Obama is reelected
Koch Industries, the Wichita, Kan.-based company run by the billionaire Koch brothers, sent a voter information packet to 45,000 employees of its Georgia Pacific subsidiary earlier this month.
In it was a letter, dated Oct. 1, from Koch Industries president Dave Robertson implicitly warning that “many of our more than 50,000 U.S. employees and contractors may suffer the consequences” of voting for President Obama and other Democrats in the 2012 elections, a list of conservative candidates the company’s political action committee endorses and a pair of editorials: one, by David Koch, supporting Mitt Romney, and the other, by Charles Koch, condemning Obama.
“While we are typically told before each Presidential election that it is important and historic, I believe the upcoming election will determine what kind of America future generations will inherit,” Robertson’s letter–first published by InTheseTimes.com–begins. “If we elect candidates who want to spend hundreds of billions in borrowed money on costly new subsidies for a few favored cronies, put unprecedented regulatory burdens on businesses, prevent or delay important new construction projects, and excessively hinder free trade, then many of our more than 50,000 U.S. employees and contractors may suffer the consequences, including higher gasoline prices, runaway inflation, and other ills. This is true regardless of what your political affiliation might be.”
It’s a good thing that they are warning employees of the consequences of the continuation of the Obama Regime.
E
EmperorNapoleon
Guest
I’d file a class action lawsuit for voter intimidation.
M
markomalley
Guest
How is this intimidation? If Obama is re-elected, a lot of businesses are going to downsize or be shuttered. That is a fact. Some by choice, some by mandate.
Should not an employer let his employees know that there are consequences?
E
EmperorNapoleon
Guest
This isn’t just letting employees know (as if they have a magic crystal ball that tells them the economic future of their company or that their outlook will change just because Mitt Romney enters into office). It is threatening employees with the loss of their jobs if they don’t vote for Mitt Romney which is a violation of the Voting Rights Act.
- Status