If it is a Christian Nation.. by Colbert

[Stan]

an interesting thought... there is a lot of help for the poor, is this an overstatement?

[bonnie]

an interesting thought... there is a lot of help for the poor, is this an overstatement?

It is more a nation made up of mainly christian people than a "christian nation"

You cannot bring up the name Jesus in the work place or our schools if someone objects.

Jesus did not say to help the needy without reservation or non ending.

He did say the man that will not work shall not eat.

The poor and needy should have immediate needs met and work towards changing their situation with help if needed.

Help should not be a lifetime career

[Kyran]

Depends on the context. My understanding is that Americans as a whole are generally more generous then other nationalities.

I suppose you'd also have to consider how you measure the level of help the poor recived. Is it from individual contributions or state contributions?

I also wonder how non-'Christian Nations' compare in this regards. It would be rather dodgy saying Christians don't help the poor enough if they are already doing more then other groups (of course there is always room for improvement).

[olger]

In a study 85 days ago Stan, I discovered numerous overt links between socialism and the "social gospel." Both are part of an oncoming trend that appears destined to undermine the importance of Biblical doctrine.

And we know where it is heading...

`oG

[Dr. Shane]

Americans do help the poor. Who can possibly make the case that we do not? In the US the poor are given free food and medical care. In addition they are given low-income housing and free public education for their children. In cold areas, they are given heating assistance to subsidize the cost of heating their home during the winter months.

America is one of the best places on earth to live if one is poor.

[Paula]

Stan, I think its more of an UNDERstatement, than an overstatement. Thank GOD some Christians are finally waking up to the fact that as followers of CHRIST we shouldn't be stealing from the poor to fuel the rich's Maserati's... Corporations routinely oppress the poorest of the poor, both inside the US and around the world. They plunder and pillage. No wonder Revelation ties the WHORE of Babylon with the "kings of the earth who lived LUXURIOUSLY (Politicians in our days) with the Merchants (Corporate World, Greedy Business leaders in our days) together. Read Revelation 18:9-20.

Anyways, some Christians are waking up to the inconsistency in favoring the strongest at the expense of the weakest, http://www.circleofprotection.us/

[olger]

as I said..

[olger]

Class envy is soooooo last year...

[Paula]

Olger, it's not class envy. I work for a major corporation. Trust me, they don't care about you or me. They don't want to pay taxes, and they could care less if that means old ladies will have their social security cut, or little kids will go to bed hungry. On the other hand I know many ultra-wealthy people who have absolutely no qualms about carrying a higher tax load. They can afford it, they are grateful for God's blessings and they don't want to live off of the poor and needy. There is nothing wrong with being rich. Greed IS wrong. Not wanting to be taxed while social services are cut for "the least of these" is wrong. Plain and simple. Tell me, if he were to get involved in politics, what would Jesus do? Would he keep social services for the poorest and weakest. Or would he make sure the strongest and richest kept their tax breaks? Now ask yourself, if we go by HIS name, what should our position be? Take a look at this list and tell me it's not immoral:

1) Exxon Mobil. They made $19 billion in profits in 2009. Exxon not only paid no federal income taxes, it actually received a $156 million rebate from the IRS, according to its SEC filings.

2) Bank of America received a $1.9 billion (thats BILLION with a tax refund from the IRS last year, although it made $4.4 billion in profits and received a bailout from the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department of nearly $1 trillion.

3) Over the past five years, while General Electric made $26 billion in profits in the United States, it received a $4.1 billion (again, BILLION) refund from the IRS.

4) Chevron received a $19 million refund from the IRS last year after it made $10 billion in profits in 2009.

5) Boeing, which received a $30 billion contract from the Pentagon to build 179 airborne tankers, got a $124 million refund from the IRS last year.

6) Valero Energy, the 25th largest company in America with $68 billion in sales last year received a $157 million tax refund check from the IRS and, over the past three years, it received a $134 million tax break from the oil and gas manufacturing tax deduction.

