Gawd Should Stop Livin' On the Dadgum Dole, RRRRRGH!

[cm husker]

 

 

I think that tax exempt status should be removed from churches, if it's removed from all 501©(3) organizations.

 

And I definitely think that donations to college athletic programs should not be deductible, while we are at it.

 

 

We actually agree on something, that's a first.

We agree in outcomes more often than you realize.

 

 

Also, I'm not sure you actually agree with what I said about removing 501©(3) status from all charities, not just churches.

[zoogs]

 

Not paying taxes is far from being on the public dole. How one concludes that not paying taxes is the same as receiving welfare indicates the 'logical' thinking of a liberal.

It's exactly the same thing, actually.

 

Yeah, I agree -- not that I'm necessarily opposed to it for churches.

 

I think this applies in general. To the extent that individuals or organizations can operate without or with low taxes, they are effectively being publicly supported for their activity. That's fine for some things, but there should be good reasons for them.

[cornographic]

Can you post the link to that actual picture?

 

 

I don't think this is a straight forward issue. Like so many things, the socialist/anti-religious take an extreme example to justify a wide ranging policy position that would impact a lot of people.

 

The question here is solely property because all of the employees, including the religious leaders, are taxed on their income. It's not as though all religious activity is tax free.

 

That said, I would do away with the 501©(3) deductions of any type, lower rates for everyone based on those saving and let people decide where they want to spend their dollars.

 

As to the taxation of church property, I don't have a problem in theory requiring churches to pay a property tax commiserate with the level of services they receive. I'd be curious to see what that figure really is for the typical church.

 

I do know that the $71,000,000,000 is manipulated and probably based on the total value of all property and not just what would be payable as a % of real property.

Socialists aren't necessarily anti-religious or atheists. Socialism is an socioeconomic critique, not a religious critique, though some guys like Marx were atheists. Jesus was a socialist, so there's that. The religious critique here is mine.

 

I pulled that image off Google images which links to a msg board on the subject of religious mega mansions--which you can Google separately:

 

http://www.debatepolitics.com/church-and-state/198721-petition-remove-tax-exempt-status-churches-3.html

 

[cornographic]

 

 

Not paying taxes is far from being on the public dole. How one concludes that not paying taxes is the same as receiving welfare indicates the 'logical' thinking of a liberal.

It's exactly the same thing, actually.

 

Yeah, I agree -- not that I'm necessarily opposed to it for churches.

 

I think this applies in general. To the extent that individuals or organizations can operate without or with low taxes, they are effectively being publicly supported for their activity. That's fine for some things, but there should be good reasons for them.

 

zoogs, my man, you are a refreshingly sane person here on the Board, and I appreciate that .

[cornographic]

 

 

I think that tax exempt status should be removed from churches, if it's removed from all 501©(3) organizations.

 

And I definitely think that donations to college athletic programs should not be deductible, while we are at it.

 

 

We actually agree on something, that's a first.

We agree in outcomes more often than you realize.

 

 

Also, I'm not sure you actually agree with what I said about removing 501©(3) status from all charities, not just churches.

 

Yeah, alot of those charities are bogus, so I'd tend to go along with you on that. They say they are "non-profit" and such, but that's just to avoid taxes, and alot of times the $ doesn't go where it's supposed to, just ask Billary Clinton.

[cm husker]

 

 

Can you post the link to that actual picture?

 

 

I don't think this is a straight forward issue. Like so many things, the socialist/anti-religious take an extreme example to justify a wide ranging policy position that would impact a lot of people.

 

The question here is solely property because all of the employees, including the religious leaders, are taxed on their income. It's not as though all religious activity is tax free.

 

That said, I would do away with the 501©(3) deductions of any type, lower rates for everyone based on those saving and let people decide where they want to spend their dollars.

 

As to the taxation of church property, I don't have a problem in theory requiring churches to pay a property tax commiserate with the level of services they receive. I'd be curious to see what that figure really is for the typical church.

 

I do know that the $71,000,000,000 is manipulated and probably based on the total value of all property and not just what would be payable as a % of real property.

Socialists aren't necessarily anti-religious or atheists. Socialism is an socioeconomic critique, not a religious critique, though some guys like Marx were atheists. Jesus was a socialist, so there's that. The religious critique here is mine.

