Romney’s taxes

Democrats have been accusing Romney of not paying any income taxes or of hiding something in his finances.  So the Republican presidential nominee has released his 2011 returns.  It turns out, he paid 14.1% of his income to the government.  And he paid 30% to charity.   He didn’t even claim all of the charitable deductions he could have!

He also submitted a letter from his tax accountants, PriceCooperWaterhouse, saying that between 1990 and 2009, his average taxrate was 20.2% and that he never paid less than 13.66%.

So much for the Democrats’ tactic of trying to demonize the guy over his taxes, though the Washington Post article giving the details takes a strangely negative tone (saying how his taxes “would have been” only 10% if he took all of his deductions, that he could amend his return at any time, that we still don’t know the flow of his investment income, and other irrelevant attempts to put the worst construction on facts that are all to Romney’s credit).

via Mitt Romney releases tax return for 2011, showing he paid 14.1 percent tax rate – The Washington Post.

About Gene Veith

Professor of Literature at Patrick Henry College, the Director of the Cranach Institute at Concordia Theological Seminary, a columnist for World Magazine and TableTalk, and the author of 18 books on different facets of Christianity & Culture.

  • Pete

    Far more telling than the amount of taxes he paid (seriously – who in their right mind wouldn’t minimize the amount of tax they could legally pay?) is the thirty percent charitable. How does that compare with the charitable giving of his opponent? More than double? The Repubs need to beat that drum pretty loudly.

  • Pete

    Far more telling than the amount of taxes he paid (seriously – who in their right mind wouldn’t minimize the amount of tax they could legally pay?) is the thirty percent charitable. How does that compare with the charitable giving of his opponent? More than double? The Repubs need to beat that drum pretty loudly.

  • Michael B.

    “how his taxes “would have been” only 10% if he took all of his deductions”

    One of the most frustrating victories of the Republican party leadership is how much they’ve been able to neutralize outrage over facts like this. I’m not saying anything against Romney personally, but the fact that someone making tons more than you should pay a lower tax rate ought to outrage you. Do people not actually know their tax rate? I wish Gene would give it as a homework assignment tonight for everyone on here to dig up their 2011 tax return and find out their effective tax rate. But it’s so frustrating how successfully a bunch of eastern frat boys and CEOs have convinced ordinary Americans that somehow their interests are aligned.

  • Michael B.

    “how his taxes “would have been” only 10% if he took all of his deductions”

    One of the most frustrating victories of the Republican party leadership is how much they’ve been able to neutralize outrage over facts like this. I’m not saying anything against Romney personally, but the fact that someone making tons more than you should pay a lower tax rate ought to outrage you. Do people not actually know their tax rate? I wish Gene would give it as a homework assignment tonight for everyone on here to dig up their 2011 tax return and find out their effective tax rate. But it’s so frustrating how successfully a bunch of eastern frat boys and CEOs have convinced ordinary Americans that somehow their interests are aligned.

  • Susan

    One things that seems to get lost in the brouhaha over Romney’s tax return is that the federal tax system is extremely progressive and hence by definition is redistributive. It also double taxes income that has been saved and then invested (like Romney’s). Romney has never been guilty of not paying his “fair” share, but has picked up the tab when he was in his earning years and is now being double taxed on his retirement income.

  • Susan

    One things that seems to get lost in the brouhaha over Romney’s tax return is that the federal tax system is extremely progressive and hence by definition is redistributive. It also double taxes income that has been saved and then invested (like Romney’s). Romney has never been guilty of not paying his “fair” share, but has picked up the tab when he was in his earning years and is now being double taxed on his retirement income.

  • Tom Hering

    Michael B. @ 2, try to keep up with the conservative argument. If you can get tax advantages from the government, you’re an admirable fellow. If you get other benefits from the government, you’re a bum. How hard is that?

  • Tom Hering

    Michael B. @ 2, try to keep up with the conservative argument. If you can get tax advantages from the government, you’re an admirable fellow. If you get other benefits from the government, you’re a bum. How hard is that?

  • http://snafman.blogspot.com Snafu

    Clever move by the Romney campaign letting the press keep writing stories about the tax rate and then show he’s paid more taxes than enough!

  • http://snafman.blogspot.com Snafu

    Clever move by the Romney campaign letting the press keep writing stories about the tax rate and then show he’s paid more taxes than enough!

  • Susan

    @ Tom Herring

    No one is stopping you from not taking every legal deductions you qualify for on your yearly tax return and no one is stopping you from quitting your job or applying for welfare benefits. It’s your choice if you want to pay the highest amount of taxes possible or give all of your earnings to the government. It’s your choice if you work to support yourself or ask the government to support you. There is no reason to criticize those who do accept abiding by our tax codes and/or accepting benefits where applicable.

  • Susan

    @ Tom Herring

    No one is stopping you from not taking every legal deductions you qualify for on your yearly tax return and no one is stopping you from quitting your job or applying for welfare benefits. It’s your choice if you want to pay the highest amount of taxes possible or give all of your earnings to the government. It’s your choice if you work to support yourself or ask the government to support you. There is no reason to criticize those who do accept abiding by our tax codes and/or accepting benefits where applicable.

  • Patrick kyle

    Not a Romney fan, but find it to his credit that he gave more to charity in one year than almost any two or three of us will earn in a lifetime.

  • Patrick kyle

    Not a Romney fan, but find it to his credit that he gave more to charity in one year than almost any two or three of us will earn in a lifetime.

  • Tom Hering

    Susan @ 6, thank you for proving my point @ 4. “… no one is stopping you from quitting your job … if you work to support yourself or ask the government to support you.” See what you did there? The person receiving benefits is a bum by choice.

  • Tom Hering

    Susan @ 6, thank you for proving my point @ 4. “… no one is stopping you from quitting your job … if you work to support yourself or ask the government to support you.” See what you did there? The person receiving benefits is a bum by choice.

  • Other Gary

    I agree 14% does not represent some shameful pittance or absurdly meager effective tax rate, as some (including myself) were inclined to speculate. (I wondered if his rate would turn out to be way south of 10%.) Hay was made out of this particular subject, and now it turns out his return doesn’t amount to the damning evidence the President’s campaign had hoped for.

    So for me it raises the question, why did he wait so long to release this return? Which of his advisers failed to do his or her job by not telling the candidate, “Governor, just do it and get it over with before the convention, because by the time we get to Labor Day it’ll be a big yawn”?

    Now I still believe Michael’s point above has merit–why ISN’T there more outrage over the growing disparity between the richest Americans and the poorest? Something is happening in this country, and it isn’t good. But Romney didn’t create the system. (Until I know how much of his charitable giving was to LDS organizations, I will withhold my applause for his generosity.)