7) Goldman Sachs in 2008 only paid 1.1 percent of its income in taxes even though it earned a profit of $2.3 billion and received an almost $800 billion from the Federal Reserve and U.S. Treasury Department.

8) Citigroup last year made more than $4 billion in profits but paid no federal income taxes. It received a $2.5 trillion bailout from the Federal Reserve and U.S. Treasury.

9) ConocoPhillips, the fifth largest oil company in the United States, made $16 billion in profits from 2007 through 2009, but received $451 million in tax breaks through the oil and gas manufacturing deduction.

10) Over the past five years, Carnival Cruise Lines made more than $11 billion in profits, but its federal income tax rate during those years was just 1.1percent.

And these are just the top 10!!! There are hundreds more!!! How a Christian can be for this is beyond me. If these companies PAID their taxes (instead of getting rebates in the millions of dollars) there would be more than enough to balance the budget, stimulate the economy AND help the poor.

[bonnie]

Olger, it's not class envy. I work for a major corporation. Trust me, they don't care about you or me. They don't want to pay taxes, and they could care less if that means old ladies will have their social security cut, or little kids will go to bed hungry. On the other hand I know many ultra-wealthy people who have absolutely no qualms about carrying a higher tax load. They can afford it, they are grateful for God's blessings and they don't want to live off of the poor and needy. There is nothing wrong with being rich. Greed IS wrong. Not wanting to be taxed while social services are cut for "the least of these" is wrong. Plain and simple. Tell me, if he were to get involved in politics, what would Jesus do? Would he keep social services for the poorest and weakest. Or would he make sure the strongest and richest kept their tax breaks? Now ask yourself, if we go by HIS name, what should our position be? Take a look at this list and tell me it's not immoral:................

What is immoral is the way the government spends money supposedly "contributed" by the taxpayer. If it was spent responsibly we would not be in this mess.

SS has to be reformed,it cannot conitnue the way it is.Paul Ryan had a pretty good plan,anyone 55 years and older would continue the same. Retirement and such would be phased in .There is no reason to pay a able bodied person to sit on his backside and collect SS,unless there is a medical problem.

You neglected to ask what Jesus would do for the welfare cheats,taking food and resources from those unable to care for themselves

Unecessary spending and fraud is widespread.

[Tom Wetmore]

That logic is the same as saying that since their are those that speed, drive recklessly and drive drunk on the highways, that we should close down the highway system or install speed bumps on the interstate.

[bonnie]

My husband contracted with HUD for a number of years.This is one area cuts are on the table. That should have been years ago

The waste and fraud associated with is enormous.

My husband was responsible for revamping HUD homes for a new tenent or when the house had become such a disaster the people that were currently living there couldn't not stand it any longer.

Cupboard doors missing,holes in the walls,bathroom sinks missing,feces on bedroom walls.That was just the most obvious.The taxpayer picked up the expense. While my husband was revamping the homes and making them livable the ones living there would be laying on the sofa,offering him a beer and to relax. HUD would not know the difference in his billable hours.This was not the exception,one or two bad apples.For HUD housing is was more the rule.

We cared for over two dozen foster children. My husband and I paid for many of the extras that go into raising children.

This was necessary as "the children" only received 26 cents out of every dollar received. Our case worker,ready to retire

said that in no way would this ever be reformed as "the poor children" were big business. Reasonable salaries and top notch benefits.Much that was part of social services was redundant.

Instead of one employee to fill out a form it took three.One to hold the paper,one to fill it out,and one to file it.

Our neighbors receive public assistance for their prescription costs.They own a golf cart to ride around the neighborhood,a boat and motor,motor home, newer vehicles,(mine is eleven years old)and recently purchased a third television for two people.A 52 inch 2500.00 necessity.

She recently asked me why I still worked so hard,explaining she really didn't like to work.