 

I pulled that image off Google images which links to a msg board on the subject of religious mega mansions--which you can Google separately:

 

http://www.debatepolitics.com/church-and-state/198721-petition-remove-tax-exempt-status-churches-3.html

 

Jesus advocated the central government's control of production and distribution?

 

Huh, must have missed that chapter. Though admittedly I'm the product of an episcopal upbringing so they might have glossed over those points...

[cm husker]

That video doesn't show that same house. The houses are different. And from what I watched of the video, it's not tax exempt.

 

Private residences, even when owned by pastors, are not tax exempt.

 

 

Also, the average religious leader in this country makes between $30k and $70k a year.

 

The focus on the media/entertainment mega church pastor outliers seems disingenuous.

[cm husker]

 

 

 

 

I think that tax exempt status should be removed from churches, if it's removed from all 501©(3) organizations.

 

And I definitely think that donations to college athletic programs should not be deductible, while we are at it.

 

 

We actually agree on something, that's a first.

We agree in outcomes more often than you realize.

 

 

Also, I'm not sure you actually agree with what I said about removing 501©(3) status from all charities, not just churches.

Yeah, alot of those charities are bogus, so I'd tend to go along with you on that. They say they are "non-profit" and such, but that's just to avoid taxes, and alot of times the $ doesn't go where it's supposed to, just ask Billary Clinton.

We are getting ever so close to having you see the light.

 

Take what you feel about bogus charities and ask yourself how government is any different. I wonder what government would score if graded by one of the charity watchdog organizations.

 

It strikes me that your position isn't so much that government can fix things but rather that government is a tool for reducing the wealth and power of individuals, whether human or corporate.

 

That's an ok theory, but ask yourself why, if a little government has been used by those wealthy and powerful people, a bigger government would not be used by those same wealthy and powerful people to protect their own interests.

[cornographic]

 

 

Can you post the link to that actual picture?

 

 

I don't think this is a straight forward issue. Like so many things, the socialist/anti-religious take an extreme example to justify a wide ranging policy position that would impact a lot of people.

 

The question here is solely property because all of the employees, including the religious leaders, are taxed on their income. It's not as though all religious activity is tax free.

 

That said, I would do away with the 501©(3) deductions of any type, lower rates for everyone based on those saving and let people decide where they want to spend their dollars.

 

As to the taxation of church property, I don't have a problem in theory requiring churches to pay a property tax commiserate with the level of services they receive. I'd be curious to see what that figure really is for the typical church.

 

I do know that the $71,000,000,000 is manipulated and probably based on the total value of all property and not just what would be payable as a % of real property.

Socialists aren't necessarily anti-religious or atheists. Socialism is an socioeconomic critique, not a religious critique, though some guys like Marx were atheists. Jesus was a socialist, so there's that. The religious critique here is mine.

 

I pulled that image off Google images which links to a msg board on the subject of religious mega mansions--which you can Google separately:

 

http://www.debatepolitics.com/church-and-state/198721-petition-remove-tax-exempt-status-churches-3.html

 

Jesus advocated the central government's control of production and distribution?

 

Huh, must have missed that chapter. Though admittedly I'm the product of an episcopal upbringing so they might have glossed over those points...

 

Jesus broke up the banksters(money changers), so to speak, fed the masses, advocated the Golden Rule. Real socialism is of, for, and by the People, i.e., the proletariat revolution--workers take over, not that USSR or Chinese, central/state dictatorship crapola. There really hasn't been a true socialistic country in the world, to date, though there have been a handful of attempts--all destroyed by fascists.

[cm husker]

You don't understand the definition of any of the words you're using.

[cornographic]

That video doesn't show that same house. The houses are different. And from what I watched of the video, it's not tax exempt.

 

Private residences, even when owned by pastors, are not tax exempt.

 

 

Also, the average religious leader in this country makes between $30k and $70k a year.

 

The focus on the media/entertainment mega church pastor outliers seems disingenuous.

Obviously, any taxation on churches and pastors would be progressive.

[cornographic]

 

 

 

 

I think that tax exempt status should be removed from churches, if it's removed from all 501©(3) organizations.

 

And I definitely think that donations to college athletic programs should not be deductible, while we are at it.

 

 

We actually agree on something, that's a first.

We agree in outcomes more often than you realize.

 

 

Also, I'm not sure you actually agree with what I said about removing 501©(3) status from all charities, not just churches.