    Why didn’t he release his return earlier? That he released it now is almost too late, since the aforementioned hay has already been made. Could it be Romney and his campaign advisers were anxious whether 14% doesn’t still sound unfair? Apparently nothing is improper about how his return was filed (or the Dems would be ALL over it), and I don’t overpay taxes either, so that’s hardly something I’d fault him for. But has the concern been what reaction the Independents and Undecideds will have when they’re reminded the person who now wants to occupy the most powerful position in the land is a man who has already financially benefited from our system far more than most us can ever imagine?

  • Other Gary

    I agree 14% does not represent some shameful pittance or absurdly meager effective tax rate, as some (including myself) were inclined to speculate. (I wondered if his rate would turn out to be way south of 10%.) Hay was made out of this particular subject, and now it turns out his return doesn’t amount to the damning evidence the President’s campaign had hoped for.

    So for me it raises the question, why did he wait so long to release this return? Which of his advisers failed to do his or her job by not telling the candidate, “Governor, just do it and get it over with before the convention, because by the time we get to Labor Day it’ll be a big yawn”?

    Now I still believe Michael’s point above has merit–why ISN’T there more outrage over the growing disparity between the richest Americans and the poorest? Something is happening in this country, and it isn’t good. But Romney didn’t create the system. (Until I know how much of his charitable giving was to LDS organizations, I will withhold my applause for his generosity.)

    Why didn’t he release his return earlier? That he released it now is almost too late, since the aforementioned hay has already been made. Could it be Romney and his campaign advisers were anxious whether 14% doesn’t still sound unfair? Apparently nothing is improper about how his return was filed (or the Dems would be ALL over it), and I don’t overpay taxes either, so that’s hardly something I’d fault him for. But has the concern been what reaction the Independents and Undecideds will have when they’re reminded the person who now wants to occupy the most powerful position in the land is a man who has already financially benefited from our system far more than most us can ever imagine?

  • Susan

    @Tom Herring

    By definition, you would be bum if you choose to not work since you are able bodied and able to find employment. Be glad we don’t apply Paul’s admonition: if anyone is not willing to work, then he is not to eat, either. ;)

  • Susan

    @Tom Herring

    By definition, you would be bum if you choose to not work since you are able bodied and able to find employment. Be glad we don’t apply Paul’s admonition: if anyone is not willing to work, then he is not to eat, either. ;)

  • Tom Hering

    Susan @ 10, no one disagrees with that definition of a bum. It actually describes fraud, and my point was that it’s the description of beneficiaries you seem to prefer.

  • Tom Hering

    Susan @ 10, no one disagrees with that definition of a bum. It actually describes fraud, and my point was that it’s the description of beneficiaries you seem to prefer.

  • trotk

    Susan, why do conservatives view taxes on investment income as double taxation? After all, what is being taxed is the additional money made, which isn’t the same as the original money invested. Correct me if I am wrong on my facts, but that doesn’t seem like double taxation to me.

    But the way to solve all of this kerfuffle about fairness in taxes would be to tax spending, not income.

  • trotk

    Susan, why do conservatives view taxes on investment income as double taxation? After all, what is being taxed is the additional money made, which isn’t the same as the original money invested. Correct me if I am wrong on my facts, but that doesn’t seem like double taxation to me.

    But the way to solve all of this kerfuffle about fairness in taxes would be to tax spending, not income.

  • Susan

    @ Other Gary

    As a former tax preparer, I think I can help answer the question on time frame. Complex tax returns often require applying for what are standard extensions of time to report because so much information from other organizations is required (eg: you cannot file your tax return until you have your W-2 from your employer which is the simplest and easiest kind of information to be collected). His accountants would also have to collect information from entities outside the US. It is a complex and time consuming task to report the 10 year time frame of taxes that Romney provided. I think Romney went far above and beyond what was necessary in providing personal financial information and was wise to wait until it could all be presented together at one time. But as his wife pointed out, it doesn’t matter what or how much he provides, there are people who will continue to find fault.

  • Susan

    @ Other Gary

    As a former tax preparer, I think I can help answer the question on time frame. Complex tax returns often require applying for what are standard extensions of time to report because so much information from other organizations is required (eg: you cannot file your tax return until you have your W-2 from your employer which is the simplest and easiest kind of information to be collected). His accountants would also have to collect information from entities outside the US. It is a complex and time consuming task to report the 10 year time frame of taxes that Romney provided. I think Romney went far above and beyond what was necessary in providing personal financial information and was wise to wait until it could all be presented together at one time. But as his wife pointed out, it doesn’t matter what or how much he provides, there are people who will continue to find fault.

  • Susan

    @Tom Herring

    Clueless where you came up with the idea that I prefer bums. I am a strong supporter of safety nets not the abuses of them.

    @trotk

    It’s not a conservative view, but a taxation principle referring to income taxes that are paid twice on the same source of earned income.

  • Susan

    @Tom Herring

    Clueless where you came up with the idea that I prefer bums. I am a strong supporter of safety nets not the abuses of them.

    @trotk

    It’s not a conservative view, but a taxation principle referring to income taxes that are paid twice on the same source of earned income.

  • Tom Hering

    Other Gary @ 9, don’t forget that what Romney’s critics have been asking for all along is the release of his tax returns for the last 10 years. That’s the period there have been questions about, not just 2011 (which was the year he announced his candidacy, so of course his return looks good).

  • Tom Hering

    Other Gary @ 9, don’t forget that what Romney’s critics have been asking for all along is the release of his tax returns for the last 10 years. That’s the period there have been questions about, not just 2011 (which was the year he announced his candidacy, so of course his return looks good).

  • Tom Hering

    Susan @ 14, from your description of beneficiaries in your comment @ 6.

  • Tom Hering

    Susan @ 14, from your description of beneficiaries in your comment @ 6.

  • Other Gary

    Susan, thanks for the insight. If disclosing earlier wasn’t really an option, as you’re suggesting, then that’s a bad break for him. Having nothing personally to hide, it was politically better for him to make his tax rate a non-issue as soon as he could after clinching the nomination. But if he couldn’t disclose until it was all pulled together, then it is what is.

  • Other Gary

    Susan, thanks for the insight. If disclosing earlier wasn’t really an option, as you’re suggesting, then that’s a bad break for him. Having nothing personally to hide, it was politically better for him to make his tax rate a non-issue as soon as he could after clinching the nomination. But if he couldn’t disclose until it was all pulled together, then it is what is.

  • Justin

    The idea of taxing income is certainly not American. Until the 20th century it was unconstitutional. Our current tax system is straight from Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto. So this debate about how much one’s tax rate is, is merely a debate of much Communism we want in this country.

  • Justin

    The idea of taxing income is certainly not American. Until the 20th century it was unconstitutional. Our current tax system is straight from Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto. So this debate about how much one’s tax rate is, is merely a debate of much Communism we want in this country.

  • Other Gary

    Justin, what would be a more “American” way of raising taxes?

  • Other Gary

    Justin, what would be a more “American” way of raising taxes?

  • Steve Billingsley

    Romney is not being hurt by this one bit. In fact it helps him with the Republican base voter (which doesn’t really trust him to begin with, not without reason I might add). It gives him another issue that he can play the, “why are Democrats not talking about the real issues that face the American people” card.

