M
Metis1
Guest
And Jesus taught that to whom more is given, more is expected.
- Status
S
Socrates92
Guest
Source?
Also, the majority of mere millionaires wouldn’t have accumulated wealth over 50M.
S
Sarcelle
Guest
We are now in a time of history that for a child of the working class to go into the middle class will require higher education.
However with skyrocketing costs of education we have now put a sky high paywall to the middle class.
It is now harder for someone to raise themselves into the higher class. It wouldn’t be long before we have the landed gentry and serfs.
However with skyrocketing costs of education we have now put a sky high paywall to the middle class.
It is now harder for someone to raise themselves into the higher class. It wouldn’t be long before we have the landed gentry and serfs.
Last edited:
D
Domer90
Guest
Thank you for the kind words. My son is discerning the priesthood, so that is such a gift for us. He has been through some tough times but stands firm in that.
Yes, I am quite sure my parents learned it from theirs. Large families and both grandfathers worked in coal mines.
Yes, I am quite sure my parents learned it from theirs. Large families and both grandfathers worked in coal mines.
D
Domer90
Guest
We have serious insurance issues in the U.S., healthcare providers have no clue that tests they may be ordering may be causing people to go bankrupt. Something serious has got to change. My prayers to you. Don’t be afraid to ask doctors if this test is absolutely needed.
P
Pattylt
Guest
Reading through all these comments some basic solutions to start with become apparent.
Slightly increase the top 1% taxes. Also, slightly lower the tax debt on the middle and working class.
Better funding for education to get it back up to good standards.
Start making an economics class mandatory. Educate our children on how money works, how savings works and the way to improve your financial situation…education, a job and no children out of wedlock!
Bring back state or federal training programs for trades that are needed. Obviously, computer repairs, automation skills or anything that’s obviously going to be needed in the future…medical, etc. keep them reasonably affordable.
Serious looking into closing loopholes that only benefit multimillionaires. Farms, too, are still getting some unnecessary benefits. Corporate farms should not be receiving benefits designed for single family farms.
I have no problem with tax benefits or loopholes that allow the wealthy to reduce their tax burden if it’s due to reinvestments, new business starts or benefiting society in some actual manner. There should be some penalty for moving jobs overseas just to help their bottom line.
We also need to take a serious look at government programs that are not meeting their goals. There is consolidation that should take place with some and outright removal of others.
Reduction in military spending…we spend far too much and often more than the military itself says it needs!
These are just starting points and many are cost neutral but steps on some big toes. We have to still be willing to spend money in certain areas…education…that hurts a bit. Aren’t our children and futures worth that much? Of course there are going to be arguments over how and how much to change. Here’s where we have to get back to the parties compromising instead of winner take all attitudes. I want politicians that want to compromise! Just some thoughts to throw out there!
Slightly increase the top 1% taxes. Also, slightly lower the tax debt on the middle and working class.
Better funding for education to get it back up to good standards.
Start making an economics class mandatory. Educate our children on how money works, how savings works and the way to improve your financial situation…education, a job and no children out of wedlock!
Bring back state or federal training programs for trades that are needed. Obviously, computer repairs, automation skills or anything that’s obviously going to be needed in the future…medical, etc. keep them reasonably affordable.
Serious looking into closing loopholes that only benefit multimillionaires. Farms, too, are still getting some unnecessary benefits. Corporate farms should not be receiving benefits designed for single family farms.
I have no problem with tax benefits or loopholes that allow the wealthy to reduce their tax burden if it’s due to reinvestments, new business starts or benefiting society in some actual manner. There should be some penalty for moving jobs overseas just to help their bottom line.
We also need to take a serious look at government programs that are not meeting their goals. There is consolidation that should take place with some and outright removal of others.
Reduction in military spending…we spend far too much and often more than the military itself says it needs!
These are just starting points and many are cost neutral but steps on some big toes. We have to still be willing to spend money in certain areas…education…that hurts a bit. Aren’t our children and futures worth that much? Of course there are going to be arguments over how and how much to change. Here’s where we have to get back to the parties compromising instead of winner take all attitudes. I want politicians that want to compromise! Just some thoughts to throw out there!
P
PetraG
Guest
No, I think it is immoral to whine about having to pay more taxes when your “addiction” pays you nine times the median pay while someone else is holding down two or three jobs and barely making rent and hoping their kids don’t get sick, which would bankrupt them. The immorality is in thinking that you make that much more because you’re just that much better than other people out their working their backsides off just to keep their noses above water and pretending that they would do as well as you are if they only had the “paradigm” you have, as someone here has seemed to suggest.
Yes, many rich people are wealthy because they work hard. Actors actually work hard, and most never get anything like rich. Many other people, however, don’t have the same opportunity to make themselves rich no matter how hard they work.
The point is that as a society we need to be a lot more concerned about people who have food and shelter insecurity, not to mention medical insecurity, no matter how hard they work because they are also people doing work that needs to be done in order for anybody to get wealthy.
