CDZ Charity is a failure of government - Discuss

Toddsterpatriot

Diamond Member
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
62,090
Reaction score
11,138
Points
2,030
Location
Chicago
The Bible teaches that charity should come from the heart, family and church. Nothing about giving your money to a Roman bureaucrat to dole it out for you.
Actually, Jesus was pretty clear... "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's" Caesar's picture was on the coins. You give him his coins back when he asks for them. Render unto Washington what is Washington's, he'd say today.
You are obviously confused.

If you ever went to church and studied things like you would understand that passage was part of a larger conversation to challenge the faith of the Jewish leader to chose between God or the secular world.


Render Unto Caesar: A Most Misunderstood New Testament Passage


With one straightforward counter-question, Jesus skillfully points out that the claims of God and Caesar are mutually exclusive. If one's faith is in God, then God is owed everything; Caesar's claims are necessarily illegitimate, and he is therefore owed nothing. If, on the other hand, one's faith is in Caesar, God's claims are illegitimate, and Caesar is owed, at the very least, the coin which bears his image.

Jesus' counter-question simply invites His listeners to choose allegiances. Remarkably, He has escaped the trap through a clever rhetorical gambit; He has authoritatively refuted His opponents' hostile question by basing His answer in scripture, and yet, He never overtly answers the question originally posed to Him. No wonder that St. Matthew ends the Tribute Episode this way: "When they heard this they were amazed, and leaving him they went away."
Jesus hardly promoted the idea of "individual freedom".
You may also be confused.

Jesus was a citizen of a country that hated an oppressive government. In fact He was crucified by the Government.

If you want to use political terms He was a Libertarian.

God gave us free will. The ultimate personal freedom. It was Man that turned the freedom of free will over to oppressive government.
Jesus wasn't political. You are arguing politics. Don't infuse Jesus into that argument.
You are confused at the point I was making.

I was arguing that God gave us free will which is the ability to chose our own fate.

If we let government oppress us then it is our own fault.

Jesus told us many times to chose God over the state.

The Romans oppressed the Jews as they did most of the conquered lands.

We get that kind of oppression from government. Even in a country like the US that founded on the principle of "In God We Trust". For instance, in some places our government was even telling us recently that we couldn't even go to church and we even have a Bill of Rights that guarantees freedom of religion.

However, to get back to the subject of this thread. Charity should be an act of the heart, not the oppression of government.

I hate welfare, taxes and government oppression. I don't want the government taking my money by force and giving it away to the special interest groups that vote in the politicians.

However, I am a generous person. I help to support an orphanage. My wife and I go to the grocery store every month and buy food and donate it to a food bank. We spend quite a bit of our income on charity.

I want to have the ability to chose who I help. That is called Liberty. I do not want some stuipid and corrupt politician stealing my money and giving it away to the special interest groups that help to get him or her reelected.

Socialism is slavery to the state. Nobody in their right minds would support something like that.
You make the mistake in assuming that those who wish to see a fairer country is worshipping the state. You are wrong.
You are confused about this. Ii don't think you really understand what the word fairness means.

How can the oppressive government taking the money that I earned and giving it to some worthless welfare queen or Illegal alien be considered fair by any definition? Isn't that slavery? Isn't that thievery?

I had to work hard for my money. Why should the government steal it and give it to somebody else that didn't do a damn damn thing to earn it?
Nobody is taking your money to give to others. The government is just creating it out of nothing.

View attachment 407851
Nobody has worked for the 'wealth" the government is just creating .

One thing about Liberals. They have no more understanding of Economics than they do of History, Climate Science, Biology, Ethics or the Constitution.

I earned my money by working hard, working smart and being productive. It is despicable that the government would rob me of it and give it away to somebody else that didn't earn it.
Ben Bernanke - The Father of Extreme US Socialism

Mr Bernanke’s unorthodox “cash for trash” scheme, otherwise known as quantitative easing, drove up asset prices and bailed out baby boomers at the profound political cost of pricing out millennials from that most divisive of asset markets, property.

Trash? LOL!
 

pknopp

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2019
Messages
20,904
Reaction score
3,867
Points
215
The Bible teaches that charity should come from the heart, family and church. Nothing about giving your money to a Roman bureaucrat to dole it out for you.
Actually, Jesus was pretty clear... "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's" Caesar's picture was on the coins. You give him his coins back when he asks for them. Render unto Washington what is Washington's, he'd say today.
You are obviously confused.

If you ever went to church and studied things like you would understand that passage was part of a larger conversation to challenge the faith of the Jewish leader to chose between God or the secular world.