    Obama did the same thing for 3 years with the birth certificate “issue”. It made his opponents look petty and small and gave him an opportunity to shake his head and look like the adult in the room.

  • Steve Billingsley

    Romney is not being hurt by this one bit. In fact it helps him with the Republican base voter (which doesn’t really trust him to begin with, not without reason I might add). It gives him another issue that he can play the, “why are Democrats not talking about the real issues that face the American people” card.

    Obama did the same thing for 3 years with the birth certificate “issue”. It made his opponents look petty and small and gave him an opportunity to shake his head and look like the adult in the room.

  • Jon

    Is it just me, or are the DNC and MSM starting to get a little irritated that GOP is sticking to the real issue about the economy and the administration’s pathetic record?

    Yet, the Dems keep casting the same wedge issue bait: taxes, war on women, socioeconomic divisiveness.

    Good on the GOP for sticking to the real issues that matter.

  • Jon

    Is it just me, or are the DNC and MSM starting to get a little irritated that GOP is sticking to the real issue about the economy and the administration’s pathetic record?

    Yet, the Dems keep casting the same wedge issue bait: taxes, war on women, socioeconomic divisiveness.

    Good on the GOP for sticking to the real issues that matter.

  • Mary

    Tom Hering #15
    ” don’t forget that what Romney’s critics have been asking for all along is the release of his tax returns for the last 10 years.”
    I still find it interesting that the congressmen (and women) most outspoken about Romney releasing his returns will not release theirs. What are they hiding? Their response to requests for them? It’s not required by law. Neither is it for candidates for the presidency or for the sitting president. Why the cry for the returns? The reason I have heard most often is because they will be responsible for tax law and it is important to see how the law will affect their own fortunes. Are not the members of congress the ones writing the tax laws? Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi both flatly refuse to release any returns. When asked for returns by McClatchy News Service just 17 of 535 members of congress agreed to release their returns, 19 refused and the rest never responded.
    Double Standard.

  • Mary

    Tom Hering #15
    ” don’t forget that what Romney’s critics have been asking for all along is the release of his tax returns for the last 10 years.”
    I still find it interesting that the congressmen (and women) most outspoken about Romney releasing his returns will not release theirs. What are they hiding? Their response to requests for them? It’s not required by law. Neither is it for candidates for the presidency or for the sitting president. Why the cry for the returns? The reason I have heard most often is because they will be responsible for tax law and it is important to see how the law will affect their own fortunes. Are not the members of congress the ones writing the tax laws? Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi both flatly refuse to release any returns. When asked for returns by McClatchy News Service just 17 of 535 members of congress agreed to release their returns, 19 refused and the rest never responded.
    Double Standard.

  • Tom Hering

    Justin @ 18, thanks for reminding us of Lincoln’s famous speech wherein he states that the Union’s only hope is to adopt the graduated income tax of the Communist Manifesto. Oh, and both Marx and Lincoln wore beards. That clinches it, don’t you think?

  • Tom Hering

    Justin @ 18, thanks for reminding us of Lincoln’s famous speech wherein he states that the Union’s only hope is to adopt the graduated income tax of the Communist Manifesto. Oh, and both Marx and Lincoln wore beards. That clinches it, don’t you think?

  • Susan

    @Tom Herring

    Please remember your statement: “If you can get tax advantages from the government, you’re an admirable fellow. If you get other benefits from the government, you’re a bum.” and my summary: “There is no reason to criticize those who do accept abiding by our tax codes and/or accepting benefits where applicable.” That you are free to be a bum was rhetorical.

  • Susan

    @Tom Herring

    Please remember your statement: “If you can get tax advantages from the government, you’re an admirable fellow. If you get other benefits from the government, you’re a bum.” and my summary: “There is no reason to criticize those who do accept abiding by our tax codes and/or accepting benefits where applicable.” That you are free to be a bum was rhetorical.

  • Other Gary

    Btw, in 19 I made a mistake; instead of “raising taxes,” I should have written, “raising revenues.”

    It still remains on the table that you have to tax something. If not income, then what other good alternatives are out there?

  • Other Gary

    Btw, in 19 I made a mistake; instead of “raising taxes,” I should have written, “raising revenues.”

    It still remains on the table that you have to tax something. If not income, then what other good alternatives are out there?

  • Susan

    @ Other Gary

    It’s my understanding that Romney went the extra mile in releasing financial information in order to help end the ginned up controversy/smears by Obama. Historically, this has been one of Obama’s favorites ploys to launch against his opposition and cast aspersions on their character.

    As an aside: Anyone seen ever seen even one of Pelosi or Reid’s (who fiercely attack Romney) tax returns? The answer is no and there are well grounded questions on how Reid amassed his wealth from his government paychecks.

  • Susan

    @ Other Gary

    It’s my understanding that Romney went the extra mile in releasing financial information in order to help end the ginned up controversy/smears by Obama. Historically, this has been one of Obama’s favorites ploys to launch against his opposition and cast aspersions on their character.

    As an aside: Anyone seen ever seen even one of Pelosi or Reid’s (who fiercely attack Romney) tax returns? The answer is no and there are well grounded questions on how Reid amassed his wealth from his government paychecks.

  • Tom Hering

    Susan @ 24, you’re not much better at walking back your comments than Mitt is.

  • Tom Hering

    Susan @ 24, you’re not much better at walking back your comments than Mitt is.

  • Susan

    @Other Gary

    If you can figure out how to tax everyone fairly, you will deserve every award out there. Just for fun, here is an overview – just reading the index makes my head spin:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax

  • Susan

    @Other Gary

    If you can figure out how to tax everyone fairly, you will deserve every award out there. Just for fun, here is an overview – just reading the index makes my head spin:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax

  • http://facebook.com/mesamike Mike Westfall

    Other Gary writes: “why ISN’T there more outrage over the growing disparity between the richest Americans and the poorest?”

    It’s not clear to me why there ought to be outrage over merely a “growing disparity” between rich and poor. Perhaps you have left something unstated.

    What’s so bad about a disparity, growing or not, between rich and poor?

  • http://facebook.com/mesamike Mike Westfall

    Other Gary writes: “why ISN’T there more outrage over the growing disparity between the richest Americans and the poorest?”

    It’s not clear to me why there ought to be outrage over merely a “growing disparity” between rich and poor. Perhaps you have left something unstated.

    What’s so bad about a disparity, growing or not, between rich and poor?

  • fws

    1) Romney can quietly file an amended return when this is all over and get back all those overpayments if he choses. He says that he would never pay one dime more than he owes…. so….

    2) 20% tax on a family of 4 making $60,000 , plus ss tax plus sales tax plus property tax plus federal excise tax on stuff like tires and gasoline takes alot more bite than a zillionaire like Romney paying the same percentage in taxes and charitable giving.

