• 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!

taxes

Green Gaia

Veteran Member
Jocose said:
Nope. Not in the mood for educating you. You could do the research yourself though. It wouldn't' hurt. *shrugs*

LOL. You might want to take a look back through some old threads on homosexuality and sexuality studies. Pah has done more research on the subject than probably everyone else on this forum combined.

But anyway, this is off topic. :)
 

Melody

Well-Known Member
Faminedynasty said:
I can remind you that it is our taxes that pay the medical for the legless vets returning from Iraq.
D'you mean like the one who is living in a car because *our* government is dunning him for not returning his re-up bonus when he was discharged and it's ruining his credit rating to the point where he's unable to even get an apartment? Did I forget to mention that his legs were blown off not long after he received the bonus and then he was discharged?

My dad is a vet and the coverage he gets at the VA hospital is laughable....and that's not their fault. It's the fault of our government who takes the tax dollars we pay and sends them overseas to help support regimes who bide their time and build up their weaponry...on our tax dollars...so they can then turn on the hand that's been feeding them so that we then feel the need to send our young men over to fight in a war and have their legs blown off so they can come back and....

I pay taxes because freedom is much more appealing than going to jail. Do I like them or agree with how my money is spent? Nope, but then they never asked me. Please don't tell me I have taxation with representation and my representatives vote my tax dollars for me, because Jimmy Carter was the only person I ever voted for that actually made it into office.

I would much rather my tax dollars went to fighting AIDS. I don't care how it was started, nor am I interested in placing blame for who's spreading the disease the fastest. The reality is that it is a problem and we need to find a solution. If my tax dollars can do that, then go for it.

When people donate to United Way, they can designate which of the United Way organizations they want their money to go to. Wouldn't it be cool if we could do the same for our taxes?
 

Melody

Well-Known Member
jamaesi said:
If you're going to be stingy about who you help- which goes against the Bible, Jesus said to help the lowest of the low and the unsavoury people- then don't come crying when no one wants to help you.
Oh blast! It won't let me frubal you....ok...have some coins!
 

Feathers in Hair

World's Tallest Hobbit
I fear I'm rather with Maize and and Pah, here. If you're wanting to make such a cruel and baseless statement against a group of people, there'll be a lot of others that are more than willing to do the research to prove you wrong. If you can't be bothered to come up with evidence that indicates otherwise, the odds aren't stacked in your favor.
 

DreamQuickBook

Active Member
pdoel said:
Here's an idea. Turn on MTV sometime. Watch shows such as "Real World", "Road Rules", or even better, "Spring Break".

Heterosexuals seem QUITE promiscious to me. More so than any homosexual I know.

lol Now there is some objective data for you! :)
 

pdoel

Active Member
Jocose said:
lol Now there is some objective data for you! :)
Well, how about this. I went to a rather strict Presbyterian College. LOTS of Bible beaters there. I, (keep in mind, I am a gay male) was the ONLY one who wasn't having sex. Everyone else was hooking up just about every weekend, with different people each weekend.

If people want to believe that it's only the homosexuals who are promiscious, then they obviously don't want to face facts. It's easy to sit back and point fingers. It's not as easy to accept truths.
 

Melody

Well-Known Member
Maize said:
I would say yes if I had faith that not just the popular causes and programs would be funded.
Ok...how about a specific percentage goes to the government to spend...and we get to designate the rest to specific programs?

Oh wait, then they'll do like the lottery which was supposed to fund the education programs. So what did they do. Originally, $25 million was budgeted for the schools (figures made up). The lottery brought in $40 million. Does that mean the schools get $65 million or even $40 million? Nope...the schools get $25 million and now the states have removed them from the budget since the lottery is funding them. And where's the rest of the money....hmmmm?

Never mind. Figure a solution and the politicians will figure out how to futz it up.
 

Aqualung

Tasty
rainbowchristianqld said:
As for paying medical bills for "**** with AIDS", some people forget that there's just as many "Hetro's with Aids" in the world, do you not want to pay for your own "Club" as well?

As for Income Tax, I believe that there should just be the same percentage % taken off for everyone.

I don't like paying for anybody who brough AIDs on themselves by their own risky behavoiur. And I don't like the government saying that I must pay for the AIDs care of those unlucky enough to be born with AIDs. This is a matter of principle, not with where my sentiments lie. The government's job is to allow people to do whatever they want, as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. It's not to let me do whatever I want as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else, and, by the way, I also must help all these different people, too.
 

Aqualung

Tasty
FeathersinHair said:
You pay for someone who's heterosexual, just as equally. Again, if you'd like to take this up in another thread, I'm more than willing.




You pay all of them? Dear heavens, that's gotta be a heavy burden! (Just kidding.)
I pay the same as you do. What if I didn't want to support all the heterosexuals, sleazing around with their risky lifestyle? Quite frankly, statistically (there being more straights than gays) that's the bigger outrage.



