Raising taxes on the rich

[Monte_RCMS]

Who do you think is being envious?

The right to private property is not absolute and unconditional.

Actually, it** is** absolute and unconditional:

Thou Shalt Not Steal.

Thou Shalt Not Covet Thy Neighbor’s Goods.

The right to private property is covered by not one, but TWO of THE TEN COMMANDMENTS.

And if you include the prohibition against bearing false witness … then that’s three.

You can’t plot against your neighbor to take his stuff.

the-ten-commandments.org/the-ten-commandments.html

If you visit Google, and type in “if you don’t work, you don’t eat” … tons of essays come up …

kgbuckeye.wordpress.com/tag/if-you-dont-work-you-dont-eat/

And you can also research that the worker is worthy of his pay.

Meaning that if you work, you are entitled by biblical authority to get paid and keep your pay. And buy stuff with it.

And if you don’t work, then either you don’t eat, or if you can’t work for medical reasons, then you are dependent on the charity of others.

And the others are OBLIGATED to provide charity … but you are not authorized to take what what others have.

 

[Monte_RCMS]

lucianne.com/thread/?artnum=623171

Geithner: Taxes on ‘Small Business’ Must
Rise So Government Doesn’t ‘Shrink’
CNSNews.com, by Terence P. Jeffery

Original Article

cnsnews.com/news/article/geithner-taxes-small-business-must-rise

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner told the House Small Business Committee on Wednesday that the Obama administration believes taxes on small business must increase so the administration does not have to “shrink the overall size of government programs.” The administration’s plan to raise the tax rate on small businesses is part of its plan to raise taxes on all Americans who make more than $250,000 per year—including businesses that file taxes the same way individuals and families do.

Comments:
THIS is the liberal mind-set, personified!

Post Reply
Reply 1
Remove this idiot gnome!

Reply 2
What an arrogant, ignorant creep! But, what else would you expect considering who put him in the job.

Reply 3 -
How could somebody this stupid as well as a tax cheat have ever been approved for the job? It is like Obama is mocking us.

Reply 4 -
Now I am SURE this administration is out to destroy this country!

Reply 5 -
Shrink = Good!!

Reply 6 -
To quote Jethro Gibbs… “Is everyone up there as stupid as you?”

Reply 7 -
Little timmy has come out of the closet. He’s openly cheerleading for the death of the USA.

Reply 8 -
Simple. Geitner keeps his job because he is willing to lie for Obama and be his “yes” man. Google “Geitner” for some interesting facts on his background. You’ll be even more angry!

Reply 9 -
Geithner, Obama and Bernanke favor big banks, big unions and big auto. They gave them $2 trillion dollars to buy their votes. Now they want to kill off small business by increasing their taxes. If you are unemployed you have no chance of getting a job in a bank, in a union or an auto company. If you find work it will be in a small business.

Reply 10 - Posted by:
The Demogogue Party needs to be voted out.

They don’t realize the “revenue” increase the government would get from an expanding economy – it would be much more than the revenue from raising taxes, due merely to current tax rates. Taxing small business will not lead to an expanding economy.

Taxing small business will lead to smaller or no economic growth, and likely a net decrease in revenues to the government. Aaaagghhhh! Really Stuck on Stupid.

Reply 11 -
This guy’s gonna get in trouble for telling the truth.

Reply 12 -
Don’t forget that Obama’s mother worked for Timothy’s father in the Ford Foundation funded third world socialism incubator projects. Timothy’s and Obama’s socialist roots go way back.

Reply 13 -
Tea should’ve been splashing into the harbor long before this. Our forefathers went to war for far less than what we’re putting up with today.

So what is the final last straw? It won’t be much longer before it will be too late to do anything.

Reply 14 -
Tax and spend for whatever ails you. That’s the Democrat solution. It’s so cruel to the people that they claim to be helping.