Money is not the root of evil, but the love of money is. When you love money so much that you guard your excessive wealth at the expense of other people who are just trying to live, you love money too much.
I don’t know about St. Paul, but St. James had a few choice words for the very wealthy (who were not as remotely as far above their fellows as our wealthy are now).
Come now, you rich, weep and wail over your impending miseries. Your wealth has rotted away, your clothes have become moth-eaten, your gold and silver have corroded, and that corrosion will be a testimony against you; it will devour your flesh like a fire. You have stored up treasure for the last days.
Behold, the wages you withheld from the workers who harvested your fields are crying aloud, and the cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord of hosts. You have lived on earth in luxury and pleasure; you have fattened your hearts for the day of slaughter. You have condemned; you have murdered the righteous one; he offers you no resistance.
James 5:1-6
Our Lord had his words for the wealthy, as well:
But woe to you who are rich, for you have received your consolation. But woe to you who are filled now, for you will be hungry. Woe to you who laugh now, for you will grieve and weep. Woe to you when all speak well of you, for their ancestors treated the false prophets in this way.
Luke 6:24-26
He was echoing the prophets:
The Lord enters into judgment with the people’s elders and princes: You, you who have devoured the vineyard; the loot wrested from the poor is in your houses. What do you mean by crushing my people, and grinding down the faces of the poor? says the Lord, the GOD of hosts.
Is. 3:14-15
Last edited:
P
PetraG
Guest
.If we as a society protect the pursuit of wealth at the expense of laborers who cannot afford doctors, can’t afford food, can’t afford rent–yes, there are unsheltered people who work full time jobs!–and try to rationalize the preposterous premise that those people just don’t have the right work ethic because they clean offices and pick lettuce and do necessary labor that is dismissed as “dead end jobs,” if we don’t care that our factories are closing because we care about low prices more than the lives of the people who make the things we use, we have to know we’re not going to be able to beg ignorance when the Judgement comes. We know better than that.
Those of us who realize a very good return because we’ve had the opportunity to turn our talent and hard work to a very good profit can’t afford to rationalize that we have no responsibility to the poor, whether they are poor in funds or poor in mental or physical capabilities. Yes, there are people who are in bad circumstances because they arrogantly made bad choices. There are many others who aren’t so much at fault as those who don’t want to help them rationalize that they are. Even those at fault aren’t likely to turn their lives around without some help. In their place–and can we not say that but for the grace of God, there we go?–what would be the right thing to do? A handout, no questions asked? I don’t think anyone here is suggesting that. I think we’re suggesting, though, that the wealthiest nation in history can do better, if we have the will to do it. No one in this country is wealthy independent of the infrastructure provided by all. We are all beholden to each other. Let’s not act like we owe nothing to anyone else because we’ve worked hard.
I don’t think anyone here is really suggesting that, by the way. The question is not whether or not some taxes are going to be used for the general welfare. No one is saying 0% anymore than anyone is saying 100%. Everyone pays the same on the first portion of their income–it is zero for everybody, not just the poor. The difference is that the poor don’t make any more than that. A lot of us are fortunate enough at present that we do. There is nothing inherently immoral about governments using tax money from those of us who have made extra to provide for the general welfare, rather than relying on private charity and private initiative to do all of it.
Those of us who realize a very good return because we’ve had the opportunity to turn our talent and hard work to a very good profit can’t afford to rationalize that we have no responsibility to the poor, whether they are poor in funds or poor in mental or physical capabilities. Yes, there are people who are in bad circumstances because they arrogantly made bad choices. There are many others who aren’t so much at fault as those who don’t want to help them rationalize that they are. Even those at fault aren’t likely to turn their lives around without some help. In their place–and can we not say that but for the grace of God, there we go?–what would be the right thing to do? A handout, no questions asked? I don’t think anyone here is suggesting that. I think we’re suggesting, though, that the wealthiest nation in history can do better, if we have the will to do it. No one in this country is wealthy independent of the infrastructure provided by all. We are all beholden to each other. Let’s not act like we owe nothing to anyone else because we’ve worked hard.
I don’t think anyone here is really suggesting that, by the way. The question is not whether or not some taxes are going to be used for the general welfare. No one is saying 0% anymore than anyone is saying 100%. Everyone pays the same on the first portion of their income–it is zero for everybody, not just the poor. The difference is that the poor don’t make any more than that. A lot of us are fortunate enough at present that we do. There is nothing inherently immoral about governments using tax money from those of us who have made extra to provide for the general welfare, rather than relying on private charity and private initiative to do all of it.
Last edited:
S
Sarcelle
Guest
Great post!
There seems to be be this Darwinistic atmosphere, survival of the richest, to hell with everyone else mindset in American society.
This is not compatible with a Christian mindset.
There seems to be be this Darwinistic atmosphere, survival of the richest, to hell with everyone else mindset in American society.
This is not compatible with a Christian mindset.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
So everyone who has more money got it through working harder than those who didn’t get as much?
