Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
Mahatma Gandhi on Socialism.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ishraqiyun" data-source="post: 57868118" data-attributes="member: 280646"><p>All taxation involves a redistribution of wealth. This includes defense spending and other forms of spending that you might consider legitimate. Money is collected from Americans and then used to pay for services or programs that are in the best interests of the American people (in theory at least). It's in the best collective interests of a nation that people do not starve, that consumer protections on food exist, that we have good roads, that we have protections for workers, and that our citizens are well educated, etc. </p><p></p><p>It isn't in the best interests of the nation collectively for 1% of the population to own over 40% of the wealth. That gives that one percent too much power and influence over the direction of the country. Democracy doesn't work right when you have such extreme inequalities like that. The economy no longer works for the interests of the majority of people either. That 1% will have a firm grip on the direction of the economy and who continues to profit off of it.</p><p></p><p>And then those lucky enough to be born into wealth or to have good business acumen and opportunities will economically dominate those who were not so blessed? There has to be some measure of protection for the majority of people so they are not at the mercy of the 1% who are able to accumulate the most capital. Not everyone is a cut throat businessman. Not everyone knows how to start their own successful business. Not everyone is a millionaire waiting to happen. Not everyone was born in an environment conducive to that either.</p><p></p><p>How does protecting the poor = vanity ? </p><p></p><p>I've done a fair amount of Bible reading and never noticed any detailed or specific commandments given regarding how exactly the government should be run. In the OT we have some rules regarding the Israelite monarchy/theocracy but in the New Testament there isn't much of a focus on the issue. Certainly you can use what is given and then theorize about how it might relate to the issue and many conservatives and liberals have done so but there is little explicitly stated. </p><p></p><p>Also, if Capitalism is the Christian model why did it take so long for Christians to finally come up with the idea? What do you make of some the earliest Christian communities that lived in a communal almost communistic manner and shared all their wealth (like in the book of Acts). Do you think they should have instead focused on competing with one another in a capitalistic manner?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ishraqiyun, post: 57868118, member: 280646"] All taxation involves a redistribution of wealth. This includes defense spending and other forms of spending that you might consider legitimate. Money is collected from Americans and then used to pay for services or programs that are in the best interests of the American people (in theory at least). It's in the best collective interests of a nation that people do not starve, that consumer protections on food exist, that we have good roads, that we have protections for workers, and that our citizens are well educated, etc. It isn't in the best interests of the nation collectively for 1% of the population to own over 40% of the wealth. That gives that one percent too much power and influence over the direction of the country. Democracy doesn't work right when you have such extreme inequalities like that. The economy no longer works for the interests of the majority of people either. That 1% will have a firm grip on the direction of the economy and who continues to profit off of it. And then those lucky enough to be born into wealth or to have good business acumen and opportunities will economically dominate those who were not so blessed? There has to be some measure of protection for the majority of people so they are not at the mercy of the 1% who are able to accumulate the most capital. Not everyone is a cut throat businessman. Not everyone knows how to start their own successful business. Not everyone is a millionaire waiting to happen. Not everyone was born in an environment conducive to that either. How does protecting the poor = vanity ? I've done a fair amount of Bible reading and never noticed any detailed or specific commandments given regarding how exactly the government should be run. In the OT we have some rules regarding the Israelite monarchy/theocracy but in the New Testament there isn't much of a focus on the issue. Certainly you can use what is given and then theorize about how it might relate to the issue and many conservatives and liberals have done so but there is little explicitly stated. Also, if Capitalism is the Christian model why did it take so long for Christians to finally come up with the idea? What do you make of some the earliest Christian communities that lived in a communal almost communistic manner and shared all their wealth (like in the book of Acts). Do you think they should have instead focused on competing with one another in a capitalistic manner? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
American Politics
Mahatma Gandhi on Socialism.
Top
Bottom