    Graduated income tax rates are not wrong per-se.
    a 20% rate on that family of 4 making 50-60 thousand per yer would feel likethe equivalent of what rate for someone making 140 million per year? 60%? 70%? 80%?

    And all that charitable giving? laudable but hardly sacrificial. Romney is like the man who would give you the shirt of his back , as long has he has 10 more in the dresser drawer.

    The fact that such giving stands out, just underlines the general immorality of the rich (and the not so rich in the usa as well). His charitable giving should be at the shameful low end of what the rich give to charity. And it is not. So we don´t give voluntarily to the poor. That is why God has chosen to punish us with a government that is increasingly going to force us to do so

    How does one spell “confiscatory?”

    Fact: God gives men an excess of what they need to modestly live on for ONLY one reason: to spend ALL that excess doing mercy on those who don´t have enough to live on. That is the ONLY reason God gives us extra. And if we refuse to learn to willingly share that extra, God WILL send the punishment of big government to make us do as we ought.

    Personal freedom is not it´s own good. It is mere means to Divinely Desired End. Which is that fatherly goodness mercy be done among men.

    God will bless us with freedom only to the extent that we voluntarily use that personal freedom to dedicate our lives to the service of others.

  • fws

    1) Romney can quietly file an amended return when this is all over and get back all those overpayments if he choses. He says that he would never pay one dime more than he owes…. so….

    2) 20% tax on a family of 4 making $60,000 , plus ss tax plus sales tax plus property tax plus federal excise tax on stuff like tires and gasoline takes alot more bite than a zillionaire like Romney paying the same percentage in taxes and charitable giving.

    Graduated income tax rates are not wrong per-se.
    a 20% rate on that family of 4 making 50-60 thousand per yer would feel likethe equivalent of what rate for someone making 140 million per year? 60%? 70%? 80%?

    And all that charitable giving? laudable but hardly sacrificial. Romney is like the man who would give you the shirt of his back , as long has he has 10 more in the dresser drawer.

    The fact that such giving stands out, just underlines the general immorality of the rich (and the not so rich in the usa as well). His charitable giving should be at the shameful low end of what the rich give to charity. And it is not. So we don´t give voluntarily to the poor. That is why God has chosen to punish us with a government that is increasingly going to force us to do so

    How does one spell “confiscatory?”

    Fact: God gives men an excess of what they need to modestly live on for ONLY one reason: to spend ALL that excess doing mercy on those who don´t have enough to live on. That is the ONLY reason God gives us extra. And if we refuse to learn to willingly share that extra, God WILL send the punishment of big government to make us do as we ought.

    Personal freedom is not it´s own good. It is mere means to Divinely Desired End. Which is that fatherly goodness mercy be done among men.

    God will bless us with freedom only to the extent that we voluntarily use that personal freedom to dedicate our lives to the service of others.

  • fws

    susan

    characterization of Obama as a non christian marxist lacks truth and it lacks charity. Where has Obama ever identified as a non christian or as a marxist in anything he has said or written?

    It is immoral for you to say such things Susan. It lacks the charity God demands of us.
    You can make a fine case that Obama is not a conservative without needed to resort to sinful slander.

  • fws

    susan

    characterization of Obama as a non christian marxist lacks truth and it lacks charity. Where has Obama ever identified as a non christian or as a marxist in anything he has said or written?

    It is immoral for you to say such things Susan. It lacks the charity God demands of us.
    You can make a fine case that Obama is not a conservative without needed to resort to sinful slander.

  • fws

    mike @ 29

    Because God grants wealth to the wealth with the purpose that they would share it with those who are not. This is what Scripture teaches us.

    A society where this is not happening is an immoral society. God has promised to hear the cries of the poor.

    He has promised to send plagues, punishments and suffering to those who refuse to willingly redistribute ALL they have that is more than what they need to live modestly.

    It is as simple as that Mike. We should fear God and learn to willingly do what he wills of us, because he WILL make his will be done. We can chose to learn to sacrificially, do mercy voluntarily or he will send a hard government that will make this happen. And often that government will be as immoral as those that it governs.

    We are probably entering just such a time in our nation´s history.

    We all need to repent. Are we all focussed on giving whatever we have beyond what we need to live modestly to those who are without? No.

    We treat what we have as ours to do with as we please. And we call this freedom, as though such selfish freedom is some sort of God willed inalienable right. It is not. And God will teach us so one way or another.

    If we chose to do what is right with our property and send it out to do mercy, God promises a long and happy life for doing it, and we will excape punishment by doing so.

  • fws

    mike @ 29

    Because God grants wealth to the wealth with the purpose that they would share it with those who are not. This is what Scripture teaches us.

    A society where this is not happening is an immoral society. God has promised to hear the cries of the poor.

    He has promised to send plagues, punishments and suffering to those who refuse to willingly redistribute ALL they have that is more than what they need to live modestly.

    It is as simple as that Mike. We should fear God and learn to willingly do what he wills of us, because he WILL make his will be done. We can chose to learn to sacrificially, do mercy voluntarily or he will send a hard government that will make this happen. And often that government will be as immoral as those that it governs.

    We are probably entering just such a time in our nation´s history.

    We all need to repent. Are we all focussed on giving whatever we have beyond what we need to live modestly to those who are without? No.

    We treat what we have as ours to do with as we please. And we call this freedom, as though such selfish freedom is some sort of God willed inalienable right. It is not. And God will teach us so one way or another.

    If we chose to do what is right with our property and send it out to do mercy, God promises a long and happy life for doing it, and we will excape punishment by doing so.

  • fws

    Mike @ 29.

    We have found various ways to UN-sin the sin of greed haven´t we? And even dare, before God, to call greed “virtue” or even a “God given inanalienable right”.

    How could a christian not fear for a country that shakes it´s fist at God and his Will with such a wilful collective lifestyle? This goes way beyond groups denying something is not sinful when it is. It is to take sin and call it virtue. What could be more perverted than that?

  • fws

    Mike @ 29.

    We have found various ways to UN-sin the sin of greed haven´t we? And even dare, before God, to call greed “virtue” or even a “God given inanalienable right”.

    How could a christian not fear for a country that shakes it´s fist at God and his Will with such a wilful collective lifestyle? This goes way beyond groups denying something is not sinful when it is. It is to take sin and call it virtue. What could be more perverted than that?

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    I wish Romney had held a press conference claiming that he would announce he would release his tax returns. Then when the cameras were on, he set the condition of releasing his return on Obama’s unsealing his college records. He could have given a long diatribe on openness and transparency of public officials before he delivered the punch line.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    I wish Romney had held a press conference claiming that he would announce he would release his tax returns. Then when the cameras were on, he set the condition of releasing his return on Obama’s unsealing his college records. He could have given a long diatribe on openness and transparency of public officials before he delivered the punch line.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    @30

    To whom should Romney give?

