Is it possible to become filthy rich without losing your soul?

[mapleoak]

Yep.

He only says things like that because he’s let his mindset be polluted by simplistic, PROTESTANT either/or style thinking.

(For those who don’t understand, go look at the lad’s profile.)

Oh, I see!

 

[stinkcat_14]

Is that the standard for research these days? To assume that people do things with no data to support it?

Ok, let’s look at the data to answer your next question:

You suggested it very strongly – and ignored the most common form of tax cheating.

From the following report, we see some interesting numbers. The IRS estimates that the tax gap is approximately $350 billion, now this can’t all come from the poor, because if they had $350 billion, they wouldn’t be poor.

What are the most common types of tax fraud, as measured by dollars lost?

1. Underreported business income accounts for $109 billion in unpaid taxes, or 32% of the total. Now who is it that owns these businesses who are cheating on their taxes, the poor?
2. Unreported nonbusiness income accounts for $56 billion of the tax loss. Now some of this may be poor people working for cash off the books, but some of this is also rich people with money offshore in some tax haven.
3. The smallest is deductions and tax credits at $32 billion. Some of this may be due to people cheating to get the EITC, but also people puffing up charitable contributions, etc.

So here we have some data, there is more but I have only highlighted a few things.

usgovinfo.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ&sdn=usgovinfo&cdn=newsissues&tm=5&f=00&tt=2&bt=1&bts=1&zu=http%3A//www.treas.gov/press/releases/reports/otptaxgapstrategy%2520final.pdf

 

[stinkcat_14]

No, I didn’t – you raised the issue of the immorality of the “rich,” and I pointed out that most crimes are committed by people in the lower socio-economic strata – and the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report statistics back that up.

I never said that the rich were immoral, so don’t put words in my mouth. I said that there is potential danger if one pursues a path to extreme wealth.

 

[vern_humphrey]

I never said that the rich were immoral, so don’t put words in my mouth. I said that there is potential danger if one pursues a path to extreme wealth.

You didn’t ask the question, “Is it possible to become filthy rich without losing your soul?”

You didn’t opine that there is potential danger if one pursues a path to extreme wealth?

 

[stinkcat_14]

You didn’t ask the question, “Is it possible to become filthy rich without losing your soul?”

I didn’t? Then what is the title to this thread? Who gave it the title?

You didn’t opine that there is potential danger if one pursues a path to extreme wealth?

Here is what I said in the first post, I have bolded the part that refutes your claim.

Ok, I admit the “filthy rich” part was a cheap marketing ploy to generate interest in the thread. Anyway, I was listening to NPR yesterday, and they had on Felix Dennis who was basically claiming that if you want to get filthy rich, it will cost you in many ways, including your morals.

Here is the link to the show:

onpointradio.org/shows/20…623_b_main.asp

Let’s define filthy rich as over $100 million. Although, if someone has a different number in mind, feel free to give it and defend it.

The problem I had with the main guest is that he was generalizing from himself, which of course is always bad thing. On the other hand being ruthless can be profitable. Also, can you make $100 million plus without being obessively focused towards your work? Is for example, neglecting your family to make money you will never spend, consistent with the gospel?

On the other hand, they had on Rosabeth Moss Kanter, who in my opinion did a very poor job arguing against him. All she did was make a bunch of assertions with no facts to back them up.

Senior monent, Vern?

 

[mapleoak]

From the following report, we see some interesting numbers. The IRS estimates that the tax gap is approximately $350 billion, now this can’t all come from the poor, because if they had $350 billion, they wouldn’t be poor.

What is your conclusion as to what this bit of information means?

Also, given the fact that there are people who cheat on their taxes, what do you figure is the amount of fraud on an individualized basis?

 

[stinkcat_14]

What is your conclusion as to what this bit of information means?

Also, given the fact that there are people who cheat on their taxes, what do you figure is the amount of fraud on an individualized basis?

Let’s think about this for a moment. Let’s assume that 75% of people are completely honest with their taxes. For a lot of people, they have an incentive to be honest because if all you have are w-2’s and 1099’s, it is going to be hard to cheat.

