Tell Congress to Oppose Any Tax Bill That Would Increase Taxes for Seniors! Take Action Now

Reply
Treasured Social Butterfly
Posts: 25,369
Registered: ‎07-11-2013

Re: MEALS ON WHEELS RATTLED

[ Edited ]
Message 11 of 82 (195 Views)

rk9152 wrote:

Richva wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

I believe those folks take on the personal responsibility for assisting those in need. It is the socialists (not Christians) who think it is their job to get the government to take someone else's money to deal with the need.


One of the basic purposes of government is to protect those weaker members of society.  Which "folks" are you suggesting step up to take on your personal responsibility for you?


Obviously, decent people, Christian or not.

 

Where did you get that "basic purpose" from? I have seen "From each......to each...." nowhere in the Constitution. That is in a different document.


There's another document - the Christian New Testament - that contains the clear and unambiguous instruction to - "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" - words said by a man named "Jesus"...

Currently, Repubican politicians, - and the content of some Repubican/Conservative posts here have been advocating in favor of having their Repubican led "government" doing the opposite of that Christian mandate - that says lots about the moral quality of Repubicans holding office - and even more about who actually is and who is not a for real practicing Christian...

Answer - definitely not #45 and most of his followers/supporters.

Have pity for Melania - she wakes up with a jerk every morning
Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 20,692
Registered: ‎11-09-2011

Re: MEALS ON WHEELS RATTLED

[ Edited ]
Message 12 of 82 (196 Views)

Civilization is not possible without taxation. To assert that collecting taxes is the same as theft is to assert civilization is thievery.

 

The US has NEVER "confiscated property" (except in extreme cases of tax fraud by the individual) as a form of taxation. Taxes are collected in the form of currency, not property. Refusing to collect sufficient taxes results in the degradation of society because unlike personal income, ALL the funds collected from taxes is used for the advancement of the society and the benefits are available for all citizens.

 

Look at the civic buildings our grandparents erected - from the county courthouse to the Nation's Capitol. Republicans stopped the collection of taxes necessary for the preservation of those structures, and after 100+ years, they were deteriorated beyond safe use. Now civic structures look like machine sheds and will be derelict in 20 years. Who gained? The very wealthy. Who paid? Everybody else.

Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 31,833
Registered: ‎02-21-2014

Re: MEALS ON WHEELS RATTLED

Message 13 of 82 (195 Views)

And a few more things for Cent:

-Socialism is a an economic model embraced by some. Rather than hiding by "You insulted me" it would contribute much more to the discussion to be honest. And to compare an economic model to "Nazi" or  "Fascist" is more dishonesty.

 

- It seems "Limblah" popped up again. That adds nothing to the discussion. He (whoever he is) is not posting.

 

-"From each.......to each......" is not a straw argument. it is at the base of this discussion.

Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 31,833
Registered: ‎02-21-2014

Re: MEALS ON WHEELS RATTLED

Message 14 of 82 (194 Views)

Centristsin2010 wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

Centristsin2010 wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

Centristsin2010 wrote:

It's pathetic to see some Conservatives complain that less than $2.00 of their Federal taxes each year goes to support the sick, the disabled and the elderly.  It speaks volumes about their character, empathy and being an American.  I bet a few of them actually consider themselves "Christians".


It is pathetic to see some Socialist not be able to understand that the issue isn't $2.00, it is the government entering into areas not dictated by the Constitution.

 

I'm shocked you would call another poster a "socialist", rk.  Most might believe that's an ad hominem personal attack..

Two thoughts - 1) Are you shocked to see people called Nazis Yep, yet some choose to be that anyways.  or Fascists Yep, yet some choose to be that anyways.  or racists Yep, yet some choose to be that anyways.  or the rest of the litany?; 2) It is strange that you consider "Socialist" to be an attack. To you it does.  Some think being called a racist is an attack, while others embrace the term.   Socialism is a political ideology of long standing and respected by many. So was Nazi Germany and Facism.