    Seriously, I mean, I know you live in Brasil where you see real abject poverty, but who are you calling poor that Romney should give to and how do you know he doesn’t? I mean I give to people I know or meet but I don’t put it on my tax return, because it is done informally to individuals and not through a charity. How do you know Romney doesn’t do that? Everyone who knows him personally says he is involved in that kind of direct personal giving that doesn’t get him a receipt. Are you sure you are putting the best construction on Romney’s actions?

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    @30

    To whom should Romney give?

    Seriously, I mean, I know you live in Brasil where you see real abject poverty, but who are you calling poor that Romney should give to and how do you know he doesn’t? I mean I give to people I know or meet but I don’t put it on my tax return, because it is done informally to individuals and not through a charity. How do you know Romney doesn’t do that? Everyone who knows him personally says he is involved in that kind of direct personal giving that doesn’t get him a receipt. Are you sure you are putting the best construction on Romney’s actions?

  • NavyChaps

    fws @various

    You are absolutely right that God blesses the wealthy in order that they might care for the poor. I agree that “we” (as a societal statement) struggle mightily with selfishness and greed, though not differently than any other group of sinful people throughout time. There really is nothing new under the sun.

    However, here in the U.S. at least, the ability to care for the poor will not be accomplished by taking from the so-called haves and very arbitrarily redistributing it to the so-called have-nots. The government does NOTHING efficiently and only periodically effectively.

    Besides, the reality is that the supposedly evil and greedy conservatives are FAR MORE GENEROUS than the supposedly kind and compassionate liberals: http://dailycaller.com/2010/09/23/surprise-conservatives-are-more-generous-than-liberals/

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html

    Liberals are more than happy to take more someone else’s money and distribute it according to their desires. Conservatives want everyone to donate their money to the charities of their choice. Liberals choose the government who skims their take off the top before ineffectively supporting the poor. Conservatives overwhelmingly give to their religious organizations who actually succeed in providing real care to needy people.

    By any reasonable measure of care for the poor and needy among us, the conservative path of charitable contributions is far more compassionate and effective than the liberal model of forced redistribution.

    You are right that there is a need for repentance. I would add though that repentance should begin with the liberal sin of pride that assumes 1. that they can spend my money better than I can, and 2. that they are more moral than I because of where I choose to donate my money.

    It has been said on this blog before, but the real problem with the liberal view is that they want the government to fulfil THEIR responsiblity to love their neighbor. If you really love your neighbor, care for your neighbor, don’t just say, “I gave to the IRS; and oh, by the way, I’m taking your money too to show just how compassionate I am.”

  • NavyChaps

    fws @various

    You are absolutely right that God blesses the wealthy in order that they might care for the poor. I agree that “we” (as a societal statement) struggle mightily with selfishness and greed, though not differently than any other group of sinful people throughout time. There really is nothing new under the sun.

    However, here in the U.S. at least, the ability to care for the poor will not be accomplished by taking from the so-called haves and very arbitrarily redistributing it to the so-called have-nots. The government does NOTHING efficiently and only periodically effectively.

    Besides, the reality is that the supposedly evil and greedy conservatives are FAR MORE GENEROUS than the supposedly kind and compassionate liberals: http://dailycaller.com/2010/09/23/surprise-conservatives-are-more-generous-than-liberals/

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html

    Liberals are more than happy to take more someone else’s money and distribute it according to their desires. Conservatives want everyone to donate their money to the charities of their choice. Liberals choose the government who skims their take off the top before ineffectively supporting the poor. Conservatives overwhelmingly give to their religious organizations who actually succeed in providing real care to needy people.

    By any reasonable measure of care for the poor and needy among us, the conservative path of charitable contributions is far more compassionate and effective than the liberal model of forced redistribution.

    You are right that there is a need for repentance. I would add though that repentance should begin with the liberal sin of pride that assumes 1. that they can spend my money better than I can, and 2. that they are more moral than I because of where I choose to donate my money.

    It has been said on this blog before, but the real problem with the liberal view is that they want the government to fulfil THEIR responsiblity to love their neighbor. If you really love your neighbor, care for your neighbor, don’t just say, “I gave to the IRS; and oh, by the way, I’m taking your money too to show just how compassionate I am.”

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    We have found various ways to UN-sin the sin of greed haven´t we?

    Yes, we have. The man who does not work and still expects his needs met is every bit as greedy as the man who works and never shares.

    We should not favor the poor just because they are poor. They too need to repent of their sins. They are not blameless because they are poor. They have every bit as much duty to their neighbor as the rich.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    We have found various ways to UN-sin the sin of greed haven´t we?

    Yes, we have. The man who does not work and still expects his needs met is every bit as greedy as the man who works and never shares.

    We should not favor the poor just because they are poor. They too need to repent of their sins. They are not blameless because they are poor. They have every bit as much duty to their neighbor as the rich.

  • DonS

    fws @ 30: “And all that charitable giving? laudable but hardly sacrificial. Romney is like the man who would give you the shirt of his back , as long has he has 10 more in the dresser drawer.”

    I just saw you chiding Abby for sin on another thread for being judgmental of Obama, and here you are judging Romney in a way at least as bad. You owe her an apology.

    20% tax on a family of 4 making $60,000 , plus ss tax plus sales tax plus property tax plus federal excise tax on stuff like tires and gasoline takes alot more bite than a zillionaire like Romney paying the same percentage in taxes and charitable giving.

    This is an absurd point. A family of 4 making $60,000 is NOT paying 20% federal tax, plus ss tax and all the other taxes. Nothing like that. To educate yourself on this issue see http://www.savingtoinvest.com/2011/05/2012-tax-brackets-and-rates-what-they-could-look-like-and-planning-ahead.html Assuming they take the standard deduction of $11, 900, and 4 personal exemptions of $3800, their taxable income would be $32,900. The first $17,400 of this is taxed at 10% and the last $15,500 is taxed at 15%. So their federal income tax is $4,065, an effective rate of 6.8%.

  • DonS

    fws @ 30: “And all that charitable giving? laudable but hardly sacrificial. Romney is like the man who would give you the shirt of his back , as long has he has 10 more in the dresser drawer.”

    I just saw you chiding Abby for sin on another thread for being judgmental of Obama, and here you are judging Romney in a way at least as bad. You owe her an apology.

    20% tax on a family of 4 making $60,000 , plus ss tax plus sales tax plus property tax plus federal excise tax on stuff like tires and gasoline takes alot more bite than a zillionaire like Romney paying the same percentage in taxes and charitable giving.