Render Unto Caesar: A Most Misunderstood New Testament Passage


With one straightforward counter-question, Jesus skillfully points out that the claims of God and Caesar are mutually exclusive. If one's faith is in God, then God is owed everything; Caesar's claims are necessarily illegitimate, and he is therefore owed nothing. If, on the other hand, one's faith is in Caesar, God's claims are illegitimate, and Caesar is owed, at the very least, the coin which bears his image.

Jesus' counter-question simply invites His listeners to choose allegiances. Remarkably, He has escaped the trap through a clever rhetorical gambit; He has authoritatively refuted His opponents' hostile question by basing His answer in scripture, and yet, He never overtly answers the question originally posed to Him. No wonder that St. Matthew ends the Tribute Episode this way: "When they heard this they were amazed, and leaving him they went away."
Jesus hardly promoted the idea of "individual freedom".
You may also be confused.

Jesus was a citizen of a country that hated an oppressive government. In fact He was crucified by the Government.

If you want to use political terms He was a Libertarian.

God gave us free will. The ultimate personal freedom. It was Man that turned the freedom of free will over to oppressive government.
Jesus wasn't political. You are arguing politics. Don't infuse Jesus into that argument.
You are confused at the point I was making.

I was arguing that God gave us free will which is the ability to chose our own fate.

If we let government oppress us then it is our own fault.

Jesus told us many times to chose God over the state.

The Romans oppressed the Jews as they did most of the conquered lands.

We get that kind of oppression from government. Even in a country like the US that founded on the principle of "In God We Trust". For instance, in some places our government was even telling us recently that we couldn't even go to church and we even have a Bill of Rights that guarantees freedom of religion.

However, to get back to the subject of this thread. Charity should be an act of the heart, not the oppression of government.

I hate welfare, taxes and government oppression. I don't want the government taking my money by force and giving it away to the special interest groups that vote in the politicians.

However, I am a generous person. I help to support an orphanage. My wife and I go to the grocery store every month and buy food and donate it to a food bank. We spend quite a bit of our income on charity.

I want to have the ability to chose who I help. That is called Liberty. I do not want some stuipid and corrupt politician stealing my money and giving it away to the special interest groups that help to get him or her reelected.

Socialism is slavery to the state. Nobody in their right minds would support something like that.
You make the mistake in assuming that those who wish to see a fairer country is worshipping the state. You are wrong.
You are confused about this. Ii don't think you really understand what the word fairness means.

How can the oppressive government taking the money that I earned and giving it to some worthless welfare queen or Illegal alien be considered fair by any definition? Isn't that slavery? Isn't that thievery?

I had to work hard for my money. Why should the government steal it and give it to somebody else that didn't do a damn damn thing to earn it?
Nobody is taking your money to give to others. The government is just creating it out of nothing.

View attachment 407851
Nobody has worked for the 'wealth" the government is just creating .

One thing about Liberals. They have no more understanding of Economics than they do of History, Climate Science, Biology, Ethics or the Constitution.

I earned my money by working hard, working smart and being productive. It is despicable that the government would rob me of it and give it away to somebody else that didn't earn it.
View attachment 407857
If economists understood economics, they would be psychologists.
If economicists understood economics at the least we wouldn't have had to spend billions bailing out the economy.

Right up until the crash, Bernanke was saying everything was going to be fine.
 

pknopp

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2019
Messages
20,904
Reaction score
3,867
Points
215
The Bible teaches that charity should come from the heart, family and church. Nothing about giving your money to a Roman bureaucrat to dole it out for you.
Actually, Jesus was pretty clear... "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's" Caesar's picture was on the coins. You give him his coins back when he asks for them. Render unto Washington what is Washington's, he'd say today.
You are obviously confused.

If you ever went to church and studied things like you would understand that passage was part of a larger conversation to challenge the faith of the Jewish leader to chose between God or the secular world.


Render Unto Caesar: A Most Misunderstood New Testament Passage


With one straightforward counter-question, Jesus skillfully points out that the claims of God and Caesar are mutually exclusive. If one's faith is in God, then God is owed everything; Caesar's claims are necessarily illegitimate, and he is therefore owed nothing. If, on the other hand, one's faith is in Caesar, God's claims are illegitimate, and Caesar is owed, at the very least, the coin which bears his image.