The remaining 25% are broken down into two categories, 15% are minor cheaters, less than $1000, and 10% are big cheaters who cheat by more than $1,000. For example, if you fudge a bit on your charitable contributions, or pocket some cash instead of declaring it. There were about 130 million tax returns filed in 2005, so we can bump it up to 150 million to account for the nonfilers.

That would leave 37,500.000 tax cheaters, of which the minor tax cheaters account for 22,500,000. If we assume that they take the full $1000, that would be $22.5 billion. That leaves $327.5 billion from the big cheaters. There are 15 million big cheaters, so that would be $21,833 worth of tax cheating per big cheater. These are probably not the poor.

Now you may quibble with my numbers. If anything, I would estimate that my number of big cheaters is too high.

 

[vern_humphrey]

I didn’t? Then what is the title to this thread? Who gave it the title?

My point, exactly.

This thread starts with your conclusion that “the rich” are somehow immoral, and throught its length you seek to bolster that conclusion with suggestions and innuendo, but never with facts.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Let’s think about this for a moment. Let’s assume that 75% of people are completely honest with their taxes. For a lot of people, they have an incentive to be honest because if all you have are w-2’s and 1099’s, it is going to be hard to cheat.

The remaining 25% are broken down into two categories, 15% are minor cheaters, less than $1000, and 10% are big cheaters who cheat by more than $1,000. For example, if you fudge a bit on your charitable contributions, or pocket some cash instead of declaring it. There were about 130 million tax returns filed in 2005, so we can bump it up to 150 million to account for the nonfilers.

That would leave 37,500.000 tax cheaters, of which the minor tax cheaters account for 22,500,000. If we assume that they take the full $1000, that would be $22.5 billion. That leaves $327.5 billion from the big cheaters. There are 15 million big cheaters, so that would be $21,833 worth of tax cheating per big cheater. These are probably not the poor.

Now you may quibble with my numbers. If anything, I would estimate that my number of big cheaters is too high.

No, let’s not assume anything. Go get the facts and then we can talk about it.

 

[stinkcat_14]

My point, exactly.

This thread starts with your conclusion that “the rich” are somehow immoral, and throught its length you seek to bolster that conclusion with suggestions and innuendo, but never with facts.

All I did was ask a question. I have given plenty of facts. Do you have any facts behind your assertion that most of the tax cheating is done by the poor?

 

[vern_humphrey]

All I did was ask a question. I have given plenty of facts.

Facts don’t start with “let’s assume.”

Do you have any facts behind your assertion that most of the tax cheating is done by the poor?

Estesbob posted that – citing the IRS for the fact that the predominant tax cheating is falsely claiming EITC credit. He pointed out this is the only case where a tax preparer is required to sign a special form that makes him liable for negligence if the claim is fraudulent.

You can go to the FBI UCR to determine the rate of drug sales, muggings, and so on. Then try to find a tax return where the filer declares his occupation as “mugger,” “drug pusher” or “prostitute.”

 

[stinkcat_14]

Estesbob posted that – citing the IRS for the fact that the predominant tax cheating is falsely claiming EITC credit. He pointed out this is the only case where a tax preparer is required to sign a special form that makes him liable for negligence if the claim is fraudulent.

You made the claim, but you didn’t back it up. Now, you presume that Estebob is right, so if he is right, why don’t you link us to some official data from the IRS which proves he is right. After all, you made the claim, so you have the moral responsibility to back up what you claim.

 

[vern_humphrey]

You made the claim, but you didn’t back it up. Now, you presume that Estebob is right, so if he is right, why don’t you link us to some official data from the IRS which proves he is right. After all, you made the claim, so you have the moral responsibility to back up what you claim.

Estesbob made the claim, not I. And he cited the IRS requirement that tax preparers sign a form making them responsible for any “negligence” on their part.

If you want more, take it up with Bob.

 

[stinkcat_14]

Estesbob made the claim, not I. And he cited the IRS requirement that tax preparers sign a form making them responsible for any “negligence” on their part.

If you want more, take it up with Bob.

Of course, he is wrong that the government loses more money to EITC fraud than any other fraud. The biggest fraud is underreported business income, costing the government $109 billion per year. See my link in the previous post.

If he can link to a report claiming the EITC fraud is higher, I will be quite impressed.