 

And btw, the US Constitution, I presume you are referring to THAT constitution, states the government is to provide for the defense and general welfare.  That usually is ignored by Conservatives until it suits them.

Yes, that's the one. "General welfare" vs "welfare" is a distinction worth considering. And no distinction was made, so the Cons think their distinction is the only one worth accepting; just as Limblah tells us each month or so...  I do not believe it was intended to be "From each....to each......" - that is a different system.  Again with the straw arguments.  You assume others agree with your assumption.  I assume "from those who can, to those who need" is inconceivable.

 

It is equally pathetic to see those that do not understand that being a Christian means helping your fellow man - not expecting government wealth redistribution to do it instead.  Many Christians believe the US is a "Christian nation"; therefore, many believe our values should reflect that belief.  Shoot, they elected a liar for President who has claimed he's given millions to charity.....LMAO!

Yes, our values should be reflected. Individual responsibility to help, not individual responsibility to get the government to require someone else to do it.  The government is by the people, for the people.  It was the people who put those in place who decided to fund part of Meals-on-wheels".  Many are watching which politicians will attempt to pull the funding away from those in need.  Of course, no one campaigned to reduce Meals-On-Wheels funding....yet some proclaim, "Trumps doing EXACTLY what he said he'd do."


The government is by the people, for the people.

 

True. But, that hardly defines a situation wherein the government seizes the property of some to redistribute to others.

 

Charity is an individual thing, or a voluntary collective thing (a charitable organization) - but not a government mandated thing.

Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 31,833
Registered: ‎02-21-2014

Re: MEALS ON WHEELS RATTLED

Message 15 of 82 (187 Views)

Panjandrum wrote:

rk9152:  National defense is obliviously a function of the federal government. Feeding people is not.

 

No, feeding people is not, so maybe those old folks should stop being  pests that need feeding and just die sooner? Or maybe go to a nursing home where they will be fed daily and let the government pick up a $40K annual tab for them? You will help pay that you know. Smiley Happy


A rather offensive dodge to evade the truth of, "National defense is obliviously a function of the federal government. Feeding people is not".

Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 31,833
Registered: ‎02-21-2014

Re: MEALS ON WHEELS RATTLED

Message 16 of 82 (184 Views)

Richva wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

I believe those folks take on the personal responsibility for assisting those in need. It is the socialists (not Christians) who think it is their job to get the government to take someone else's money to deal with the need.


One of the basic purposes of government is to protect those weaker members of society.  Which "folks" are you suggesting step up to take on your personal responsibility for you?


Obviously, decent people, Christian or not.

 

Where did you get that "basic purpose" from? I have seen "From each......to each...." nowhere in the Constitution. That is in a different document.

Treasured Social Butterfly
Posts: 21,518
Registered: ‎06-09-2010

Re: MEALS ON WHEELS RATTLED

Message 17 of 82 (266 Views)

rk9152 wrote:

Centristsin2010 wrote:

ChasKy53 wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

Centristsin2010 wrote:

It's pathetic to see some Conservatives complain that less than $2.00 of their Federal taxes each year goes to support the sick, the disabled and the elderly.  It speaks volumes about their character, empathy and being an American.  I bet a few of them actually consider themselves "Christians".


It is pathetic to see some Socialist not be able to understand that the issue isn't $2.00, it is the government entering into areas not dictated by the Constitution.

 

It is equally pathetic to see those that do not understand that being a Christian means helping your fellow man - not expecting government wealth redistribution to do it instead.


So who here do you consider to be a "Socialist"?  And many things fall under the General Welfare Clause, perhaps even the welfare of our senior citizens.  What did you think about the general wealth and income redistribution that Reagan did? It's OK as long as the redistribution goes to the wealthiest? Are the wealthiest acquiring "dependency" on it?


