Lent Visor,

You stated earlier that if people were investing we wouldn't be having this problem right now. Do you even realized what caused this problem? One word answer: government. Now you think government can fix it? Typical liberal. The same government that tanked Social Security? The same government that has ruined education? Where does your trust in government manifest itself? I'm also sorry to tell you that a lot of small businesses do have people employing other people out of their personal income. Small business provide an overwhelming majority of all new jobs in this country and a majority of jobs in general. You state that reducing taxes puts a huge burden on our future. What about Presbo's $4 trillion budget? Do you think that might put a little bit of a burden on our future? The government should get out of the way and let the free market work. They've been in the way for far too long. They caused the housing market to fail, which led to the economic crisis. Don't give me the crap that the libs are telling us that this falls on Bush. If the libs in Congress had listened to Bush and the Repubs a few years back, this "crisis" could have been a lot better. Don't get me wrong, I'm not too thrilled with what the Repubs did with their majority in Congress. They resembled Dems in their spending. Of course, now that the Dems have the White House and Congress, they've started singing "Anything you can do, we can do better."

I don't like religious involvement in politics, and that includes Reverend Wright (and also abortion and marriage). That being said, what I read of his remarks was mostly abrasive (but not all baseless) criticism of the US, rather than pushing policy like this guy was doing. If Wright had told his constituents to support more spending on social programs, it would be somewhat comparable, and I can't say that he didn't.

Wright's comments were also generally cast more in the light of "how could Obama go to that church he must hate America" nonsense than criticism of church involvement in politics, because the Republicans love church involvement in politics.

I do have a problem with how both left and right wing churches involve themselves in politics, but the right wing is much worse. For example, telling people it is sinful to vote for pro-choice candidates is fairly widespread and much more abusive of their power than what most left wing churches do, which rarely amounts to "you are a sinner if you vote this way". Also, do you really think Wright's congregation, or those like it, would vote Republican if they didn't go to church? No. The same cannot be said for a lot of the working class people (Democrats) pressured to vote single-issue against reproductive choice or marriage rights.

Of course, with all of this they are getting off without paying taxes like some kind of charity.

Realistically, we should just tax churches of all kinds, and credit them for any real charity work.

You can say that the government can't invest in anything, but that doesn't make it true. It's really baseless and nonsensical. You're right that the government spends money that it has taken from people. That money, especially for certain things like public works projects, provides employment allowing spending and provides an inherent improvement of standards of living and commerce. Investment. Obviously the private sector does this too, but we are having a recession because they aren't. The solution is for the government to do it to help things pick up so the private sectors gets back to investing. It's worked before.

Now, investment does suggest that's it's not a total waste, and that obviously can't be said for a lot of things the government spends money on. And, it should mostly (almost all) be left to private enterprise, but not when private enterprise isn't working like during a recession.

I never actually said that a tax cut was giving money to anyone, for one thing. It does however, mean they are paying less for the government services they are receiving. If the government takes 2% of my money to pay for the roads I use, and they cut it to 1%, I'm only paying half of what it takes to maintain the roads. So they are "giving" me half of the road maintenance.

Obviously, that is very simplified, but in general the government gives the rich a very good return on their tax dollars with all it does to facilitate their wealth, so when you cut taxes on the rich that is "giving" them a lot of those taxes.

Think about roads. The average person benefits from a road by being able to earn an average salary, offset by everyone who doesn't use the roads and doesn't benefit at all. A rich person benefits from a road by earning tons of money because they are able to employ people more than a mile away, ship goods across the country, and commute to their very well paid jobs. They are also using the roads a lot more as part of all that. And that ends up being a lot more than what the poor and middle class disproportionately benefit from some social services.

We have at least one clear description of the failure of Communism under optimal conditions. I refer, of course, to the Book of Acts, 4:32 - 5:11, Ananias and Sephira. NewLiving translation.

1. There is no doubt that they are practicing the economic system of communism:"All the believers were of one heart and mind, and they felt that what they owned was not their own; they shared everything they had...There was no poverty among them, because people who owned land or houses sold them, and brought the money to the apostles to give to others in need." From each according to his means, to each according to his need --- Marx would have been proud to call them brother.

2. They had as close to an incorruptible body of rulers as possible, who were proving their uprightness with miracles every day.