    This is an absurd point. A family of 4 making $60,000 is NOT paying 20% federal tax, plus ss tax and all the other taxes. Nothing like that. To educate yourself on this issue see http://www.savingtoinvest.com/2011/05/2012-tax-brackets-and-rates-what-they-could-look-like-and-planning-ahead.html Assuming they take the standard deduction of $11, 900, and 4 personal exemptions of $3800, their taxable income would be $32,900. The first $17,400 of this is taxed at 10% and the last $15,500 is taxed at 15%. So their federal income tax is $4,065, an effective rate of 6.8%.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Many of these discussions regarding poverty aren’t really about poverty but about status. The poor in the U.S. are not poor in the objective sense of the word. They have food, clothing, shelter, medical care and education that is better by objective measure than 99% of all people that have ever lived. That is a fact. However, they are highly dysfunctional and are not valuable as employees in our sophisticated society, so they cannot earn much and some can’t earn anything because they are to0 low skilled and have very low conscientiousness.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Many of these discussions regarding poverty aren’t really about poverty but about status. The poor in the U.S. are not poor in the objective sense of the word. They have food, clothing, shelter, medical care and education that is better by objective measure than 99% of all people that have ever lived. That is a fact. However, they are highly dysfunctional and are not valuable as employees in our sophisticated society, so they cannot earn much and some can’t earn anything because they are to0 low skilled and have very low conscientiousness.

  • http://facebook.com/mesamike Mike Westfall

    Frank,
    You’ve also left some things unstated.

    I’d still like to know why a mere disparity — growing or not — is something to be outraged at.

    Why is disparity of wealth warrant to play the “greed” card?

    Our capitalist system that is responsible for disparity of wealth has enabled America to be the most charitable country by far, what with all our financial aid to needy foreign countries, even to regimes that don’t seem to have any sense of gratitude for it.

    Our capitalist system that leads to disparity of wealth has also enabled Americans to be the most charitable with personal finances, too. Look at all the money that pours into places that suffer natural disasters, for instance.

    Our capitalist system to which we owe our disparity of wealth is responsible for America’s poor people being the richest poor people in the world.

    Perhaps God has blessed us with a “growing disparity” of wealth to serve His purposes.

  • http://facebook.com/mesamike Mike Westfall

    Frank,
    You’ve also left some things unstated.

    I’d still like to know why a mere disparity — growing or not — is something to be outraged at.

    Why is disparity of wealth warrant to play the “greed” card?

    Our capitalist system that is responsible for disparity of wealth has enabled America to be the most charitable country by far, what with all our financial aid to needy foreign countries, even to regimes that don’t seem to have any sense of gratitude for it.

    Our capitalist system that leads to disparity of wealth has also enabled Americans to be the most charitable with personal finances, too. Look at all the money that pours into places that suffer natural disasters, for instance.

    Our capitalist system to which we owe our disparity of wealth is responsible for America’s poor people being the richest poor people in the world.

    Perhaps God has blessed us with a “growing disparity” of wealth to serve His purposes.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    People see wealth disparity as the evidence of exploitation. That is the combination of highly productive workers (not necessarily fairly compensated for the productivity) and economies of scale allow capitalists operating under special rules that they write and the government enforces gives them an unfair and specifically unearned share of what workers create. There is redistribution of wealth up the scale. The CEO of United Healthcare “earned” $1.4 billion over 16 years. I call BS that he actually earned that much. He may have engineered a scheme that skimmed some incredible share of $$ spent allegedly on health care, but that his fair share of that scam was $1.4 billion seems a bit implausible. Complaints about wealth disparities of this sort are really complaints about corruption and exploitation of workers.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    People see wealth disparity as the evidence of exploitation. That is the combination of highly productive workers (not necessarily fairly compensated for the productivity) and economies of scale allow capitalists operating under special rules that they write and the government enforces gives them an unfair and specifically unearned share of what workers create. There is redistribution of wealth up the scale. The CEO of United Healthcare “earned” $1.4 billion over 16 years. I call BS that he actually earned that much. He may have engineered a scheme that skimmed some incredible share of $$ spent allegedly on health care, but that his fair share of that scam was $1.4 billion seems a bit implausible. Complaints about wealth disparities of this sort are really complaints about corruption and exploitation of workers.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    (Until I know how much of his charitable giving was to LDS organizations, I will withhold my applause for his generosity.)

    Replace LDS with Lutheran and reevaluate.

    The LDS provides people with a social institution that contributes to maintaining and improving civic life. So do other churches, synagogues, temples etc. People need social institutions to maintain their investment in health community life. That is why such institutions are tax exempt. They provide a service of greater value than the tax they would pay.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    (Until I know how much of his charitable giving was to LDS organizations, I will withhold my applause for his generosity.)

    Replace LDS with Lutheran and reevaluate.

    The LDS provides people with a social institution that contributes to maintaining and improving civic life. So do other churches, synagogues, temples etc. People need social institutions to maintain their investment in health community life. That is why such institutions are tax exempt. They provide a service of greater value than the tax they would pay.

  • Susan

    @fws

    Lets see if your accusations are true: “characterization of Obama as a non christian marxist lacks truth”

    1) You are posting on the wrong thread

    2) No where did I write Obama was a “non christian” or a “non Christian marxist.” I did write he was a “black liberation activist.”

    3) Obama spent 20+ years in a church well known for it’s black liberation theology and activism. I linked to an Issues Etc. program and a scholarly paper that both expounded on the marxist elements in black liberation theology.

    4) I did write: We have watched Obama’s black liberation activism play out on the national stage: the division of Americans into groups of oppressors and oppressed – class warfare, race, gender, homosexuality, and so on.

    5) Your characterization of Obama as a “non christian marxist” is your problem not mine. Own it.

    My suggestion is that you learn to read and stop libeling me with false accusations of being immoral, lacking of charity, and slandering.

  • Susan

    @fws

    Lets see if your accusations are true: “characterization of Obama as a non christian marxist lacks truth”

    1) You are posting on the wrong thread

    2) No where did I write Obama was a “non christian” or a “non Christian marxist.” I did write he was a “black liberation activist.”

    3) Obama spent 20+ years in a church well known for it’s black liberation theology and activism. I linked to an Issues Etc. program and a scholarly paper that both expounded on the marxist elements in black liberation theology.

    4) I did write: We have watched Obama’s black liberation activism play out on the national stage: the division of Americans into groups of oppressors and oppressed – class warfare, race, gender, homosexuality, and so on.

    5) Your characterization of Obama as a “non christian marxist” is your problem not mine. Own it.

    My suggestion is that you learn to read and stop libeling me with false accusations of being immoral, lacking of charity, and slandering.

  • Susan

    @sg – great points – all.

  • Susan

    @sg – great points – all.

  • Jim_777

    I see Michael B. has made another appearance angrily demanding that some other person should have more of his property confiscated by the gov’t because of “fairness.” What is this liberal obsession with other people’s money? Mitt Romney’s money and his tax rate have nothing to do with me and are frankly none of my business. I don’t understand why people running for public office are required to publicly exhibit every private aspect of their lives. Maybe we should demand to see the video of Romney’s colonoscopy to make certain he isn’t secreting undeclared gold coins up his rear end. As a side point, Obama is a wealthy man who does everything possible to minimize his tax liability. Will Michael B. and other caring libs raise a cry over that?