P
PetraG
Guest
You said it so much more succinctly than I did.
I don’t think we have any full-on social Darwinists here. Nobody here is supporting the employer who makes himself wealthy by treating his employees unjustly whenever he gets the chance, just because he (or she) can. No one is suggesting the wealthy need have no fear of God in how they handle the power that their wealth gives them. (That is what the prophets decried, after all, not just being wealthy.)
I think there is room for a lively conversation about just how much involuntary contributions to the general welfare can be justly expected. I think there is a lot of room for discussion about how to use those contributions in a way that is just and also most productive of genuine good in the people it reaches. That’s all a place where there ought to be a debate in which we all put our heads together, correct each other, see the holes in the thinking of the other and come to see the places where our own thinking came up short.
We’re not going to solve our societal problems unless we recognize how much we do have in common in terms of what sort of society is just and well-run. We’re always going to differ on some things, true, but that is OK, too. Respect for each other as we come to the course we take cannot be neglected; that is what I mean to say. We cannot be a great nation if someone is being scapegoated or demonized, whether that is the rich or the poor or the “elite” or the “unwashed” or what have you. We Christians do have to lead the way in showing respect for the rest of God’s children who are our neighbors.
I don’t think we have any full-on social Darwinists here. Nobody here is supporting the employer who makes himself wealthy by treating his employees unjustly whenever he gets the chance, just because he (or she) can. No one is suggesting the wealthy need have no fear of God in how they handle the power that their wealth gives them. (That is what the prophets decried, after all, not just being wealthy.)
I think there is room for a lively conversation about just how much involuntary contributions to the general welfare can be justly expected. I think there is a lot of room for discussion about how to use those contributions in a way that is just and also most productive of genuine good in the people it reaches. That’s all a place where there ought to be a debate in which we all put our heads together, correct each other, see the holes in the thinking of the other and come to see the places where our own thinking came up short.
We’re not going to solve our societal problems unless we recognize how much we do have in common in terms of what sort of society is just and well-run. We’re always going to differ on some things, true, but that is OK, too. Respect for each other as we come to the course we take cannot be neglected; that is what I mean to say. We cannot be a great nation if someone is being scapegoated or demonized, whether that is the rich or the poor or the “elite” or the “unwashed” or what have you. We Christians do have to lead the way in showing respect for the rest of God’s children who are our neighbors.
Last edited:
S
Sarcelle
Guest
I agree but I was talking about American society in general.
I’ve been to several online debates and these Darwinists abound there.
Last edited:
P
PetraG
Guest
Yes, and the anti-religionists, too. The free expression gets so free sometimes, I wonder if they’re all really reading what they write. I have to hope they don’t really think that way when they’re in contact with real human beings.
E
EndTimes
Guest
IF Taxes on Corps and the Ultra Weathy are too high, they won’t Sell, Hire, Purchase
And the Economy would Implode.
A Healthy Economy needs a Flow of Money.
The Circular Flow on Money is as a Trickle Up AND Down reality.
Squeeze One and you Squeeze the Other…
And the Economy would Implode.
A Healthy Economy needs a Flow of Money.
The Circular Flow on Money is as a Trickle Up AND Down reality.
Squeeze One and you Squeeze the Other…
R
Rau
Guest
The concerns expressed have generally been about the extremes of income and wealth distribution and the limited extent to which the top end of that distribution are taxed. Accompanying this situation is a fall in the share of national income accruing to wage and salary earners.
R
Rau
Guest
Higher Taxes (at the top end only) can certainly reduce the excess of govt spend over income because they increase government income. And those taxes directed at the very wealthy will have no adverse impact on economic growth either because they will have no impact on personal spending.
The extent to which the trillion dollar deficits in the US are a spending problem vs a lack of tax income problem - I don’t know. But trillion dollar deficits at a time when unemployment is low is a concern.
R
Rau
Guest
Pension funds are one variant of this. Municipal pension funds are widely reported to be grievously underfunded in the US, meaning they will be unable to sustain the expected pension payouts for municipal employees as they retire. A bit off-topic but another worrying financial measure.
H
Hodos
Guest
The Federal Budget deficit for 2019 was $1.1 Trillion dollars, for one year. And this is just the discretionary spending, not including social security, medicare, and medicaid. If you think that just imposing a tax to close the gap won’t impact the economy without imposing spending limits, let me know. I would be happy to hear how much revenue your plan will bring in and how you will then reign in Congress from spending the additional revenue considering they are already proposing plans that increase spending by 10s of trillions of dollars over the next decade. The fact of the matter is Congress continues to propose spending that far outstrips any proposed increases in revenue.
Last edited:
R
Rau
Guest
I am letting you know!
. More tax at the top end is inevitable. I also don’t doubt your observation about the need to spend more responsibly and get out of the cycle of perennial deficits.
R
Rau
Guest
That’s true. Education is far more manageable if one’s parents are well off - they will usually help meet those costs, and of course family money usually stays in the family.
- Status