3. And they had pretty close to the ultimate Auditor; when Ananais and Sephira try to cheat the system, Peter knows about it instantly, and the punishment is swift and sure: the cheaters are struck dead on the spot.

And yet there were still cheaters, the apostles couldn't hold it together for very long, and none of the other churches outside Jerusalem seem to have even tried it. If the 12 Apostles backed up by God couldn't make communism work, how in the h*ll would any lesser mortals have a shot??

I understand I'm probably wasting my time here......lent visor...government doesn't "invest" in anything,government only spends money it has taken from people who work for same.
When the gov't cuts taxes it can only do so for people who actually pay taxes,the gov't is not "giving" anything.
If the gov't is taking half of the money you earn in your work and one day decides to only take one third of what you earn are they "giving" you something?
I don't want to overload you so I'll stop with those thoughts.

If you are sick of the Gov't and their reckless spending, then join me for an April 15th Protest.

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=69714831419

If I'm reading this right, it was a church sermon? For a tax exempt church? Wow. It's also kind of sick how people twist religions to advocate right wing nonsense, especially when that particularly religion is blatantly anti-wealth (not that religion should influence government policy in any case).

This is also not applicable to our country. It's not half of the people taking care of the other half. The government provides far more to the "rich half" (which isn't really a half), than to the "poor half", and the "poor half" don't have less money because they don't work as hard. Also, if you actually believe that the "rich half" will decide it does no good to do anything because they have an extra few percent in income taxes, then you have a very low opinion of them.

Taxes also make perfect sense right now. If people were investing, we wouldn't be having this crisis. But they aren't, so the government needs to.

I love you. Can we meet for lunch???

Curiously, Obama sang the praises of entrepreneurs during his address to Congress as "people who keep this economy running". Then he turned around and presented sharply higher taxes on upper-income individuals (i.e., entrepreneurs) and higher taxes on the capital that finances start-ups.

Since most start-up venture capital comes from angels--wealthier friends and relatives in the $400,000+ bracket who can spare that $25,000 or so in seed money, this has serious consequences. Now that Obama has raised taxes on that individual, he now pays that $25,000 that in the form of additional income taxes and will not be able to use that money as seed money.

Considering that every 1% rise in personal income and capital gains taxes causes a correspondent 4% decrease in entrepreneurial activity--according to a 2005 study by economists Bruce/Gurley--significant when you consider that 3 out of every 100 jobs created is in a startup.

Now that's change you can believe in.

Let me put it plain and simple: I don't owe you or your like a dad burned nickel. So get your (for webwench here) "porkified" fat fingers outta my pocket! You are nothing but a drain on society and must have gotten your marching orders this morning cause you are just FULL of "stuff" today.

Copyleft is obviously a socialist. Either that or he has some kind of twisted agenda.......

Liberals really are that arrogant.

Copyleft said:
"Who gets to define 'little', and who gets to determine how much I can 'spare'? You, Copyleft? The government?"

Both, in fact. We all do, through the arm of government. That's the price you pay for living in our society."

In that case, let's take the question off of money, which seems to be too abstract for liberals to truly grasp. Instead of money, let's look at time, since time=money.

Let's say that you're a wealth-envying leftist with no marketable skills and you have very little money. The government would still like you to contribute to society, so really the only thing you have to spare is your time and your labor.

How would you feel about the government placing restrictions on your free time? How would you like it if some government bureaucrat decided that you really only NEED 8 hours of free time per day (for sleeping) and that for the other hours of the day that you weren't working a job, you should report to a homeless shelter and offer your services there?

Would you feel some sort of indignation? Would you ask the question, "Who the heck is the government to mandate how much free time I need and how I spend it?"

I'd be very curious to hear your answer.

Slavery still exist here today.It hasen't been abolished, it has just been made more expensive and renamed. Its more like indentured servants to pay taxes and support gov.welfare.

"You'd think a devout minister would be familiar with Luke 12:48: 'From everyone who has been given much, much will be required.'" -- Copyleft

Ok... seriously, have you even read that passage in CONTEXT? It isn't talking about your financial status at all or how you should give money to the poor. It's talking about your commitment to God. He is the master and you are the servant. Much is required by him. Sometimes this does mean giving to the poor, but it's not the government that requires it, it's GOD. Another aspect is your time, your ethics, giving up you own personal selfishness and so on. In fact, the passage is actually talking about evangelism more than anything else. So, Jesus in that passage is actually saying Christians should be out there sharing their faith.