  • Jim_777

    I see Michael B. has made another appearance angrily demanding that some other person should have more of his property confiscated by the gov’t because of “fairness.” What is this liberal obsession with other people’s money? Mitt Romney’s money and his tax rate have nothing to do with me and are frankly none of my business. I don’t understand why people running for public office are required to publicly exhibit every private aspect of their lives. Maybe we should demand to see the video of Romney’s colonoscopy to make certain he isn’t secreting undeclared gold coins up his rear end. As a side point, Obama is a wealthy man who does everything possible to minimize his tax liability. Will Michael B. and other caring libs raise a cry over that?

  • P.C.

    Forget about Romney’s tax return. Its more appropriate to focus on what Romney gave to charity because its the charities that feed the homeless and the poor, provide assistance to families, give pro-life counseling to unwed and wed mothers, and run the Boys and Girls’ clubs and Big Brothers and Sisters, etc. Uncle Sam doesn’t even get close to supporting those in need as do our thousands of charities in the United States. The following article supports my contention that rich liberals are cheapscapes (at least this one, of many) when it comes to supporting charities (OK, there are a few that that do). Jesus didn’t command governments to support the poor, widows, and fatherless…no he told YOU!

    From the Weekly Standard
    Romney Gave 1,000 Times as Much to Charity in a Year as Biden Gave in a Decade
    Sep 24, 2012 • By JEFFREY H. ANDERSON

    “The release of Mitt Romney’s 2011 tax returns shows that he freely gave away more than $4 million to charity last year (about 30 percent of his income). In comparison, when Joe Biden was first running for vice president, his tax returns showed that he had given away just $3,690 to charity over the previous ten years (about 0.2 percent of his income). In other words, Romney gave away a thousand times as much to charity in one year as Biden gave in a decade.

    That’s despite the fact that the Bidens earned well over $2 million over that decade. In fact, their income was $320,000 in 2008, thereby putting them comfortably over the $250,000-a-year line that marks the entry point for “millionaires and billionaires” in Obama-speak.

    Last year, Romney freely gave away more than $10,000 a day to charity — an impressive sum by nearly any standard. Of course, it’s not too hard to beat Biden’s tally. Over the span of that decade, or 3,650 days, he gave away $3,690 — an average of $1.01 a day.”

  • P.C.

    Forget about Romney’s tax return. Its more appropriate to focus on what Romney gave to charity because its the charities that feed the homeless and the poor, provide assistance to families, give pro-life counseling to unwed and wed mothers, and run the Boys and Girls’ clubs and Big Brothers and Sisters, etc. Uncle Sam doesn’t even get close to supporting those in need as do our thousands of charities in the United States. The following article supports my contention that rich liberals are cheapscapes (at least this one, of many) when it comes to supporting charities (OK, there are a few that that do). Jesus didn’t command governments to support the poor, widows, and fatherless…no he told YOU!

    From the Weekly Standard
    Romney Gave 1,000 Times as Much to Charity in a Year as Biden Gave in a Decade
    Sep 24, 2012 • By JEFFREY H. ANDERSON

    “The release of Mitt Romney’s 2011 tax returns shows that he freely gave away more than $4 million to charity last year (about 30 percent of his income). In comparison, when Joe Biden was first running for vice president, his tax returns showed that he had given away just $3,690 to charity over the previous ten years (about 0.2 percent of his income). In other words, Romney gave away a thousand times as much to charity in one year as Biden gave in a decade.

    That’s despite the fact that the Bidens earned well over $2 million over that decade. In fact, their income was $320,000 in 2008, thereby putting them comfortably over the $250,000-a-year line that marks the entry point for “millionaires and billionaires” in Obama-speak.

    Last year, Romney freely gave away more than $10,000 a day to charity — an impressive sum by nearly any standard. Of course, it’s not too hard to beat Biden’s tally. Over the span of that decade, or 3,650 days, he gave away $3,690 — an average of $1.01 a day.”

  • Susan

    @P.C.

    Romeny’s charitable giving reveals his beliefs and how he applies those beliefs to the way he lives his life. Unfortunately, there will always be people who will gnash their teeth at civic righteousness instead of respecting/admiring it. Some people will continue to think he still has too much money left and won’t be satisfied until he is impoverished by draconian taxes. They have bit on the lie that says other people’s wealth should be coercively redistributed and cannot see that envy and greed are inherent in the lie. They also fail to see that this ‘redistribution of wealth’ is a mantra used to lure people into a socialist form of government. It is also a pillar in black liberation theology which they think brings economic parity. I will never understand how progressive Christians think they can justify stealing other people’s wealth through the guise of government.

  • Susan

    @P.C.

    Romeny’s charitable giving reveals his beliefs and how he applies those beliefs to the way he lives his life. Unfortunately, there will always be people who will gnash their teeth at civic righteousness instead of respecting/admiring it. Some people will continue to think he still has too much money left and won’t be satisfied until he is impoverished by draconian taxes. They have bit on the lie that says other people’s wealth should be coercively redistributed and cannot see that envy and greed are inherent in the lie. They also fail to see that this ‘redistribution of wealth’ is a mantra used to lure people into a socialist form of government. It is also a pillar in black liberation theology which they think brings economic parity. I will never understand how progressive Christians think they can justify stealing other people’s wealth through the guise of government.

  • P.C.

    Susan @47,

    “I will never understand how progressive Christians think they can justify stealing other people’s wealth through the guise of government.”

    Me neither. Excellent point.

  • P.C.

    Susan @47,

    “I will never understand how progressive Christians think they can justify stealing other people’s wealth through the guise of government.”

    Me neither. Excellent point.

  • http://sensa-reviews.net Ashley

    The totally corrupt, parasitic, military industrial complex, and the insatiable greed of Congress (Red AND Blue) scares me 10,000 times more than the pus-head Al Qaeda, or the religious freaks of Iran… imagine $420 million for 1 F22 that cuts off oxygen, to the highly skilled pilot!!! (At least 4 have crashed = poof! $1.5 billion into junk.)

  • http://sensa-reviews.net Ashley

    The totally corrupt, parasitic, military industrial complex, and the insatiable greed of Congress (Red AND Blue) scares me 10,000 times more than the pus-head Al Qaeda, or the religious freaks of Iran… imagine $420 million for 1 F22 that cuts off oxygen, to the highly skilled pilot!!! (At least 4 have crashed = poof! $1.5 billion into junk.)

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    $420 million for 1 F22

    Welfare for the educated.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    $420 million for 1 F22

    Welfare for the educated.

  • dust

    Ashley….you can’t be serious? Who do you think, of all the evil doers on your list of bad boys would be more likely to use atomic weapons on our cities?

    It’s a sophomoric question and the answer is the same folks who flew planes into the WTC if they had them….

    Now if that’s true, now who scares you more, seriously?

    sg….you can’t be serious? those kinds of systems protect us from evil doers who also want to buy some high tech gear….and would happily use it on us and then we can’t blog in peace :(

    It’s really that simple, seriously :)

    cheers!