Reply 15 -
In the perfect squirrel’s world, Timmy would have no job, no money, and no place to live except his parent’s basement. He can try to look for work, but will have to be re-trained in the HVAC college or the Medical services industry in phlebotomy…come to think of it, Timmy’s calling is sucking people dry of their life fluids anyway, so that’s my career advice for this little weasel.

Reply 16 -
Obama can sure pick them.

Incompetent Marxist political hacks abound in this administration, from the top down.

Sadly, long after Obama is gone, the voters that put him in office will still be voting.

 

[copperblade]

Actually, it** is** absolute and unconditional:

Thou Shalt Not Steal.

Thou Shalt Not Covet Thy Neighbor’s Goods.

The right to private property is covered by not one, but TWO of THE TEN COMMANDMENTS.

And if you include the prohibition against bearing false witness … then that’s three.

You can’t plot against your neighbor to take his stuff.

the-ten-commandments.org/the-ten-commandments.html

If you visit Google, and type in “if you don’t work, you don’t eat” … tons of essays come up …

kgbuckeye.wordpress.com/tag/if-you-dont-work-you-dont-eat/

And you can also research that the worker is worthy of his pay.

Meaning that if you work, you are entitled by biblical authority to get paid and keep your pay. And buy stuff with it.

And if you don’t work, then either you don’t eat, or if you can’t work for medical reasons, then you are dependent on the charity of others.

And the others are OBLIGATED to provide charity … but you are not authorized to take what what others have.

Pope Paul VI said:
"Everyone knows that the Fathers of the Church laid down the duty of the rich toward the poor in no uncertain terms. As St. Ambrose put it: “You are not making a gift of what is yours to the poor man, but you are giving him back what is his. You have been appropriating things that are meant to be for the common use of everyone. The earth belongs to everyone, not to the rich.” (22) These words indicate that the right to private property is not absolute and unconditional. "

He also said:
“the exclusive pursuit of personal gain is prohibited” which you may or may not agree with, but it is certainly the foundation of our marketplace.

 

[Monte_RCMS]

Pope Paul VI said:
"Everyone knows that the Fathers of the Church laid down the duty of the rich toward the poor in no uncertain terms. As St. Ambrose put it: “You are not making a gift of what is yours to the poor man, but you are giving him back what is his. You have been appropriating things that are meant to be for the common use of everyone. The earth belongs to everyone, not to the rich.” (22) These words indicate that the right to private property is not absolute and unconditional. "

He also said:
“the exclusive pursuit of personal gain is prohibited” which you may or may not agree with, but it is certainly the foundation of our marketplace.

In my opinion, you are reading much more into it.

Otherwise would the Old Testament forbid stealing, and coveting?

 

[copperblade]

In my opinion, you are reading much more into it.

Otherwise would the Old Testament forbid stealing, and coveting?

I’m really not trying to read into it any more than what is stated. If you think taxes are stealing, then I don’t think the Church is with you on that one. I will agree with you that some (a lot?) people may have the wrong intentions to tax and spend. I don’t think it’s usually covetous though.

Here are some more quotes from Populorum Progressio, which probably refers more to social justice between rich and poor countries, but does so by making the conclusion that “what you already know to be true” about individuals, also applies to nations. So please also note that these ideas go back further than Paul VI. (By the way, it’s also pretty explicit in saying the state has the duty to appropriate property if it’s being misused–but I’m not suggesting that it is necessarily the case in the US.)

"These concepts present profit as the chief spur to economic progress, free competition as the guiding norm of economics, and private ownership of the means of production as an absolute right, having no limits nor concomitant social obligations.

This unbridled liberalism paves the way for a particular type of tyranny, rightly condemned by Our predecessor Pius XI, for it results in the “international imperialism of money.”(26)

Such improper manipulations of economic forces can never be condemned enough; let it be said once again that economics is supposed to be in the service of man."