A single mom on full assistance as she waits for just the right job to come along.Her mother has cleaned homes for years and has a very good clientele.She is planning on quitting the end of this summer and wanted her daughter to get off welfare and take it over.Pay is 20.00 + per hour,her daughter says no she wants some kind of office work where she doesn't have to be on her feet all day"

There are many area's that could be cut but to many have been led to believe they have a right to the resources of others

[bonnie]

That logic is the same as saying that since their are those that speed, drive recklessly and drive drunk on the highways, that we should close down the highway system or install speed bumps on the interstate.

No,that logic says those that abuse should pay the price.If I drive drunk on the highway chances are good I will be stopped.

The fine is hefty and can lead to a loss of the privilege to drive,jail time,and very expensive insurance.

It is the same logic that caused me to pay 110.00 per speeding violation and the third time you find yourself in front of a judge trying to convince him you should keep your license

[Paula]

[Dr. Shane]

I work for a major corporation. Trust me, they don't care about you or me. They don't want to pay taxes, and they could care less if that means old ladies will have their social security cut, or little kids will go to bed hungry.

[Dr. Shane]

So all these companies getting back BILLIIONS in tax rebates, others getting back HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS, while the weakest and poorest are taxed ISN'T immoral.

Taxes that are paid by corporations are passed off to the consumer. So the consumer pays the tax.

Let me demonstrate.

In 1995 I went to El Salvador on a mission trip. I went into several furniture and appliance stores. The cheapest microwave oven I could find cost about $280. At the same time, back home I could buy a cheap microwave at Wal-Mart for $35. Why were microwaves so expensive in El Salvador? Import tax. No microwaves were manufactured in El Salvador so the tax the corporation had to pay was passed off to the consumer. Years later there was a trade agreement passed and today (16 years later) one can purchase a microwave in El Salvador four about $80.

Corporations are good tax targets - no doubt. They make a lot of money and keep books that normally are easy for the IRS to audit. But we have to be careful that we don't create a tax burden for them that keeps them from competing in a world market.

[Dr. Shane]

One point that I cannot let escape is that America is a good nation and while I would not want to label it a "Christian" nation, is is very charitable.

Our government gives food away to the poor.

Our government provides the poor with housing.

Our government pays heating bills for the poor.

Our governments educates poor children for free.

Just travel around the world and compare. If a person has to be poor, the US is a pretty good spot to be stuck in that dilemma. I speak from experience. I was raised on food stamps and the welfare dime. At Christmas time the fire fighters brought me free Christmas gifts! That doesn't happen to poor kids in Mexico.

[bonnie]

Quote:

So all these companies getting back

BILLIIONS in tax rebates, others getting back HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS, while the weakest and poorest are taxed ISN'T immoral. Look, government will never PERFECTLY administrate the tax payers money. But does that mean that it's the social services that need to be cut in order for the GE and others to continue getting BILLIONS (with a back in tax returns?!?!?!? If thats your definition of morality... wow... just wow...

The weakest and poorest do not pay any federal income tax.In fact they get rebates for being poor from the federal government.

No one expects the government to perfectly administrate. With not much effort in can do a lot better.

Yes,entitlement programs need to be run more efficiently.

When you are taking from one to hand to the other there is a certain obligation.

[bonnie]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Exxon Says It Does Pay U.S. Income Taxes

Posted by Christopher Helman

Recently we published the story “What the Top U.S. Companies Pay In Taxes,” and a related blog post, “Big Oil’s Tax Bill.” What’s received the most attention from readers and bloggers was our assertion that ExxonMobil, despite recording more than $15 billion in income taxes, “paid none of its 2009 income taxes in the U.S.”

Although I came up with that by reading the company’s annual 10-k filing with the SEC, ExxonMobil spokesman Alan Jeffers assures me that this is wrong, that Exxon did indeed pay substantial income taxes to the U.S. Treasury in 2009, and that it overpaid taxes in 2008. How much? Well, Jeffers says so far he’s not at liberty to disclose that information. “That’s not something we’re required to disclose, nor do we.”

So what gives? Jeffers explains that what ExxonMobil reports in its annual consolidated financial statements is just accounting, that the numbers reflect expenses or credits recorded throughout the year and “do not represent our tax bill,” which has not yet been filed, let alone settled. The financial results listed in the 10-k “is an accurate reflection of what it is, but not what you thought it was,” says Jeffers.

