Originally posted by Cow Poke
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
Income Inequality?
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Spartacus View PostThe people who have money and property can do whatever they want with it-- how the heck is that NOT economic might makes right?
Let's try an experiment... I demand you send me 50% of your monthly income so I can expand theologyweb and pay our moderators who are purely working on a volunteer basis. I think that is just. They do a lot of work around here and get paid nothing at all. So since you have income and they don't, you need to give me 50% of your income to distribute it to them.
I am betting you won't do it because you don't want to give half of your money away or have someone like me tell you how to spend your money. But hey, I could be wrong. Here is the paypal page: http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/fa...ologywebdonate
You mean exegesis, or, more likely, eisegesis. Try googling big words before you use them.
If you didn't work you didn't eat, but you also had the opportunity to work to get enough food.
Abraham was before the Mosaic Law, and Solomon's wealth was one of the signs of his corruption.
And since you are nitpicking on my spelling, I am guessing that is a diversionary tactic to avoid admitting you are wrong again.
Comment
-
Here's a working paper to keep track of:
The folks arguing that income inequality is fine because a "business owner" and shareholders should be allowed to profit however much he wants, dismissive of any responsibility to share increasing wealth with employees, ought to remember that we're not in the 50's or 60's any more and we're not principally talking about the guy who runs a repair shop or a even a regional chain of fast food restaurants. We're talking about an increasingly fractional percent of Americans, mostly in the financial sector, sucking up an increasingly disproportionate amount of wealth. We often compare today's wealth inequality to the Gilded Age but, in truth, it's decidedly worse: at the turn of the 20th century, ~30% of America's wealth was held by the top 2%. In 2007, more than 30% of America's wealth was held by the top 1%. The authors cited above state that we are only three percentage points away from the inequality that existed immediately prior to the Great Depression, when the top 0.1% held 25% of America's wealth.
Defending the great inequalities of the Gilded Age and the Roaring 20's while denying laborers even the real increases in wages and wealth during those times is remarkable in its audacity."I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sam View PostThe folks arguing that income inequality is fine...The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostEveryone has the right to do what they want with their own property. How is that wrong? What would be unjust is other people telling YOU how to spend your salary.
Let's try an experiment... I demand you send me 50% of your monthly income so I can expand theologyweb and pay our moderators who are purely working on a volunteer basis. I think that is just. They do a lot of work around here and get paid nothing at all. So since you have income and they don't, you need to give me 50% of your income to distribute it to them.
I am betting you won't do it because you don't want to give half of your money away or have someone like me tell you how to spend your money. But hey, I could be wrong. Here is the paypal page: http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/fa...ologywebdonate
You expect a pirate to know how to spell? I meant eisegesis. Reading INTO the text.
and that sounds like a fair deal to me and not socialism.
I know Abraham was before the Mosaic law, but are you saying that God changed his mind about wealth accumulation? And Solomon was not the only rich king in the land under Mosaic law, or the only rich person.
Or are you arguing that the end of the Law that came through Christ was God changing His mind, too? Do you think that God changing his mind is a bad thing? A good thing? You're not being particularly coherent.
And since you are nitpicking on my spelling, I am guessing that is a diversionary tactic to avoid admitting you are wrong again.Don't call it a comeback. It's a riposte.
Comment
-
Matthew 26:11New American Standard Bible (NASB)
11 For you always have the poor with you...That's what
- She
Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
- Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)
I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
- Stephen R. Donaldson
Comment
-
Originally posted by Spartacus View PostThis line of argument would be far more effective if I actually had income.
I think that is your problem right there. You don't have a job and so you want someone to support you and think that other people somehow owe you a living. They don't.
And if you did have income I am fairly sure you would not give 50% of it to theologyweb to support it and the moderators working here because you would not want us telling you how to spend YOUR money.
I expect a person who wants to convince me that they know how to properly interpret Scripture to know at least a few of the relevant terms and ideas.
Sure it's a fair deal, but it's not a deal that's available to everyone in the US.
But we were talking about Mosaic law, not the USA. How is working for food anything but fair? It sure isn't what you have been arguing. You want people to get paid no matter what they do or how hard they work. You think the employer exists to support the employee and that somehow the employees get to decide how a business should be run and how the owner should spend his money instead of the other way around. You are just proposing a tyranny of the masses. If owners can not decide how to spend their own money and property, then they will stop owning businesses and then there will be no jobs and the workers can demand nothing from nothing all day long and still have nothing.
So because Abraham was rich, later generations could ignore those elements of the Law that were supposed to limit their ability to accumulate wealth at the expense of the poor? Is that what you're arguing?
Or are you arguing that the end of the Law that came through Christ was God changing His mind, too? Do you think that God changing his mind is a bad thing? A good thing? You're not being particularly coherent.