This really one isn’t part of the discussion, but I really liked it and thought it was interesting:

“It is not just a question of eliminating hunger and reducing poverty. It is not just a question of fighting wretched conditions, though this is an urgent and necessary task. It involves building a human community where men can live truly human lives,** free from discrimination on account of race, religion or nationality, free from servitude to other men or to natural forces which they cannot yet control satisfactorily.**”

“We must repeat that the superfluous goods of wealthier nations ought to be placed at the disposal of poorer nations. The rule, by virtue of which in times past those nearest us were to be helped in time of need, applies today to all the needy throughout the world.”

(He’s basically basing the “give to poor countries” instructions on what you should already know without being told–that the rich are to give to the poor.)

And as far as a free market being fair or able to regulate itself:

“The teaching set forth by Our predecessor Leo XIII in Rerum Novarum is still valid today: when two parties are in very unequal positions, their mutual consent alone does not guarantee a fair contract; the rule of free consent remains subservient to the demands of the natural law. (57) In Rerum Novarum this principle was set down with regard to a just wage for the individual worker; but it should be applied with equal force to contracts made between nations: trade relations can no longer be based solely on the principle of free, unchecked competition, for it very often creates an economic dictatorship.”

(Looks like Paul VI is just applying what Leo XIII said about individuals to nations.)

And as far as taxes go…

“Government leaders, your task is to draw your communities into closer ties of solidarity with all men, and to convince them that they must accept the necessary taxes on their luxuries and their wasteful expenditures in order to promote the development of nations and the preservation of peace.”

 

[Monte_RCMS]

The right to private property is not absolute and unconditional.

Back to this [false] statement.

 

[PeterGStanley]

Yep Jesus was a capitalist and would love and endorse the way the system runs.Build up your profit here instead of in heaven.

 

[Brendan]

What did Jesus mean by “the rich”? I would say: someone who owns much more than they need (as opposed to what they desire), has a steady, “comfortable” income, etc. This includes the “middle” classes, though they should be taxed proportionately (ie less so wealthier peoples)…

In other words, almost everyone in the United States.

The majority of the world is far poorer than almost all that the US goverment classifies as poor.

So what level of taxation do you propose to place on an inner city single mom so that a African in a Sudanese hut can get a better life?

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Copperbladfe,

This is truly an interesting concept - and one which I really do not have serious clue how to apply it.

If “…private property is not absolute and unconditional…” what on earth is? Seriously, how does one live their life if they are unsure if they have ownership - we can discuss just what is absolute and unconditional.

Maybe with the specific focus we can get a better understanding of just what is meant.

God bless

Pope Paul VI said:
"Everyone knows that the Fathers of the Church laid down the duty of the rich toward the poor in no uncertain terms. As St. Ambrose put it: “You are not making a gift of what is yours to the poor man, but you are giving him back what is his. You have been appropriating things that are meant to be for the common use of everyone. The earth belongs to everyone, not to the rich.” (22) These words indicate that the right to private property is not absolute and unconditional. "

He also said:
“the exclusive pursuit of personal gain is prohibited” which you may or may not agree with, but it is certainly the foundation of our marketplace.

 

[vz71]

Yep Jesus was a capitalist and would love and endorse the way the system runs.Build up your profit here instead of in heaven.

If we are not to gain a profit here, then where is the opportunity to give to the poor?

We are to make our profit, God is very interested in what we do with it.

 

[Monte_RCMS]

When Jesus did the miracle of the loaves & fishes, His disciples at the time said it would cost a year’s pay to feed them. So then He did the miracle.

So, how much in current dollars would that have been?

 

[Ignats75]

St Samuel of Gompers said that the single biggest sin a business owner can make is to fail to turn a profit.

 

[Jerry-Jet]

If Jesus were to set the highest tax rate what would He put it at?

It is hard for me to believe that Jesus would tax anyone more than 1/2 of whatever they earned?

Am I wrong about that? I can see taxing wealthy people more–I just think it is wrong for the government to take more than 1/2 of whatever one earns in taxes.

Is that right or wrong?