It's odd, isn't it Chas, that the rabid Cons forget that the military, federal parks, schools and the federal highways are all Socialist in nature?  Oh my God!


National defense is obliviously a function of the federal government. Feeding people is not.


If the people decide it is, than yes, it is.  Regardless what Limblah say's.


"FAKE 45 #illegitimate" read a sign at the Woman's March in Washington DC, January 21, 2017.
Treasured Social Butterfly
Posts: 21,518
Registered: ‎06-09-2010

Re: MEALS ON WHEELS RATTLED

Message 18 of 82 (243 Views)

rk9152 wrote:

Centristsin2010 wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

Centristsin2010 wrote:

It's pathetic to see some Conservatives complain that less than $2.00 of their Federal taxes each year goes to support the sick, the disabled and the elderly.  It speaks volumes about their character, empathy and being an American.  I bet a few of them actually consider themselves "Christians".


It is pathetic to see some Socialist not be able to understand that the issue isn't $2.00, it is the government entering into areas not dictated by the Constitution.

 

I'm shocked you would call another poster a "socialist", rk.  Most might believe that's an ad hominem personal attack..

Two thoughts - 1) Are you shocked to see people called Nazis Yep, yet some choose to be that anyways.  or Fascists Yep, yet some choose to be that anyways.  or racists Yep, yet some choose to be that anyways.  or the rest of the litany?; 2) It is strange that you consider "Socialist" to be an attack. To you it does.  Some think being called a racist is an attack, while others embrace the term.   Socialism is a political ideology of long standing and respected by many. So was Nazi Germany and Facism.

 

And btw, the US Constitution, I presume you are referring to THAT constitution, states the government is to provide for the defense and general welfare.  That usually is ignored by Conservatives until it suits them.

Yes, that's the one. "General welfare" vs "welfare" is a distinction worth considering. And no distinction was made, so the Cons think their distinction is the only one worth accepting; just as Limblah tells us each month or so...  I do not believe it was intended to be "From each....to each......" - that is a different system.  Again with the straw arguments.  You assume others agree with your assumption.  I assume "from those who can, to those who need" is inconceivable.

 

It is equally pathetic to see those that do not understand that being a Christian means helping your fellow man - not expecting government wealth redistribution to do it instead.  Many Christians believe the US is a "Christian nation"; therefore, many believe our values should reflect that belief.  Shoot, they elected a liar for President who has claimed he's given millions to charity.....LMAO!

Yes, our values should be reflected. Individual responsibility to help, not individual responsibility to get the government to require someone else to do it.  The government is by the people, for the people.  It was the people who put those in place who decided to fund part of Meals-on-wheels".  Many are watching which politicians will attempt to pull the funding away from those in need.  Of course, no one campaigned to reduce Meals-On-Wheels funding....yet some proclaim, "Trumps doing EXACTLY what he said he'd do."


"FAKE 45 #illegitimate" read a sign at the Woman's March in Washington DC, January 21, 2017.
Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 1,068
Registered: ‎12-05-2009

Re: MEALS ON WHEELS RATTLED

Message 19 of 82 (244 Views)

rk9152:  National defense is obliviously a function of the federal government. Feeding people is not.

 

No, feeding people is not, so maybe those old folks should stop being  pests that need feeding and just die sooner? Or maybe go to a nursing home where they will be fed daily and let the government pick up a $40K annual tab for them? You will help pay that you know. Smiley Happy

Treasured Social Butterfly
Posts: 12,565
Registered: ‎02-28-2008

Re: MEALS ON WHEELS RATTLED

Message 20 of 82 (250 Views)

rk9152 wrote:

I believe those folks take on the personal responsibility for assisting those in need. It is the socialists (not Christians) who think it is their job to get the government to take someone else's money to deal with the need.


One of the basic purposes of government is to protect those weaker members of society.  Which "folks" are you suggesting step up to take on your personal responsibility for you?