  • dust

    Ashley….you can’t be serious? Who do you think, of all the evil doers on your list of bad boys would be more likely to use atomic weapons on our cities?

    It’s a sophomoric question and the answer is the same folks who flew planes into the WTC if they had them….

    Now if that’s true, now who scares you more, seriously?

    sg….you can’t be serious? those kinds of systems protect us from evil doers who also want to buy some high tech gear….and would happily use it on us and then we can’t blog in peace :(

    It’s really that simple, seriously :)

    cheers!

  • dust

    sg….and a defense “ministry” for the everybody :)

    cheers!

  • dust

    sg….and a defense “ministry” for the everybody :)

    cheers!

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Well if our military is for our defense, I sure do wish they would defend us on our own borders from alien invaders and stop traipsing around the middle east quagmires. Send some drones and missiles to hit some strategic but don’t set foot in those places. They are death traps and money pits. If F22′s were effectively policing our borders, I might keep my peace.
    :D

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Well if our military is for our defense, I sure do wish they would defend us on our own borders from alien invaders and stop traipsing around the middle east quagmires. Send some drones and missiles to hit some strategic but don’t set foot in those places. They are death traps and money pits. If F22′s were effectively policing our borders, I might keep my peace.
    :D

  • fws

    sg @ 50 @ 53

    +1

    eisenhower was right about the military industrial complex.

    I predict that both Iraq and Afghanistan will revert back to something similar to what they were like before we invaded them.

    In the past we would never deploy our troops unless we were first attacked. This was a necessary for our leaders to risk the lives or our boys even though it is true that sometimes that turned out to be pretense.

    its worse than welfare for the rich sg . in the past we raised taxes , mostly on the wealthy, to pay for war. Now we just borrow the money and lower taxes , and then try to pin the blame for deficit spending on things are are trivial compared to the debt. things like earmarks or such.

  • fws

    sg @ 50 @ 53

    +1

    eisenhower was right about the military industrial complex.

    I predict that both Iraq and Afghanistan will revert back to something similar to what they were like before we invaded them.

    In the past we would never deploy our troops unless we were first attacked. This was a necessary for our leaders to risk the lives or our boys even though it is true that sometimes that turned out to be pretense.

    its worse than welfare for the rich sg . in the past we raised taxes , mostly on the wealthy, to pay for war. Now we just borrow the money and lower taxes , and then try to pin the blame for deficit spending on things are are trivial compared to the debt. things like earmarks or such.

  • fws

    sg

    we are weakening our national defense by weakening our economy with those two absolutely pointless and wasted wars. a strong economy usually translates into the best and strongest defense in the long term.

    money spent on weapons systems that they military doesnt even want and keeping bases open in the usa that the military doesnt want… that is all a drain and drag on the rest of the economy. it is the production of nonuseful nonproductive goods. we spend more on the military than the next 5 largest spenders spend COMBINED. do we REALLY need all that?

  • fws

    sg

    we are weakening our national defense by weakening our economy with those two absolutely pointless and wasted wars. a strong economy usually translates into the best and strongest defense in the long term.

    money spent on weapons systems that they military doesnt even want and keeping bases open in the usa that the military doesnt want… that is all a drain and drag on the rest of the economy. it is the production of nonuseful nonproductive goods. we spend more on the military than the next 5 largest spenders spend COMBINED. do we REALLY need all that?

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    @ 54, 55

    Yeah, I agree.

    You know how people say that some will put on a big show because they are overcompensating for some deficiency? I think this country does that with the military. It wouldn’t take a tenth of our armaments and personnel to level our enemies, but rather than do that, we show them our guns. Kinda weird. I remember my brother once said that if he were so intimidated by someone that he felt he needed his gun, he wouldn’t just show it to him, he would shoot him. This whole saber rattling is expensive and harmful. Countries with far fewer armaments have done far more damage than we have. I don’t advocate doing more damage. I just think we are way overspending on military stuff.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    @ 54, 55

    Yeah, I agree.

    You know how people say that some will put on a big show because they are overcompensating for some deficiency? I think this country does that with the military. It wouldn’t take a tenth of our armaments and personnel to level our enemies, but rather than do that, we show them our guns. Kinda weird. I remember my brother once said that if he were so intimidated by someone that he felt he needed his gun, he wouldn’t just show it to him, he would shoot him. This whole saber rattling is expensive and harmful. Countries with far fewer armaments have done far more damage than we have. I don’t advocate doing more damage. I just think we are way overspending on military stuff.

  • fws

    sg

    Probably the best defense is a population that truly believes in american ideals and are willing to make sacrifices for them. and a strong economy doesnt hurt either.

    when sept 11 happened, we were willing to give up all our constitutional safeguards, like the need for a judge to permit wiretaps and lots of other stuff for some false sense of security. I am really pretty sure that none of that stuff made us safer, and rather just paves the way for the next time we are attacked and some democratic or republican demogogue says he will protect us if only we will turn over the power to him, temporarily of course, to do that.

    i dont think many americans feel the pain of those two wars except for the families with men and women in the military. the fact that both obama and bush are not allowing press coverage of returning caskets is shameful. we SHOULD feel some pain when we send our boys to war in both higher taxes and seeing the dead and maimed return home.

    the sad thing is that both political parties are really the same in what you are talking about sg. for a politician to say what you are saying would be to invite accusations of wanting america to be weak.

    we will probably need to elect someone like a colin powell or eisenhower to overcome that problem. it sure wont be a bush jr or obama or romney

  • fws

    sg

    Probably the best defense is a population that truly believes in american ideals and are willing to make sacrifices for them. and a strong economy doesnt hurt either.

    when sept 11 happened, we were willing to give up all our constitutional safeguards, like the need for a judge to permit wiretaps and lots of other stuff for some false sense of security. I am really pretty sure that none of that stuff made us safer, and rather just paves the way for the next time we are attacked and some democratic or republican demogogue says he will protect us if only we will turn over the power to him, temporarily of course, to do that.

    i dont think many americans feel the pain of those two wars except for the families with men and women in the military. the fact that both obama and bush are not allowing press coverage of returning caskets is shameful. we SHOULD feel some pain when we send our boys to war in both higher taxes and seeing the dead and maimed return home.

    the sad thing is that both political parties are really the same in what you are talking about sg. for a politician to say what you are saying would be to invite accusations of wanting america to be weak.

    we will probably need to elect someone like a colin powell or eisenhower to overcome that problem. it sure wont be a bush jr or obama or romney

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Probably the best defense is a population that truly believes in american ideals and are willing to make sacrifices for them.

    Uh, weak corrupt people are not capable of believing in the American ideals. Such ideals are the natural beliefs of the confident, determined and disciplined.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Probably the best defense is a population that truly believes in american ideals and are willing to make sacrifices for them.

    Uh, weak corrupt people are not capable of believing in the American ideals. Such ideals are the natural beliefs of the confident, determined and disciplined.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X