You see, liberals like you all have this habit of pointing to Christ when you find a quote you like that can be taken out of context to back up the ideals of Karl Marx, but you don't even give it an ounce of consideration in context.

Here's another Bible quote for you... feel free to read it in context. I think you should:

"For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: 'If a man will not work, he shall not eat.'" -- 2 Thessalonians 3:10

Again, please read all of 2 Thessalonians 3 for the full context.

Karl Marx however, would not be proud.

....eventually they run out of other people's money to spend.

Or, the productive class flees the country. Which is what's happening at this very moment.

You've turned it around. I didn't say "the government reaps what the poor provide for the benefit of all." I said, "It takes from all of us to provide services for all of us."

Your question about "what welfare leeches [sick] provide" seems unrelated to that.

You seem to enjoy drawing a false analogy between voluntary charity and government-enforced welfare. If I want to give an urban outdoorsman a $20 bill of my own free will, that's obviously very different from you placing a gun to my head and FORCING me to give him the $20. That's the difference between charity and government redistribution of wealth.

You said:
"No; all you can do is spread it around to people who need it by taking a little from those who can spare it."

Who gets to define "little", and who gets to determine how much I can "spare"? You, Copyleft? The government? It's the zenith of arrogance for you or ANYONE to look at my income and judge how much I need or how much I can spare. Who are you to make such a determination??

Also, it's funny how you guys like to quote Jesus concerning welfare. I'm not exactly sure that Jesus' words on charity have ANYTHING to do with the government's role in forced generosity.

Yes, Jesus instructed His followers to give -- OF THEIR OWN VOLITION. I doubt He would consider mandatory taxation a worthy substitute for voluntary giving.

He said this in a church? We really need to have some kinda fairness doctrine applied to the pulpits of America that we are subsidizing with tax exempt status. The congregations should hear BOTH sides!

Oh, I'm willing to logically address the quote all right... I just didn't think it was necessary. This IS a talk-radio format, after all, and logic is seldom welcome here.

But let's go for it!


"You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom."
Non-sequitur, but okay. At least it SOUNDS good. Not seeing the relevance, since no one's "enslaving" the rich or making any such proposal. (Unless you're one of those nuts who always calls taxes 'theft' or similar nonsense.)

"What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving."
That's a pretty strong condemnation of charity coming from a Baptist minister, don't you think?

"The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else."
Close... the government "takes" from ALL OF US to provide services that benefit ALL OF US. And every government is required to operate that way; it's hardly a great injustice.

"When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them..."
Which half? I don't see half the country making such an absurd assumption.

"and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for..."
Again, which half? Where are these people?

"...that, my dear friend, is about the end of any nation."
Yeah, I suppose it would be... if it ever happened.

"You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it."
No; all you can do is spread it around to people who need it by taking a little from those who can spare it.

You'd think a devout minister would be familiar with Luke 12:48: "From everyone who has been given much, much will be required."

Of course, you can't logically address the substance of his quote, so you simply attack the man, himself.

And the left constantly tries to convince us that they have the market cornered on logic and reason.

Pathetic.

Probably the best said way is from the Bible, which simply put says that if a man is not willing to work, he should not eat. The laziness of this country is horrible. We should not punish those who ARE willing to work in order to keep those who are not.

Good job Neal. Keep up the good work.

Great Quote, Neal. I am constantly amazed at the number of people who have been lulled into thinking that any money the government spends belongs to the government and they have no idea that it comes from THE PEOPLE!!! Even people who have worked and paid taxes all their lives seem to think that the government just pulls the money out of thin air rather than taking it out of your pocket and mine! Must be that pesky 1943 law that allows for tax withholding that anesthetizes the populace into thinking they don't actually pay taxes. REPEAL THE 16TH AMENDMENT, do away with income taxes and withholding and enact the fair tax!!! Or at the very least, force taxpayers to write that huge check at the end of the year to the Federal government. That should wake us up!

Dr. Rogers got it right! When will the American people wake up to the truth? Hopefully before it's too late.