Question: Why is it that wealthy companies and wealthy people get such subsidies
for doing nothing, or not doing as much as they might do to help themselves and
earn their own way and don't have to account for it? They pay lower tax
rates, as I understand it, for just sitting around collecting money than for
working at something. And yet, someone who might very much want to work, but
can't--even temporarily--has to prove it, account for all that they have
(yes, even old, infirm, little old ladies who have a little tucked away and a
burial plot and something to pay for their funeral have to account for that!).
And while a highly paid CEO can get a huge bonus even after the company gets all
that, our little old lady can't get a check from a family member to spend
for something nice for her birthday without thinking she'll lose money for
it. Or does everybody's grandma have a nice nest egg and it's only the
little old ladies I know who are in this fix?
Obama's paying for Bush's wars, the ones that we bought on an old
credit card, and owed on the day the new administration took office. And
meanwhile, back at the mansion, instead of paying the Ike years' tax rate,
which no one complained about, while there was building going on and work being
had, the rich guys don't want to pay for anything...although their cars
ride the roads, they use the first responders, fire departments, parks, etc,
same as the rest of us. And since there aren't so many workers, things need
more work, more repair, etc. and cost more. But don't try to sell me this
trickle-down stuff...King Midas still wants his world made of gold.
When ever someone receives an unpleasant truth, they often call it bigotry of
the on the part of the messenger .Further, the Catholic church is
not unique in this, the same could be said of any other church. As
a person who has lost faith in God, I must look at churches and assess them by
what they do, not by what they say. And what they do seems to mimic exactly the
business interests who have oppressed people since the beginning of
The Catholic church used government funds to build its religious business.
Can't do this without strings, mandates, and regulations. Sad, but true.Why do think our schools, businesses, etc, are so regulated with
@ShaunTrue, all money is loaned into existence by the Federal
Reserve, a private tax exempt corporation. This should not be.The
Federal Reserve is necessary. It is not necessary to make it a private
corporation. Most people believe the Fed is part of the government, and it
should be, under the treasury department.That being said; your point
makes zero sense to me. Are you saying we should not work to get out of dept
just because our currency is not debt free?I don't buy that
@Ultra Bob"I find it very difficult to believe that a large business
organization would disagree with the Tea Party proposals. The Catholic church is
a very large international business organization.History indicates
that the Catholic church has never done anything to actually fight the causes of
poverty."I'm trying to picture this being said about the
LDS church and being called something other than anti-mormon bigotry...
@Bubble. She was on food stamps because of her 4 kids and a drug addicted
husband who was is prison. She was paid more than enough for her position and
training. I gave her kids Christmas presents and cash during the holidays. I
donated money to her sister for surgery. She spent hours at the gym instead of
caring for her children. I fired her because she was beligerant, spent more
time on texts than work, surfed the internet against company policy, and lied.
I gave her a severance because I felt sorry for her and then she lied to
unemployment about receiving a severance as well as her reasons for dismisal.There are lazy, dishonest people out there. The government takes away
my freedom and makes me pay for their food and housing when they won't take
care of themselves.
I agree with those who think the nuns are a political tool who’s mission
is to hoodwink the American people.I find it very difficult to
believe that a large business organization would disagree with the Tea Party
proposals. The Catholic church is a very large international business
organization. History indicates that the Catholic church has never
done anything to actually fight the causes of poverty. Their efforts to help
the poor consists of treating the symptoms and ignoring the causes. Thus the plight of the poor relative to the rich and powerful has not changed
since the beginning. While that is not the fault of the Catholic church, it is
neither to it’s credit.
The Catholic church took too much government money, and now like many Americans,
will lose much of their independence.Qualifying for benefits
isn't what it seems to be.
@ IDC: Why was your employee on food stamps in the first place? Why were
taxpayers paying for her food instead of her labor for you paying for her
food?You want the waste to stop? You want people to stop living on
the taspayer's dime? Then pay your employees enough to live on instead of
expecting the taxpayers to pick up your slack.
We need to feed the poor but we shouldn't feed them steak, lobster, and
papa john's pizza. The nicest housing I lived in during college was
section 8 housing. The best I ate in college was the few months I had food
stamps. Far too many people abuse the system and the system is simply too soft.
Food stamps should cover wheat bread, milk, ground beef, and fresh vegetables.
Not steak, seafood, twinkies, mtn dew, papa john's pizza.I had
an employee who was on food stamps and she only ate organic food from the finest
health food stores. The waste and abuse has to stop. Only those who are truly
in need should get assistance. No more people quitting their jobs because
welfare is easier.
@ The Rock. Where do you get your information? Are you saying that if we take
away medical care from the people who need it the most, it will save our
economy? Are you one of the ones who will lose care if this happens? There are
so many people who are living on very little and are literally starving because
they cannot afford to live in this economy. So you want to cut from
the elderly and the very sick? You don't want total anarchy? Maybe then
it would be wise not to threaten the ones who are considered the weakest in
society. If you want to cut, then do it across the board starting
with congress and the president. Then go down to the working people and the
ones who are in this country illegally and cut there. Don't continue with
the Bush era tax cuts and stop the wars this country is involved in. Hurting some people is not ok. We all must make the sacrifice. Fixing the
economy any other way will not work.