Jesus' counter-question simply invites His listeners to choose allegiances. Remarkably, He has escaped the trap through a clever rhetorical gambit; He has authoritatively refuted His opponents' hostile question by basing His answer in scripture, and yet, He never overtly answers the question originally posed to Him. No wonder that St. Matthew ends the Tribute Episode this way: "When they heard this they were amazed, and leaving him they went away."
Jesus hardly promoted the idea of "individual freedom".
You may also be confused.

Jesus was a citizen of a country that hated an oppressive government. In fact He was crucified by the Government.

If you want to use political terms He was a Libertarian.

God gave us free will. The ultimate personal freedom. It was Man that turned the freedom of free will over to oppressive government.
Jesus wasn't political. You are arguing politics. Don't infuse Jesus into that argument.
You are confused at the point I was making.

I was arguing that God gave us free will which is the ability to chose our own fate.

If we let government oppress us then it is our own fault.

Jesus told us many times to chose God over the state.

The Romans oppressed the Jews as they did most of the conquered lands.

We get that kind of oppression from government. Even in a country like the US that founded on the principle of "In God We Trust". For instance, in some places our government was even telling us recently that we couldn't even go to church and we even have a Bill of Rights that guarantees freedom of religion.

However, to get back to the subject of this thread. Charity should be an act of the heart, not the oppression of government.

I hate welfare, taxes and government oppression. I don't want the government taking my money by force and giving it away to the special interest groups that vote in the politicians.

However, I am a generous person. I help to support an orphanage. My wife and I go to the grocery store every month and buy food and donate it to a food bank. We spend quite a bit of our income on charity.

I want to have the ability to chose who I help. That is called Liberty. I do not want some stuipid and corrupt politician stealing my money and giving it away to the special interest groups that help to get him or her reelected.

Socialism is slavery to the state. Nobody in their right minds would support something like that.
You make the mistake in assuming that those who wish to see a fairer country is worshipping the state. You are wrong.
You are confused about this. Ii don't think you really understand what the word fairness means.

How can the oppressive government taking the money that I earned and giving it to some worthless welfare queen or Illegal alien be considered fair by any definition? Isn't that slavery? Isn't that thievery?

I had to work hard for my money. Why should the government steal it and give it to somebody else that didn't do a damn damn thing to earn it?
Nobody is taking your money to give to others. The government is just creating it out of nothing.

View attachment 407851
Nobody has worked for the 'wealth" the government is just creating .

One thing about Liberals. They have no more understanding of Economics than they do of History, Climate Science, Biology, Ethics or the Constitution.

I earned my money by working hard, working smart and being productive. It is despicable that the government would rob me of it and give it away to somebody else that didn't earn it.
Ben Bernanke - The Father of Extreme US Socialism

Mr Bernanke’s unorthodox “cash for trash” scheme, otherwise known as quantitative easing, drove up asset prices and bailed out baby boomers at the profound political cost of pricing out millennials from that most divisive of asset markets, property.

Trash? LOL!
Kinda true. It then became money for nothing.
 

Toddsterpatriot

Diamond Member
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
62,090
Reaction score
11,138
Points
2,030
Location
Chicago
Kinda true. It then became money for nothing.
The Fed didn't buy trash. The Fed bought US Treasuries and government backed MBS.
The opposite of trash. And they earned hundreds of billions in interest on these bonds that
never, ever defaulted or missed a payment.
 

Flash

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2014
Messages
39,031
Reaction score
16,283
Points
1,630
Location
Florida
The Bible teaches that charity should come from the heart, family and church. Nothing about giving your money to a Roman bureaucrat to dole it out for you.
Actually, Jesus was pretty clear... "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's" Caesar's picture was on the coins. You give him his coins back when he asks for them. Render unto Washington what is Washington's, he'd say today.
You are obviously confused.

If you ever went to church and studied things like you would understand that passage was part of a larger conversation to challenge the faith of the Jewish leader to chose between God or the secular world.


Render Unto Caesar: A Most Misunderstood New Testament Passage


With one straightforward counter-question, Jesus skillfully points out that the claims of God and Caesar are mutually exclusive. If one's faith is in God, then God is owed everything; Caesar's claims are necessarily illegitimate, and he is therefore owed nothing. If, on the other hand, one's faith is in Caesar, God's claims are illegitimate, and Caesar is owed, at the very least, the coin which bears his image.

Jesus' counter-question simply invites His listeners to choose allegiances. Remarkably, He has escaped the trap through a clever rhetorical gambit; He has authoritatively refuted His opponents' hostile question by basing His answer in scripture, and yet, He never overtly answers the question originally posed to Him. No wonder that St. Matthew ends the Tribute Episode this way: "When they heard this they were amazed, and leaving him they went away."
Jesus hardly promoted the idea of "individual freedom".
You may also be confused.

