http://brianmclaren.net/archives/blog/jim-burklo-of-progressive-christ.html

???

Interesting approach. If I interpret it correctly, it espouses the belief that since we will not voluntarily support the poor through donations to charity, God supports a tax forcing us to do what we won't do voluntarily. Kind of makes a mockery of the free will; being free to choose good or evil and paying the consequences concept.

 

Not sure if I can accept the concept that we have to be forced to take care of the needy since donations to charities aren't getting it done. I'd have a lot more money to voluntarily give to charities (and a greater willingness to do so) if the federal govt wasn't taking my money under threat of jail time. The author's underlying theory is based on the premise that mankind is inherently bad, self centered and greedy. While that element is present in some, I fail to believe it represents a majority of Americans.

It is the American Dream to pay more taxes...

 

Yep, plenty "fair", isn't it? You pay 35%, I'll pay nothing and in fact sometimes I'll get paid money back when I've paid nothing in. Then I'll scream about you not paying your fair share until you have to pay even more than 35%. But it's all about "fairness", right?

For the last time, nobody pays "nothing". Secondly, the people who pay no income taxes do not even have a voice in the debate, they are not walking around saying to tax the upper 1% more, they don't have time to be politically involved, they are too busy trying to survive. The most "voices" that I have heard saying to tax the 1% more are actually in the 1%.

 

I have no idea who you guys talk to who are that poor and are saying to tax the rich more. My conversation with the parents of the kids in my school who are poor never get around to the 1%, they don't even watch national news and know.

We are talking income tax so yes, many do pay nothing. If you want to expand it to other taxes my 35% goes way up, even into the 70% range.

 

As to who is saying it, you need to get out more if you're not hearing it from the poor.

We are talking income tax so yes, many do pay nothing. If you want to expand it to other taxes my 35% goes way up, even into the 70% range.

 

 

You pay 70% of your income in taxes? Wholly Cow.

You pay 70% of your income in taxes? Wholly Cow.

 

Did you read my post? Read it again.

Did you read my post? Read it again.

 

you said if you include all other taxes that you pay in the 70% range, that would mean if you make 100,000.00 and you include state, local, sales, and federal taxes that you pay about 70,000.00 in taxes a year, and I said "Wholly Cow".

Still not reading it correctly. My 35% example could go to 70% if you want to include all taxes.

So how is what I wrote wrong. If you pay 35% in income taxes you are saying if you include all taxes that your rate would be about 70%. 70% of 100,000 is 70,000.

 

You can clarify with and example if I am still not getting it, but the simple fact is that there is no way you get anywhere near 70%.

For the last time, nobody pays "nothing". Secondly, the people who pay no income taxes do not even have a voice in the debate, they are not walking around saying to tax the upper 1% more, they don't have time to be politically involved, they are too busy trying to survive. The most "voices" that I have heard saying to tax the 1% more are actually in the 1%.

 

I have no idea who you guys talk to who are that poor and are saying to tax the rich more. My conversation with the parents of the kids in my school who are poor never get around to the 1%, they don't even watch national news and know.

 

Can you paint with any broader a brush? If you feel so guilty that you have it so good then sell your house or better yet give it to a poor family and donate 100% of your income the charity of your choice although I'm fairly certain that would be the government. Since tomorrow is "tax day" care to share you tax returns as an example of how a high minded liberal does everything in his or her power to maximize the amount they "give" the government?

Rick Warren had a statement on this topic:

 

Some churches think the government is the answer to all problems. Biblical churches think the local church is the answer.

Rick Warren had a statement on this topic:

 

Some churches think the government is the answer to all problems. Biblical churches think the local church is the answer.

 

But churches aren't even willing to provide birth control. That is THE main reason they cannot be the answer. Churches need everyone to adhere to a specific doctrine to receive the benefits. We just fought this battle, and the churches won, so . . . they don't have to provide INSURANCE coverage for a completely legal medicine. Where else are they going to draw the line . . . will they get to decide when the life of the mother is in danger and weigh which is more important the mom or the fetus?

 

We have a very sick man in our church, great family, American citizens who immigrated from Cameroon. He and his wife work very hard and are still in poverty - would not however let their kids get free lunch at school. He is a hard working day laborer with no insurance, got sick around Christmas and didn't go to the doctor for a while, three weeks ago they realized that 70% of his liver was eaten up with cancer. He will probably die in the next month. Churches cannot give specific money to a specific person like this, too much possibility for fraud, but even if we could, and even if we had found the cancer soon enough some of the medicine that may have helped him was going to cost 57,000,00 per month. 600,000.00 per year. Piece of cake right. Churches should be taking care of that, yet, some don't even want their insurance to cover the birth control pill.

 

The KBC were about to launch an "investigation" and possible disassociate from my church because my preacher believes that we are ALL God's children and that there is a possibility that we MAY ALL be redeemed at some point. We decided to move our staff's retirement elsewhere. So if I believe with my preacher and my insurance and health care is through the KBC can I now lose it?

 

Are they going to cover AIDS treatment in homosexual patients? Are they going to help gay partners adopt children like they do other parents or are we going to allow them to deny folks their civil rights b/c they don't adhere to a certain dogma or doctrine.

 

Rick Warren should remember that Jesus said to render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God what is God's.

Can you paint with any broader a brush? If you feel so guilty that you have it so good then sell your house or better yet give it to a poor family and donate 100% of your income the charity of your choice although I'm fairly certain that would be the government. Since tomorrow is "tax day" care to share you tax returns as an example of how a high minded liberal does everything in his or her power to maximize the amount they "give" the government?

 

What are you talking about? Who did I paint with a broad brush. I have no idea how much money I have given to my kids at school to buy clothes, go on field trips, etc. My Goodwill donations are dropped in a box and I don't get a receipt. But who cares. It is a systemic problem. You can keep asking me for like the 4000th time about whether or not I itemize, but as little as I make it wouldn't matter anyway. The system is wrong and it needs to be changed so that people who need help get it.

 

The gov't spends 13% of its budget on welfare and 25% on defense (more than the next 19 biggest spending countries COMBINED).

 

Our country spends so much on health care because we are one of the few who support the salaries of insurance company CEOs who make a profit off of folks getting sick. What we need are more non-profit health insurance companies.