• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Paying the fair share

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
I always wonder...

What is MY fair share?

I hear so many people saying that those of greater capacity need to pay their fair share but I always wonder what their own fair share should be or if they use every loop-hole available (or earned income credit which isn't earned) to get out of paying their fair share and just simply want every one else to pay for what was their own fair share.

thoughts?
 
Last edited:

Audie

Veteran Member
I always wonder...

What is MY fair share?

I hear so many people saying that those of greater capacity need to pay their fair share but I always wonder what their own fair share should be or if they use every loop-hole available (or earned income credit which isn't earned) to get out of paying their fair share and just simply want every one else to pay for what was their own fair share.

thoughts?

It is really impossible to calculate.

Just one example- one oerson's income
is from inherited securities. He doesnt work
at all.

Another is, oh, a rancher. Hardly anything
harder, more risky financially and physically.

If their income is equal, is it fair to tax them
the same?
 

Shadow Link

Active Member
IMG_2335.PNG
 

Shadow Link

Active Member
What is fair about a system that allows the highly intelligent and greedy to attain wealth well in excess of their needs?
There has never been a problem with freedom. You choose to buy products and you choose to boycott products. If the problem is 'greed' then surly you have given yourself a motivation factor to be the better competitor.
 

joe1776

Well-Known Member
There has never been a problem with freedom. You choose to buy products and you choose to boycott products. If the problem is 'greed' then surly you have given yourself a motivation factor to be the better competitor.
This isn't about freedom. It's about economics.

A society is a cooperative endeavor. Having its citizens compete to live a decent life within it is classic stupidity. The good citizen born willing to cooperate but unable to compete to make a living has no motivation.
 

joe1776

Well-Known Member
A society must be governed.

And a government that makes the right decisions should have the power to implement those decisions.

Comments like Ludwig's are thought to be brilliant but they are based on the premise that, since there never has been a government that wasn't corrupt, incompetent or both, there never will be.

I think that's wrong. We're not there yet, but governments are slowly improving in their decision-making. A clean and efficient government decision-making model is likely down the road.
 

SalixIncendium

अग्निविलोवनन्दः
Staff member
Premium Member
I always wonder...

What is MY fair share?

I hear so many people saying that those of greater capacity need to pay their fair share but I always wonder what their own fair share should be or if they use every loop-hole available (or earned income credit which isn't earned) to get out of paying their fair share and just simply want every one else to pay for what was their own fair share.

thoughts?

I wouldn't worry about it too much. You live in the US, so the government will figure that all out for you. :D
 

Shadow Link

Active Member
A society must be governed.
"By the people and for the people" is not intended to prescribe "democratic socialism."

I think that's wrong. We're not there yet, but governments are slowly improving in their decision-making. A clean and efficient government decision-making model is likely down the road.
I think you're wrong about not agreeing with Ludwig.

The smaller the better!
 

joe1776

Well-Known Member
"By the people and for the people" is not intended to prescribe "democratic socialism."

Agreed. It merely prescribes what will work best for ALL citizens and not just those born highly intelligent and infected with greed.


I think you're wrong about not agreeing with Ludwig.

The smaller the better!
Ludwig is a peabrain.;) Governments should be only as big as they need to be.
 

joe1776

Well-Known Member
That's what Big Government wants you to think.
You write of Big Government as though it's someone with a brain and a Machiavellian personality. Is that really how you think of it?

I think of governments as decision-making processes. Some are better than others, but overall they perform poorly.
 
Last edited:
Top