And how exactly do you think I interpret accusations of socialism?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sam View PostDefending the great inequalities of the Gilded Age and the Roaring 20's
while denying laborers even the real increases in wages and wealth during those times is remarkable in its audacity.
While I'm actually DOING something about the problem in the way I believe actually ADDRESS the problem, you spew forth bloviations and goofy false accusations.
For the record... I am ALL FOR laborers EARNING increases, and I'm actively engaged - albeit only 15 or so at a time - in helping them GET There!The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostSo get a job. Surely you can flip a burger for $15/hour, right?
I think that is your problem right there. You don't have a job and so you want someone to support you and think that other people somehow owe you a living. They don't."As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths." Isaiah 3:12
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Darth Executor View PostPretty sure he just lives off his parents.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Darth Executor View PostPretty sure he just lives off his parents.
I moved out of my parents house when I was 18 and paid my way through school with any job I could get. Had a room mate to help with the costs. I worked at KFC, a burger joint, a TV repair shop, a car radio installation place, a burglar alarm company and a manufacturing company all to pay my way through school.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Bill the Cat View PostMatthew 26:11New American Standard Bible (NASB)
11 For you always have the poor with you...
Raise your hand if you've ever taken an academic course in Scriptural interpretation.Don't call it a comeback. It's a riposte.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostSo get a job. Surely you can flip a burger for $15/hour, right?
I think that is your problem right there. You don't have a job and so you want someone to support you and think that other people somehow owe you a living. They don't.
And if you did have income I am fairly sure you would not give 50% of it to theologyweb to support it and the moderators working here because you would not want us telling you how to spend YOUR money.
Really? I would take any job to earn enough to eat. Or start a business selling stuff on craig's list. Or picking up cans for cash. I see "help wanted" signs everywhere. There are jobs out there if you are not too proud to take them.
But we were talking about Mosaic law, not the USA. How is working for food anything but fair? It sure isn't what you have been arguing. You want people to get paid no matter what they do or how hard they work. You think the employer exists to support the employee and that somehow the employees get to decide how a business should be run and how the owner should spend his money instead of the other way around. You are just proposing a tyranny of the masses. If owners can not decide how to spend their own money and property, then they will stop owning businesses and then there will be no jobs and the workers can demand nothing from nothing all day long and still have nothing.
You were arguing Mosaic law and now you are claiming that Jesus changed how people should spend their money? If anything, Jesus eliminated the tithe by fulfilling the law. You give what you want. You help who you want. Nobody forces you to do anything. Jesus gave advice and taught us to care for our neighbors, but he never legislated it. You can't legislate charity because when you take from me to give to someone else, it becomes stealing.
Don't call it a comeback. It's a riposte.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Spartacus View PostI wouldn't mind that at all, but the job market isn't exactly very friendly right now.
I can think of a few dozen causes more deserving of my money than TWeb
That makes one of us.
you don't know what I think and you don't care.
But we were talking about Mosaic law, not the USA. How is working for food anything but fair? It sure isn't what you have been arguing. You want people to get paid no matter what they do or how hard they work. You think the employer exists to support the employee and that somehow the employees get to decide how a business should be run and how the owner should spend his money instead of the other way around. You are just proposing a tyranny of the masses. If owners can not decide how to spend their own money and property, then they will stop owning businesses and then there will be no jobs and the workers can demand nothing from nothing all day long and still have nothing.
You were arguing Mosaic law and now you are claiming that Jesus changed how people should spend their money? If anything, Jesus eliminated the tithe by fulfilling the law. You give what you want. You help who you want. Nobody forces you to do anything. Jesus gave advice and taught us to care for our neighbors, but he never legislated it. You can't legislate charity because when you take from me to give to someone else, it becomes stealing.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Spartacus View PostWhich is a reference to Deuteronomy 15:11, part of an exhortation to Israel to never neglect the law or the poor.
Jesus' rebuke to Judas isn't a "meh, I screwed up when I made the world and there aren't actually enough resources to go around, so don't worry too much about the poor" but a "Judas, you've been embezzling from our coin purse for your own enrichment, and NOW you want to start caring for the poor?"
Raise your hand if you've ever taken an academic course in Scriptural interpretation.That's what
- She
Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
- Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)
I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
- Stephen R. Donaldson
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 09:15 AM
|
3 responses
46 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Yesterday, 04:26 PM
|
||
Started by CivilDiscourse, 06-01-2024, 04:11 PM
|
13 responses
84 views
0 likes
|
Last Post Yesterday, 08:02 AM | ||
Started by seer, 06-01-2024, 03:50 PM
|
2 responses
46 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seer
Yesterday, 06:35 AM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 06-01-2024, 05:08 AM
|
3 responses
27 views
0 likes
|
Last Post 06-01-2024, 06:54 AM | ||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 06-01-2024, 04:58 AM
|
17 responses
70 views
0 likes
|
Last Post 06-01-2024, 08:52 AM |
Comment