You do make a good point about paying, and I stand corrected. I would again bring up that it's more likely that the burden on that system is not exclusively gays.
Never once did I say it was exclusively gays. You're the one who said that. I mentioned that I don't like to pay for AIDs treatments of ANYBODY who practises a risky lifestyle. It's not the government's job to regulate that sort of caring.
 

Aqualung

Tasty
truthseekingsoul said:
I think this is the most dangerous and fatal idea to spring from free-market fundamentalism.

If the free market was perfect, America and the EU would not be steeped in draconian protectionism. If this message was true the privatised water systems in the third world would be the most efficient to be found.
History has shown time and again that regulation only hurts business. Let me give you a few example. Minimum wage. The minimum wage is pretty much a thing that the government set up because of its big heart in order to ensure that people won't be payed too little. This fails on several levels. If one business offeres X amount of dollars for a job and another business offers 2X dollars, who do you think is going to get the workers. Workers are essentially things you buy, and your service is something you sell. It works best on the free market economy. How do I know? I live in Oregon. Oregon's state minimum wage is $7.25, one of the highest in the nation. It also has one of the worst economies. Coincidence? I don't think so.
Another example is when they outlawed monopolies. Do you know why they did it? It wan't because the consumer was unhappy. In fact, the consumers were very happy. It was instead because of all the business oweners. So, even though it was better for the general population, the government slapped on restricitons. Restrictions are just the government's way of showning a population that does not generally have good economics skills that it cares, even the restrictions hurt more than they help.

The same is true with medicine.
 

Aqualung

Tasty
pdoel said:
Yes, it sucks that I, as a homosexual male, will probably never have children that will utilize the school systems. So that's money I spend to school taxes, that I will never get back.
You don't think you use the school system? The DMV is already slow as it is. Think what it would be like if none of these people had had an education. People can't vote well if they don't have an education, so we will have horrible presidents. People would stop doing white-collar work that is necessary for this country, because they won't get past grade school. Think what you want, but this country runs because of its educational system.
 

Aqualung

Tasty
Now, I want to reiterate something important that everyone seems to be missing. It's not that I don't care about anyone with any disease. It's not like I don't care whether anyone lives or dies. It's not like all the statements that I say that mention AIDs also mention homosexuals exclusively. I just don't think it the government's job to make anyone help anybody. pdoel said something about having to pay for things that he might later need. I think you should pay for them out of you heart if you want, and don't if you don't want, but if you don't, and you end up like anybody you weren't paying for, don't wonder why nobody is paying for you. it's not the government's job to make me care about people. Whether I do care or not is moot.
 

Green Gaia

Veteran Member
Aqualung said:
That's what the "practise a risky lifestyle" meant. Try reading entire sentences.
No need to get snippy. :rolleyes: I just want to know how you find fault with the child that is born with HIV/AIDS that justifies saying that they shouldn't be helped by your (and everyone else's) taxes. That's all.
 

Ceridwen018

Well-Known Member
Faminedestiny said:
Firstly, those with the highest percentage of the money should pay the highest percentage of the taxes. Corporations have escaped paying taxes with government loopholes and foreign accounts, leaving the burden on the common people, and this needs to come to an end.
Firstly, those with the highest percentage of wealth do contribute the highest percentage in taxes. In fact, the least wealthy 60% of Americans have 5% of the wealth and pay 14% of the taxes. The wealthiest 1%, on the other hand have 38% of the wealth and pay 24.8% of federal taxes.
http://www.osjspm.org/101_taxes.htm#6

Yes, wealthier people and corporations can generally afford to pay more in taxes than they already do, but to charge them more tax just because they can afford it is called socialism.

Secondly, playing around with taxes on big corporations is very tricky business. Basely, increasing taxes of major corporations wouldn't acheive the result you are looking for, it would merely start a chain reaction: Taxes increase on corporations; Corporations raise prices; Your net profit does not increase. Basically, you can either pay money in taxes, or pay money directly to the corporations.

More importantly, the major corporations of this country are what keep our economy going. If taxes are raised on them, there are a few disasterous things that could occur:

1. They can't handle the tax raise and the company fails, hurting the economy.
2. They move to a different country, (which would welcome them with open arms for all of the jobs and the huge economy boost that would ensue), where they are not taxed so much.

Yes, the government does overlook some things and cut corporations a lot of breaks, but thats because we need them. Also, for every cheating corporation, there are countless people cheating on their welfare, etc.
 

Aqualung

Tasty
Maize said:
No need to get snippy. :rolleyes:

You're right. I'm sorry. I'll try to keep my debates more civil.

I just want to know how you find fault with the child that is born with HIV/AIDS that justifies saying that they shouldn't be helped by your (and everyone else's) taxes. That's all.
I don't think it is their fault, and I definitely don't mind paying taxes for them. But my feelings don't matter. It's the principle of it. The government is here to regulate my actions as far as keeping me from harming another, not regulation that makes me care for others.
 
Top