What's new
By:

Flat Tax and Tithing

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 365
  • Start date Start date
bordelais7 said:
Should LDS members earning less than $30k be exempt from tithing? Not a loaded or leading question, just curious how you would answer this and distinguish the differences.
Click to expand...

No, they shouldn't be exempt from tithing. But it's not an equivalent matter. Tithing is (in my opinion/the LDS view) a commandment from God, with a flat rate mandated by revelation. And people are promised blessings for following the commandment. Taxes are not a commandment from God, except via the "render unto Caesar" thing, and there is certainly no such thing as a flat governmental tax rate revealed in the scriptures. And no promised blessings for paying a tax (except the blessing of staying out of jail ;-) ).

Actually, when the United Order was in effect, you could say that there was perhaps even a negative tax rate for poor people because they got back more than they gave to the government.

Anyway, another consideration is that poor LDS people also sometimes get helped via fast offerings. When in that situation their "effective tithing rate" (my phrase, not God's) would be lower than 10% if you consider the money they give up combined with the financial assistance they get back. So even in the LDS church, tithing isn't as flat as the flat tax proponents might want us to believe.
 
I see everyone paying something, even if some people receive it and more back in various forms (including cash), as a way to make everyone feel invested and that everyone is in this together. When 50% of people pay no tax, yet have a voice in how many benefits they should receive and how much actual taxpayers should pay I think it generates the kind of resentment and distrust we see in every aspect of politics today.
 
Gameface said:
I see everyone paying something, even if some people receive it and more back in various forms (including cash), as a way to make everyone feel invested and that everyone is in this together. When 50% of people pay no tax, yet have a voice in how many benefits they should receive and how much actual taxpayers should pay I think it generates the kind of resentment and distrust we see in every aspect of politics today.
Click to expand...

Fair point. "Skin in the game", etc.
 
Wasn't the flat tax Herman Cain's (wuz that his name?) idea that he based his whole platform around?

Was gone, don't remember.
 
scootsy said:
Wasn't the flat tax Herman Cain's (wuz that his name?) idea that he based his whole platform around?

Was gone, don't remember.
Click to expand...

He did talk about that but the idea was around before he proposed it. I think he called it 9-9-9.
 
PKM said:
I'd like to address poverty at the community, rather than national, level.

I am not a typical right-winger.. I care about those that are suffering. I also have a great disdain for the idea that we should all be equal. I believe in equal opportunity.. but not equalling out the results of individual efforts.
Click to expand...

With respect, I don't see anyone arguing this, certainly not One Brow. The argument is that 10% tax on someone living at the margins is a greater financial hardship than 10% tax on someone at the top income brackets. Seems pretty self-evident to me. This is far, far from arguing for equality of outcome. I honestly cannot see how one infers the latter from the former.
 
colton said:
Actually, when the United Order was in effect, you could say that there was perhaps even a negative tax rate for poor people because they got back more than they gave to the government.
Click to expand...

Is my tax rate negative considering how much I've gotten back from the government? Public roads, facilities, education, grants, etc?
 
scootsy said:
Is my tax rate negative considering how much I've gotten back from the government? Public roads, facilities, education, grants, etc?
Click to expand...

With this thought process I am seriously in the negative, with school being 7k a year, let alone my free healthcare.
 
Dal I have a question. When I lived in Great Falls, MT, I knew a guy there who would do the emergency flights for a hospital, which was an excellent hospital and serves a large region. He brought a LOT of people down there though from southern Alberta. Do you think that is due to quality of healthcare, or simply because Lethbridge, Medicine Hat, etc. are simply closer to GF than to Edmonton or Calgary?

I ask because I know your high intelligence and current enrollment in Canadian med school. I know the education is certainly on par, but are the resources as well?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top