What a Christian Pastor says about Wealth Redistribution

[xsited1]

I thought you approved of putting the matter to a vote on an earlier thread. My bad.

No harm done.

 

[YWN666]

Who defines what someone's 'fair share' is? The government?

That's the reason I don't think the idea woud fly.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Not really, well not to anyone with half a brain anyway. The fact is that apples and oranges were being compared in the opening post was so apparent to me that I just had to have a say. Since the comparison was so ridiculous then any continuing comparison is also ridiculous. Discussing charity is interesting but trying to equate the concept of charity with an economic policy is just plain stupid. Understand it now?

It IS silly to associate charity with an economic policy. So would you mind explaining to me why leftists insist on trying to do so by putting the government in charge of caring for the poor via our tax money?

Now do YOU understand?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Thread drift happens when you raise other related or non-related points. You're the one who talked about liberty. You didn't say the country was based on "economic liberty" because that would be false. In fact, this country was founded on an economic system that has nothing whatsoever to do with liberty... but in fact relied on slave labor and protected only the landed gentry.

Luckily the damn libs kept pissing off the conservatives..

The heart of democracy is a strong middle class. A strong middle class only exists under a capitalist system if legislation and various protections are in place.

Tax policy ALWAYS re-distributes wealth. Giving rich people tax breaks redistributed more wealth to the wealthiest and hit the middle class with more taxes.

See how that works.

How is giving tax breaks to people, which simply takes less of their money, "redistributing" anything?

And giving tax breaks to the wealthy works pretty well, since it makes them more likely to spend and reinvest their money, rather than hiding it in tax shelters and moving it overseas.

Bailouts, on the other hand . . .

 

[Diuretic]

It IS silly to associate charity with an economic policy. So would you mind explaining to me why leftists insist on trying to do so by putting the government in charge of caring for the poor via our tax money?

Now do YOU understand?

No, you misunderstand again. Economic policy has nothing to do with charity. What you choose to denigrate as "charity" isn't at all, it's policy. There is a difference. It's more useful to concentrate on why something's bad policy if you're going to critique it. Deliberately mislabelling it just makes someone look like a dill, the pastor mentioned in the opening post, for example. He apparently doesn't understand the difference either.

 

[Diuretic]

I want the liberty of everyone protected, but this thread is about wealth redistribution and the government's role in it. It has nothing to do with marriage.

Or charity.