Unconscionable” tax bill

  • Thread starter Thread starter Shakuhachi
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
You don’t worry about it. It’s a fiat currency anyways. It’s probably bound to fail. God commanded nation of Israel to have a currency backed by something (grain or something of other) if I remember correctly. We don’t have that anymore b/c our leaders failed to Trust in God. Rather, they trusted their own schemes.

I’m betting it’s bound to fail. Heck, bitcoin may have more credit going forward than the US Dollar.
 
Why do they not have a right? Have you read the First Ammendment? Your claim about right is frivolous if not malulous (if that can be a word).
 
The Church has erred in the US for its unholy alliance with government - this backfired during the Obama admin as the Church was marginalized, even penalized. President Trump has done more for the Catholic Church than any president in living memory - especially Kennedy. And yet, he comes under immediate fire from the extremely vocal leftist/activist segment of the USCCB. Any wonder there?

As well, I truly wonder where the catechism teaches that the federal government’s programs must be blindly supported - even increased? I was alive when the “war on poverty” began in the 1960s. Trillions have been poured into it. The result?

Poverty increased.

Is this the prudent choice that we are supposed to make?
 
Last edited:
Good points. But the Church’s position is not political (Obama vs. Trump). It’s just a social position.

Heck, I voted Trump!!!

I also know that God’s plans for nations aren’t 100% in line with Trump’s plans.
 
Bon_Croix said:
Why do they not have a right? Have you read the First Ammendment?
Click to expand...
Free Speech does not even come in to play here.
USCCB voted for the Right.
A year later USCCB are complaining about what it’s vote is doing KNOWING FULL WELL the propensity of the Right to cut Taxes for the Rich and do harm to everybody else.
 
You are still speaking right and left. That is politics.

Have you thought that abortion is more important to the Church than tax policy?

The Church is never going to agree with a candidate 100% of the time, unless the candidate is a saint, and maybe then they still won’t agree.
 
JoshuaIsLord said:
Did you object to them involving themselves in the Abortion Issue?
Click to expand...
Why would I object to that? It is the quintessential moral issue of our time. What I object to is not their involvement in politics per se, but their involvement in issues that don’t involve moral decisions. The tax bill is one such issue.
 
Ender said:
Why would I object to that? It is the quintessential moral issue of our time. What I object to is not their involvement in politics per se, but their involvement in issues that don’t involve moral decisions. The tax bill is one such issue.
Click to expand...
You can’t save your cake and eat it to. You can’t have it both ways.
 
Theo520 said:
40.png
LeafByNiggle:
No, my argument was that whatever this is, it should not be sold as a tax cut for them. It is a tax increase. I didn’t say it wasn’t a bad increase. I just think it is dishonest to say it is a tax cut for them when it isn’t. It is a tax shift. But I’ll tell you who is going to get a big cut - the rich.
Click to expand...
You are proof-texting by ignoring the majority of beneficiaries and focusing on the few that will pay more. en-mass, the poor are benefiting. Eliminating loopholes will always cause some losers.
Click to expand...
The non-partisan CBO says people earning under $75K will pay more in income taxes. That is not just “proof-texting.” So no, en-mass the poor are paying more. Also, college students will be hit hard. So much for encouraging education.
 
ProVobis said:
So how do you cut spending when you’ve just added interest payments?

Do you happen to know what the interest payments are, by the way?

$266 billion annually on $14.7 trillion worth of national debt. There are additional billions on the $5.5 trillion worth of debt created by the Fed’s QE program, varying from 2% to 5% long-term bonds.
Click to expand...
First. Stop baseline budgeting. Freeze the budget at the current level. Then begin cutting extra constitutional spending: NEA, DOEd, and many others. Use the penny plan to reduce spending. There’s lots that can be done. Begin selling off government owned land and property, etc.
use attrition to dramatically reduce the federal workforce.
 
JoshuaIsLord said:
You can’t save your cake and eat it to. You can’t have it both ways.
Click to expand...
I don’t want it both ways; I just want the bishops to stay out of political issues for which there is no doctrinal support for any particular position. I’m not interested in their personal opinions on political policy. If there is a question of morality then it is their responsibility to speak out, but if there is no moral component to the issue then it is reasonable to question their involvement.
 
Sahku: fun fact, if you are “too successful” you lose your student loan interest deduction. So, not only do you pay more in taxes because you have a higher income and therefore it gets taxed more, you lose a deduction for expenses that you had to incur to get to where you are. Versus, the guy/gal who didn’t make something of themselves after college. You would be amazed at where the cut-off happens, it’s not that high an income level. I haven’t qualified for many years, based purely off of salary.
 
Or you could impose a surtax (like they did in 1969 to pay for the war). That at least reduces the interest payments immediately in the budget.

Your suggestions would probably work but like the surtax would not help re-elect those proposing the cuts.
 
Look. Trump’s problem w/ the tax code is simple. It is too complicated!!! Yet, for those of us who are tax guys, we know it is somewhat equitable.

But, the tax code will never be revoked and replaced. Let’s face it.
 
ProVobis said:
Looks to me like the recent rate increases under the Republicans.
Code: 
  Statista
U.S. poverty rate by year 1990-2016 | Statista

This graph shows the poverty rate by year in the United States from 1990 to 2016. Over 11 percent of the population were living below the poverty line in 2000. In 2016, the U.S. poverty rate was …
Click to expand...
So by that we can deduce the poverty rate will once again increase.
 
Last edited:
No, b/c you haven’t taken into account increased transfer payments.

Revenue does not have to equal spend.
 
Ender said:
If there is a question of morality then it is their responsibility to speak out, but if there is no moral component to the issue then it is reasonable to question their involvement.
Click to expand...
They did address Moral Issues

Care for the Poor.
Strengthening Families

Are 2 that jump out like a sore thumb…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top