What the financial statement says is that ExxonMobil, in 2009, after a handful of deferrals, recorded a total U.S. income tax benefit (i.e., a refund) of $46 million. Next to this, it shows total non-U.S. income taxes of $15.165 billion.

My mistake was in thinking that these figures somehow reflected actual tax benefits and liabilities. So what we should have written was that ExxonMobil “recorded” no U.S. income taxes for 2009 instead of “paid.” All you re-bloggers out there, please note the clarification. Mea culpa.

And for all you commenters outraged that Exxon isn’t paying taxes in the U.S., don’t worry, it is. Our article only focused on income taxes, but it’s worth noting that the 10-k also records $7.7 billion in other taxes in the U.S. (like sales taxes) and more than $50 billion of other taxes and duties paid (I mean recorded) overseas.

There’s a lingering issue here. If Exxon’s income tax line items don’t mean what they say, then what does that imply about other important stuff? Are “earnings after income taxes,” really $19.28 billion? Are earnings per share really $3.99? Does it all wash out? We’ve asked Exxon to explain and will let you know what they say.

[bonnie]

I was really surprised to find out my husband and I qualified for assistance with our utilities based on monthly income.I followed up on the unsolicited invitation to apply just for the heck of it. I would have only had to pay 9.00 per month for heat and 9.00 for electricity. Until my husband and I have exhausted all options to pay our own utilities,shut off cable,internet etc I do not have a moral right to demand other taxpayers pay my expenses.Needless to say I did not follow thru.

Towards spring there was a article in the paper that the assistance money had run out. Wonder how many that truly needed that went with out.

Dug a little deeper and the reason they ran out was making sure they spent all of the money allotted so they could get more next year.

The poor and low income have their own responsibility in their survival.With the exception of the physically and mentally handicapped they have a obligation to use the time and talents God gave them. Maybe they cannot swing it alone for awhile,but they need to contribute as much towards their own support as possible. They do not have the moral right to take what they can do for themselves while those that can't are left without.

It is interesting to see those with some serious handicaps working and then compare that to my neighbor that will draw welfare till just the right job finds her

[Guest]

I would have been tempted to go for the $9.00 a month electricity. lol

[bonnie]

I would have been tempted to go for the $9.00 a month electricity. lol

It went thru my mind more than once LOL

but I could almost hear my parents giving me what for.

To them if you took the labor of another if you could do for yourself,you were a thief. Even if you had to do without some things you had no right to demand from others

[Paula]

Quote:

The weakest and poorest do not pay any federal income tax.In fact they get rebates for being poor from the federal government.

No one expects the government to perfectly administrate. With not much effort in can do a lot better.

Yes,entitlement programs need to be run more efficiently.

When you are taking from one to hand to the other there is a certain obligation.

Actually, the poor DO pay. It's called hidden taxes. For example, every time medicaid coverage goes down and an 80 year old citizen has to go without dinner to pay for meds thats a hidden tax. When SS fails to keep up with inflation, and seniors must go without heat or food, thats a hidden tax!! And whats immoral is that some would rather "tax" the poorest and weakest so as not to ruffle the feathers of the richest (after all, they make the big contributions, their kids are summer camp buddies, etc...). /Should entitlement programs be as efficient and streamlined as possible? Of course!! Should the top 5% give up their tax breaks? ABSOLUTELY. A "TAX BREAK" for the rich is actually an expenditour... or a "tax hike" on the rest of us. The money we lose from them, has to come out of somebodies pockets... and when we cut social services, guess who's pockets its coming out of.

[bonnie]

Actually, the poor DO pay.

[bonnie]

Most 80 year olds that cannot afford medication,utilities etc

in their own homes generally go to senior housing.

Senior housing is quite nice,very inexpensive and heat is included as are meals on wheels and transportation at a very low cost.

And this doesn't have anything to do with medicaid either.