 

[tqualey]

Hi, PeterGStanley,m

Do you have references to back up this statement?

God bless

Yep Jesus was a capitalist and would love and endorse the way the system runs.Build up your profit here instead of in heaven.

 

[Monte_RCMS]

If Jesus were to set the highest tax rate what would He put it at?

It is hard for me to believe that Jesus would tax anyone more than 1/2 of whatever they earned?

Am I wrong about that? I can see taxing wealthy people more–I just think it is wrong for the government to take more than 1/2 of whatever one earns in taxes.

Is that right or wrong?

The tithe.

10%.

And the rich DO pay more … 10% of a lot of money is a lot of money. Whereas 10% of a pauper’s money is very little money.

But there is no reason to increase the percentage … except in cases of outright envy.

 

[Monte_RCMS]

Hi, Copperbladfe,

This is truly an interesting concept - and one which I really do not have serious clue how to apply it.

If “…private property is not absolute and unconditional…” what on earth is? Seriously, how does one live their life if they are unsure if they have ownership - we can discuss just what is absolute and unconditional.

Maybe with the specific focus we can get a better understanding of just what is meant.

God bless

One of the reasons for world hunger and world poverty is the absence of private property rights in those countries.

If you’re in an impoverished country, and you bring some of your harvest to the town farmer’s market to sell or exchange … and you do not have a property right to “your” stall, then you are at the mercy of the local government or more likely the local government appointed mayor’s thuggy friends.

If you don’t have private property rights to the land you farm, then if you get hurt or you die then you or your widow can’t sell the farm and buy a cottage in town.

Private property rights go a long way to ensuring prosperity for everyone. Not just “the rich”.

 

[Monte_RCMS]

Yep Jesus was a capitalist and would love and endorse the way the system runs.Build up your profit here instead of in heaven.

Jesus was a carpenter … he built furniture and houses and donkey carts.

Probably did alright. After all, He was a skilled artisan … same as His earthly father, Joseph.

Carpenters need tools. You can’t buy tools and keep them in good repair unless you have money coming in.

If you as a carpenter gave your products away, you would go broke.

And if you sold them at cost, then you would have nothing in reserve for when you needed to replace a tool or to buy food when it rains.

And if you had a workshop on the back of your house, then you have to keep it in good repair. Hire somebody to chase off the scorpions and snakes.

You can’t plan to just break even.

If you plan it that close, then when something goes wrong, you are underwater. You can’t go back to your previous customers and ask each of them for more money for the stuff you already delivered to them.

But you all already knew that based on your business experience, … right?

 

[Monte_RCMS]

Here is the text of an Old Testament partial set of the Ten Commandments:

4 “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.
5 “Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long upon the land which the Lord your God is giving you.
6 “You shall not murder.
7 “You shall not commit adultery.
8 “You shall not steal.
9 “You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
10 “You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor’s.”

I highlighted the parts that mention specific examples of private property … servants might have been indentured servants or slaves at that time and place. If the servants were “free” men and women, then they would not be included in the “covet” thing.

And the part in red is pretty specific.

It is possible that in desiring to raise taxes on the rich, you may be coveting their wealth.

 

[rturner76]

tqualey, you have a very level view of this issue. Facts are facts. Opinions are opinions. The fact is we have all gotten richer as a country. I have seen some pretty depressed parts of the south where they still use outhouses, hunt for food, and “homeschool” and that is white AND black people. Even in the new milenium. That’s not the whole point I want to make. I’m not for the redistribution of wealth or Marxism, socialism, or communism, I’m a capitalist but a realist in that. Unchecked capitalism leads to Feudalism and Facism. If I have the money I can build the army that enslaves your people. It is no different than the government enslaving the people through communism.