Jesus was a citizen of a country that hated an oppressive government. In fact He was crucified by the Government.

If you want to use political terms He was a Libertarian.

God gave us free will. The ultimate personal freedom. It was Man that turned the freedom of free will over to oppressive government.
Jesus wasn't political. You are arguing politics. Don't infuse Jesus into that argument.
You are confused at the point I was making.

I was arguing that God gave us free will which is the ability to chose our own fate.

If we let government oppress us then it is our own fault.

Jesus told us many times to chose God over the state.

The Romans oppressed the Jews as they did most of the conquered lands.

We get that kind of oppression from government. Even in a country like the US that founded on the principle of "In God We Trust". For instance, in some places our government was even telling us recently that we couldn't even go to church and we even have a Bill of Rights that guarantees freedom of religion.

However, to get back to the subject of this thread. Charity should be an act of the heart, not the oppression of government.

I hate welfare, taxes and government oppression. I don't want the government taking my money by force and giving it away to the special interest groups that vote in the politicians.

However, I am a generous person. I help to support an orphanage. My wife and I go to the grocery store every month and buy food and donate it to a food bank. We spend quite a bit of our income on charity.

I want to have the ability to chose who I help. That is called Liberty. I do not want some stuipid and corrupt politician stealing my money and giving it away to the special interest groups that help to get him or her reelected.

Socialism is slavery to the state. Nobody in their right minds would support something like that.
You make the mistake in assuming that those who wish to see a fairer country is worshipping the state. You are wrong.
You are confused about this. Ii don't think you really understand what the word fairness means.

How can the oppressive government taking the money that I earned and giving it to some worthless welfare queen or Illegal alien be considered fair by any definition? Isn't that slavery? Isn't that thievery?

I had to work hard for my money. Why should the government steal it and give it to somebody else that didn't do a damn damn thing to earn it?
Nobody is taking your money to give to others. The government is just creating it out of nothing.

View attachment 407851
Nobody has worked for the 'wealth" the government is just creating .

One thing about Liberals. They have no more understanding of Economics than they do of History, Climate Science, Biology, Ethics or the Constitution.

I earned my money by working hard, working smart and being productive. It is despicable that the government would rob me of it and give it away to somebody else that didn't earn it.
View attachment 407857
If economists understood economics, they would be psychologists.
If economicists understood economics at the least we wouldn't have had to spend billions bailing out the economy.

Right up until the crash, Bernanke was saying everything was going to be fine.

Only idiots of both parties spend money to bail out failed businesses. Like that shithead Obama bailing out the UAW.
 

Markle

Gold Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2016
Messages
20,488
Reaction score
4,378
Points
290
Location
Tallahassee, FL
The most violent country in Europe: Britain is also worse than South Africa and U.S.
Guy, we've been over this... the UK counts violent crime differently than the US... Any unwanted touching is considered sexual assault (as opposed to the US, where you have to penetrate someone to be charged with it.) and every pub fight is counted as an assault.

Apples and oranges.

The ONLY quanitifable that can't really be disputed is murder. We have 19,000 of them, they have 600.
Wrong.......from politifact...apples to apples comparison...

For England and Wales, we added together three crime categories: "violence against the person, with injury," "most serious sexual crime," and "robbery." This produced a rate of 775 violent crimes per 100,000 people.

For the United States, we used the FBI’s four standard categories for violent crime that Bier cited. We came up with a rate of 383 violent crimes per 100,000 people.


As you know, Politifact is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the far-left newspaper, the Tampa Bay Times. They use the same facilities, desks, offices, personnel, and editor.
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
128,047
Reaction score
13,566
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
Because Hillary did so well? Hillary was the only candidate that would have lost to Trump.
Bernie would have lost bigger when everyone pointed out HE'S A COMMUNIST!!!!

It wasn't all her fault. People in Michigan weren't happy when they begged for help from the government for their poisoned water and Obama told them to pound sand while giving the auto companies billions.
yeah, actually, it kind of was her fault... Most people in Michigan were happy the Auto Companies got bailed out. That's why Obama won it in 12 and Biden will win it this year.

Hillary lost Michigan because she got arrogant and assumed she had it in the bag. That combined with the BS email narrative, and that's she a generally unlikable shrew, is why she lost.