Yes, we need to cut.But, remember, the GOP has vowed to kill
anything with a 10 to 1 spending cuts to revenue increases.And there
are so many that applaud that approach, that it is apparent to any logical
person that the GOP is more tied to ideology than reasonableness.
@The Rock. All money is debt. Our monetary system is debt based and if we
didn't go into debt there wouldn't be any money. We need
to change our monetary system and stop falling for the "getting out
The truth of the matter, illustrated throughout Rand's works and as
evidenced today with how many capable people have become dependent upon the
government for basic needs, is that social justice always sounds good in books,
on the news, in religious arenas, etc. The sad truth is that the Utopian
concept will only work if everyone gives their best effort and receives
according to their true needs. In reality, whenever it is implemented it leads
to a growing population that become looters, capable of supporting themselves
but unwilling to do so. The difficulty always becomes determining who is
honestly "Those in need". Even churches struggle with this as their
resources are limited. Government programs rarely get this right, as they
deliver a on-size fits all (bloated) solution that leads to looters, waste, and
astronomical costs. What we really need is a strong emphasis by government,
religion, and other civic leaders to encourage, support, and create incentives
for self-sufficiency at all levels of ability. "Ask not what your country
can do for you.."
We face hard choices.If we do not cut now the economy will fail,
businesses will cease to exist. There will be no health care and no government.
We will face total anarchy.If we cut now it will hurt some people
now but prevent the train wreck that is sure to follow if we don't cut.We never should have gotten into this position. If we followed the
original intent of the constitution all of this could have been avoided.Thomas Jefferson once said that if he could change anything in the
constitution it would be to deny congress to borrow money. If he could have
made that change we could have avoided all of this.
@A1994"You can't have Obama adding $5 tillion to the national
debt and saying he is spending less than anyone since Reagan."That is true but that's not what is being claimed. Each president, upon
leaving office, has left behind a budget plan for the fiscal year (since the
fiscal year is I think october-september but a president gets in in january).
The claim that people are making is that compared to the previous
president's final budget (in bush's case his 2009 budget or oct
2008-sept2009) Obama has increased spending at a slower rate (percentage-wise)
than all other presidents in the past 70 years. Note: if you account for
inflation, Eisenhower increased it the slowest at about -3% while Obama is
second at -1%). Yes... if you adjust for inflation Obama is decreasing
gov't spending relative to the final Bush budget.
"..."The White House is strangling the Catholic Church," he
said...".When it's safe to be a young man and a member of
the Catholic Church, voters might begin to listen to priests rant about who is
@one old manLet me correct a few things you said. It was Market
Watch (NOT part of the Wall Street Journal) who ran an article saying that Obama
wasn't spending as much. It turns out they used one of Nancy Pelosi's
charts to prove that 'fact.'I would encourage you to
actually read the Wall Street Journal, particularly their opinion page, and see
what they have to say about Obama's deficit spending.You
can't have Obama adding $5 tillion to the national debt and saying he is
spending less than anyone since Reagan. The math doesn't add up.@Dave D."Our church leaders have advocated social justice from
the beginning."Don't confuse the welfare program with social
justice. Go read what Heber J. Grant said when the welfare program was launched
Right, Tuck. When will the GOP get serious and stop increasing the debt?Even the Wall Street Journal's Money Watch acknowledges that the
rate of spending increase under Obama is the lowest of any administration since
Reagan started the spendthrift stampede.It's things like those
wars waged on a credit card and all those tax cuts for Romney's friends
that really caused the trouble.
There ain't no money folks. We are headed for catastrophe if we do not get
our budget under control. And as the man said if we go under then the poor will
really suffer. We owe untold trillions for social security and medicare and a
$15 trillion federal debt. Our true state is we are in the red over $50
trillion. Can you imagine anyone in congress suggesting we pay off say $1
trillion a year, it won't happen. Without a balanced budget things will
@casual observer"Can you imagine the uproar in Utah if the LDS church
engaged in this dialogue?"Not sure. I mean really if you look at
it... people tend to just hate religious involvement when the group is taking a
position different than what they have. Like liberals trumpet this group of nuns
while conservatives back the Bishops who are standing against the birth control
decision. Then each of those sides doesn't like what the other group is
doing. Take the LDS church involvement (limited though it is). Prop 8 had major
points among conservatives in the state and is a primary cause of a lot of
liberals switching from a neutral view of the church to a negative one. Then
there's the immigration issue here which the church hasn't exactly
taken a firm stance, but you kinda see that they're pretty okay with
illegal immigrants all things considered. You can see support for the church
taking that stance from more liberal-minded people, as well as plenty of
comments from conservative LDS members who seem to consider illegal immigration
to be the one issue they have with thire church.
Those of us who are LDS could learn a lot from these nuns and bishops. Our
church leaders have advocated social justice from the beginning. We should too.
Can you imagine the uproar in Utah if the LDS church engaged in this dialogue?