 

[JRKH]

My point, exactly.

This thread starts with your conclusion that “the rich” are somehow immoral, and throught its length you seek to bolster that conclusion with suggestions and innuendo, but never with facts.

vern,
I have been mostly quiet on this thread, especially regarding your line of discussion, but I must speak up at this point.

stinkcat made no such conclusion as you have assumed. He asked a question regarding the gathering of excessive wealth and the perils to ones soul which that entails. It is you who have drawn the conclusion/assumption from this that he is implying that the rich are immoral. In your very first post (#13) you began the comparison of rich vs poor and levels of crime/morality etc.

The origional question has nothing to do with rich vs poor. There is no correlation between money and morality. Nor does God care how much money one does or does not have. With Jesus, it is purely a matter of obeying the commandments and Doing the will of God.

Peace
James

 

[vern_humphrey]

stinkcat made no such conclusion as you have assumed. He asked a question regarding the gathering of excessive wealth and the perils to ones soul which that entails.

Then why did he phrase it this way: Is it possible to become filthy rich without losing your soul?

Why does he harp on the supposed immorality of the “filthy rich?”

Suppose he asked, "Is it possible to be a <Jew, Catholic, Black> without losing your soul? Would you not consider that an attack on Jews, Catholics, or Blacks? And if he worked in the adjective “filthy?”

It is you who have drawn the conclusion/assumption from this that he is implying that the rich are immoral. In your very first post (#13) you began the comparison of rich vs poor and levels of crime/morality etc.

What do you take this question to imply: Is it possible to become filthy rich without losing your soul?

Is he implying that rich are so **good **they lose their souls?

As for crime, the FBI statistics make it clear – most crime is concentrated among the lowest socio-economic classes. I didn’t make it that way, it is that way.
Is it possible to become filthy rich without losing your soul?

The origional question has nothing to do with rich vs poor. There is no correlation between money and morality.

“Is it possible to become filthy rich without losing your soul?”

Tell me, how does one lose one’s soul without immorality?

Nor does God care how much money one does or does not have. With Jesus, it is purely a matter of obeying the commandments and Doing the will of God.

Correct. Which is why it’s so offensive to ask: Is it possible to become filthy rich <or Catholic, Jewish, or Black> without losing your soul?

 

[stinkcat_14]

Just to let you know, Vern, I used the term “filthy rich” jokingly. I said so in my first post. Some may well be offended by the term, but that is their problem, not mine.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Just to let you know, Vern, I used the term “filthy rich” jokingly. I said so in my first post. Some may well be offended by the term, but that is their problem, not mine.

Since you used the term, and since you knew some might be offended, clearly you meant to offend.

Would you use the “N-word” jokingly? And then say if anyone was offended that was their problem?

 

[stinkcat_14]

Since you used the term, and since you knew some might be offended, clearly you meant to offend.

You are the only one that I see complaining.

Would you use the “N-word” jokingly? And then say if anyone was offended that was their problem?

Not a comparable situation in the least. But if you see a filthy rich person who is offended, have them pm me.

 

[mapleoak]

Let’s think about this for a moment. Let’s assume that 75% of people are completely honest with their taxes. For a lot of people, they have an incentive to be honest because if all you have are w-2’s and 1099’s, it is going to be hard to cheat.

How does that make it hard to cheat?

The remaining 25% are broken down into two categories, 15% are minor cheaters, less than $1000, and 10% are big cheaters who cheat by more than $1,000. For example, if you fudge a bit on your charitable contributions, or pocket some cash instead of declaring it. There were about 130 million tax returns filed in 2005, so we can bump it up to 150 million to account for the nonfilers.
That would leave 37,500.000 tax cheaters, of which the minor tax cheaters account for 22,500,000. If we assume that they take the full $1000, that would be $22.5 billion. That leaves $327.5 billion from the big cheaters. There are 15 million big cheaters, so that would be $21,833 worth of tax cheating per big cheater. These are probably not the poor.

All of this is meaningless without actual numbers and is pure speculation.

Here’s another question. How many inidividual tax returns does it take to make a billion dollars gap? Can one tax filer pull this off? Does that speak for the majority of the rich? How many ‘rich’ people are there?