But Commie Bernie would have lost most of the Mid West, because those Auto Workers wouldn't be keen on making Yugos for the greater glory of the Soviet State.
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
128,047
Reaction score
13,566
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
With one straightforward counter-question, Jesus skillfully points out that the claims of God and Caesar are mutually exclusive. If one's faith is in God, then God is owed everything; Caesar's claims are necessarily illegitimate, and he is therefore owed nothing. If, on the other hand, one's faith is in Caesar, God's claims are illegitimate, and Caesar is owed, at the very least, the coin which bears his image.
Clearly, the person didn't understand the HISTORICAL context.

In the historical context, the Pharisees were trying to trap Jesus. This was about a TEMPLE TAX that was hated by the Jews. If Jesus denounced the tax, then they would have reported him to the Romans, who would have nailed him to the nearest cross (which is what they did anyway), if he supported it, they could have accused him of being disloyal to Jewish Nationalism.

Instead, Jesus merely pointed out that the money and the tax system belonged to Caesar, and you should render onto Caesar what is Caesar.

Still looking for that passage where Jesus said the Rich should get big tax cuts... oh, wait, there isn't one.
 

sartre play

Gold Member
Joined
May 4, 2015
Messages
4,917
Reaction score
762
Points
140
I just look around & see hard working Americans not gaining any ground, while the politicians & very rich stuff their pockets. The answer evades me, but I know that Trump is not the answer.
 

Oddball

Unobtanium Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2009
Messages
67,460
Reaction score
29,867
Points
2,300
Location
Drinking wine, eating cheese, catching rays
I just look around & see hard working Americans not gaining any ground, while the politicians & very rich stuff their pockets. The answer evades me, but I know that Trump is not the answer.
Non sequitur....That has been the case far before Trump showed up on the scene.

Fact remains that the people supported best by the socialistic welfare state are the bureaucrats.
 

Grumblenuts

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2017
Messages
4,989
Reaction score
972
Points
140
Entitlements, by definition, come with no strings.
Though, in fact, fncceo was not entitled to just make things up without consequence, he always felt so entitled and got away with it quite a bit over the years.
 

Sun Devil 92

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2015
Messages
31,740
Reaction score
10,706
Points
1,410

In this story the tory minister is praising the efforts of foodbanks in helping folk to not starve.

But we pay taxes to live in a society where people are not going to starve. People should not be at the mercy of charity to put some food on the table.

Everybody pays taxes so they have a right to expect help when they go through bad times. Welfare has a dignity that charity has not got. It is time to move on from Victorian era social policy.
You've got it completely reversed.

Government handouts reflect a process that has no dignity.
 

Markle

Gold Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2016
Messages
20,488
Reaction score
4,378
Points
290
Location
Tallahassee, FL
I just look around & see hard working Americans not gaining any ground, while the politicians & very rich stuff their pockets. The answer evades me, but I know that Trump is not the answer.
Obviously, you are "looking around" with your eyes closed. As you know, and know well, Americans were gaining ground before Covid-19 from China and is are gaining ground today!


 

Desperado

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2012
Messages
32,431
Reaction score
6,116
Points
1,140

In this story the tory minister is praising the efforts of foodbanks in helping folk to not starve.

But we pay taxes to live in a society where people are not going to starve. People should not be at the mercy of charity to put some food on the table.

Everybody pays taxes so they have a right to expect help when they go through bad times. Welfare has a dignity that charity has not got. It is time to move on from Victorian era social policy.
Hw did you come up with that conclusion
The Government never was or never will be a charitable organization.
 

candycorn

Alis volat propriis
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
69,322
Reaction score
12,444
Points
2,180

In this story the tory minister is praising the efforts of foodbanks in helping folk to not starve.

But we pay taxes to live in a society where people are not going to starve. People should not be at the mercy of charity to put some food on the table.

Everybody pays taxes so they have a right to expect help when they go through bad times. Welfare has a dignity that charity has not got. It is time to move on from Victorian era social policy.
I tend to think that the need for charity in the Western World or "first world" if you prefer is more of a failure of our systems; not the government per say. Education for example. We can have the best schools in the world but if there is no "back up" at home, it's all for naught. Now why is there no "back up"? We have a lot of single parent households. Plenty of reasons for that. We (in the US anyway) tie health insurance to your job for some whacky reason so working is more important than making sure your kid does his homework in a lot of cases.

Government essentially re-allocates money. The systems that are created can only do so much.

I guess in the macro, perhaps it is a failure of government. But anyone who has a kid who wonders why their education is lacking and doesn't start with what they have done as a parent to ensure their success is starting in the wrong place. Government can't fix that.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top