Yeah, alot of those charities are bogus, so I'd tend to go along with you on that. They say they are "non-profit" and such, but that's just to avoid taxes, and alot of times the $ doesn't go where it's supposed to, just ask Billary Clinton.

We are getting ever so close to having you see the light.

 

Take what you feel about bogus charities and ask yourself how government is any different. I wonder what government would score if graded by one of the charity watchdog organizations.

 

It strikes me that your position isn't so much that government can fix things but rather that government is a tool for reducing the wealth and power of individuals, whether human or corporate.

 

That's an ok theory, but ask yourself why, if a little government has been used by those wealthy and powerful people, a bigger government would not be used by those same wealthy and powerful people to protect their own interests.

 

If you want public services, you have to have the appropriate amount of taxation, and the rich have to pay their fair share--which, at this time, they are not--and the little guy shouldn't have to carry the brunt, that's all I'm saying. Also, if you want any advanced industry, you pretty much have to have tax subsidation because that's how all advanced countries developed it, US, Japan, Singapore, China, Hong Kong, W Europe, all of them.

 

If you don't want public services, then everything will be privatized and you will be paying bills thru the roof every month for all the stuff you get more cheaply thru socialized taxation, and everywhere you go there will be a toll or entry fee, blah blah blah.

 

I agree the current gov't is too big and regulates too much, especially small biz and the like, so, in an ideal situation, the gov't would provide, thru appropriate taxation, the desired public services--The Commons--for the population and nothing more.

 

The work place also has to be democratized socially and economically and that's where WSDEs come in.

[cm husker]

 

 

That video doesn't show that same house. The houses are different. And from what I watched of the video, it's not tax exempt.

 

Private residences, even when owned by pastors, are not tax exempt.

 

 

Also, the average religious leader in this country makes between $30k and $70k a year.

 

The focus on the media/entertainment mega church pastor outliers seems disingenuous.

Obviously, any taxation on churches and pastors would be progressive.

Huh?

[cornographic]

 

 

That video doesn't show that same house. The houses are different. And from what I watched of the video, it's not tax exempt.

 

Private residences, even when owned by pastors, are not tax exempt.

 

 

Also, the average religious leader in this country makes between $30k and $70k a year.

 

The focus on the media/entertainment mega church pastor outliers seems disingenuous.

Obviously, any taxation on churches and pastors would be progressive.

Huh?

 

Progressive tax, like everyone else currently pays, or in theory, is supposed to pay.

[cm husker]

 

 

 

 

 

I think that tax exempt status should be removed from churches, if it's removed from all 501©(3) organizations.

 

And I definitely think that donations to college athletic programs should not be deductible, while we are at it.

 

 

We actually agree on something, that's a first.

We agree in outcomes more often than you realize.

 

 

Also, I'm not sure you actually agree with what I said about removing 501©(3) status from all charities, not just churches.

Yeah, alot of those charities are bogus, so I'd tend to go along with you on that. They say they are "non-profit" and such, but that's just to avoid taxes, and alot of times the $ doesn't go where it's supposed to, just ask Billary Clinton.

We are getting ever so close to having you see the light.

 

Take what you feel about bogus charities and ask yourself how government is any different. I wonder what government would score if graded by one of the charity watchdog organizations.

 

It strikes me that your position isn't so much that government can fix things but rather that government is a tool for reducing the wealth and power of individuals, whether human or corporate.

 

That's an ok theory, but ask yourself why, if a little government has been used by those wealthy and powerful people, a bigger government would not be used by those same wealthy and powerful people to protect their own interests.

 

If you want public services, you have to have the appropriate amount of taxation, and the rich have to pay their fair share--which, at this time, they are not--and the little guy shouldn't have to carry the brunt, that's all I'm saying. Also, if you want any advanced industry, you pretty much have to have tax subsidation because that's how all advanced countries developed it, US, Japan, Singapore, China, Hong Kong, W Europe, all of them.

 

If you don't want public services, then everything will be privatized and you will be paying bills thru the roof every month for all the stuff you get more cheaply thru socialized taxation, and everywhere you go there will be a toll or entry fee, blah blah blah.

 

I agree the current gov't is too big and regulates too much, especially small biz and the like, so, in an ideal situation, the gov't would provide, thru appropriate taxation, the desired public services--The Commons--for the population and nothing more.

 

The work place also has to be democratized socially and economically and that's where WSDEs come in.