I don’t clam to know the asnwer as far as this exact percent should be taxed by this bracet etc. Here’s what IAM saying:

We have enjoyed more prosperity as a nation I believe because of a few factore. One of course being peoles individual ideas, and inovation, marketing and savy. I argue that this has been made possible because of a more equal access to education. In WW II times you pretty much needed some level of money to get an education. If your parents made enough money, you were free to go to private school or some public schools in urban areas or private school and a more limited amount of public schools in rural areas but there was home schooling if you had educated parents namely a mother that didn’t have to work. If you were form a poor family, as soon as you could swing a hammer or push a rake, hoe, or broom, you were working and hod no time for school. In the Baby boom, as more factories bacame unionized, public school became more of a political issue and public schools became more avaiable ESPECIALLY when they integrated in the 60’s. You had more children getting through high school and being candidates for college. Before, in the 40’s and 50’s you ONLY went to college if your parents could afford to pay for it. After integration, so many more students were college ready by finishing HIGH SCHOOL. Notice it HIGH school because it was a higher education that most got. As more people went to college, there were more college graduates in the workforce. Hence the 60’s and 70’s hippie college students who got serious and went to Wall Street in the 80’s. Ever since, we have pumped out the college grads.

Now the new generation has gotten so fat of the baby boomer’s succes they don’t value education and are dropping out and living in mom’s basement, getting pregnant at 16, getting high and drunk instead of going to school and all this is approved of in society and MTV BET HBO media movie music videoland where ignorace is cool and education is for geeks. We have LESS people graduating both in sheer numbers because the baby boom is over and in percent because less citizens are going to college. The workforce is less educated, there is less innovation and comptetion for top jobs, companies go over seas to find serious innovators and we stink as a nation right now.

Eudcation is critical to our economy and growth as a nation.

Brazil decided to offer free college education to it’s residents. As a result, they are leading SOuth America in all industries engineering, medical, agricultural innovation, and they will share this for a price one worker at a time.

THat’s why I’m a liberal. It’s all because of the value they put on public education, early childhood education for mothers and children and all that liberal **** because it pays off in the end. Bill Gates sponsored a study that said a 20,000 investement per year per child in early child hood education for child and mother starting pre nadal with nutrition could save the government 1,000,000 ove the life of that child when you add up special ed, behavior specialise, probation officers and offices, jails and that admin, police, and that admin, prison and that admin, addiction and you see where I’m going with this.

That’s what I mean when I say education makes us all equal. Do I have all the answers? no. Would I like to see our nation lead the world in education again? yes? Do the rich bear a responsibility to those thet work for them AND make them rich by buying their products and services? yes SHould we take all they make? no Should they pat their fair share? yes. If you want people to be qualified to work for you and do a good job and buy your products with the money you pay them…yes
essay over
God bless

Scraming about the inustices between the classes (‘rich getting richer…’) is really hollow because we all want at least sufficient wealth to enjoy leisure. The hollowness comes in when you look at the so-called ‘poor getting poorer’. Since 1945 those considered poor have enjoyed yearly increases in their standard of living - the US economy (people investing in goods and services) skyrocketed. When you compare things like food, automobiles, housing, health care - things are much better then they were after WW II. The poor have NOT gotten poorer.

 

[rturner76]

And to all you mine mine mine mine I did it by myself, no help form anybody, my workers this or that. You believe you should not pay taxes because you provide a job and the worker of that job pays taxes. Let’s look at the government expense to get you that employee.

Do you think you owe anything to the society that educated those workers, taught them how to read, maybe gave them school lunches, or even a social security check when one of their parents died? So they could survive long anough to get to school on the roads bult by the government to the school built by the government to get to the teacher paid by the government for the 13 years of k-12. Plus the role models, mentorship, and councelors that were paid by the government. Then they may have received financial aid from the government for 4 years of college or more paid by the government with student loand backed by the government.

COngratulations! You now qualify to work for me. Here is my gift to you a job. Raise your family and buy a house with it. And said person would no doubt be happy to have it. When he keeps it until he retires, who will take his place? Pay taxes like everybody else and stop being so greedy

GIVE TO CEZAR WHAT IS HIS! You still have enough to put in your pool you penny pincher!