“‘Giving $700 billion to the wealthiest people in America … does not create jobs,’ said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California. There must be a ‘tax cut for middle-income people in this country. … That is what we send to the (negotiating) table.'”
So… Why would the current congress pass this bill in the House knowing that it won’t pass in the Senate?
I suspect that it is because they want to keep saying “Republicans are all about favoring the rich.”
The question is, will YOU buy into that deception?
When God described a tyranny to Israel He described a 10% tax as slavery! (I Samuel 8:10-18 — http://bit.ly/dGXwja)
So Here is the Jon Davis Tax Plan: All people (rich and poor alike) pay a MAXIMUM of 10% for all of their city, county, state, and federal taxes.
Then we’ll get the civil government out of the welfare business, out of the “education” (de-education) business, out of the foreign aid business, and out of our business in general.
Then we can try a radical new idea – a government that “establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the GENERAL welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.”
In a “brilliant” move the State of Oregon (my former home) has apparently implemented a tax increase in response to state budget shortfalls.
Idaho, claiming to be more business friendly, has issued an invitation for businesses in Oregon to move to Idaho! Sounds like a backfire!
It will be interesting to see if companies actually abandon Oregon.
Here is an excerpt from a letter from Idaho’s Governor to folks in Oregon that I found at MyFreedomPost.com:
Other states, however, have chosen some interesting and in my view counterproductive approaches. Last month, for example, Oregon voters approved their legislatureâ€™s decision to raise taxes on the wealthy and on many businesses by $727 million. The immediate result was that my phone started ringing â€“ and so did phones over at our Department of Commerce. It seems that word has spread about our Project 60 initiative, and that we are open for business, including theirs!
The businesses that have called are emotional about this subject, and they have every right to be. Rising costs â€“ especially during a recession â€“ could put some employers out of business, or at least prompt layoffs. More than 2,000 Oregonians joined a Facebook group to protest the tax increase and commiserate about the repercussions. No less an Oregon business icon than Nikeâ€™s Phil Knight calls it â€œOregonâ€™s Assisted Suicide Law II.â€
The original source of the letter is a press release from the State of Idaho here: http://gov.idaho.gov/mediacenter/press/pr2010/prmar10/pr_020.html
I wonder how long it will take Oregon to figure out that if they tax business into oblivion, there will be no more businesses to tax?
The IRS, Freedom of Religion, and Freedom of Speech
Pastors should not disengage from politics. Like every other citizen of a country, the pastor must also exercise her/his right to have a say in the governance of the country. However, I also believe that pastors be objectively critical when addressing political matters in the church.
I once served a circuit of 3 churches for 6 years, in 3 communities that had their different political leanings. None of them knew which party I supported. They tried every bait to get to me tell them where I stood. It was hard for them to tell, because I criticized or commended both sides. I knew that being in a position of authority my choice could influence some persons who believed I was on their side and at the same time anger others who would feel I was against them. But that did not stop me from including political statements in my sermons or discussions.
Here is the comment that I posted in response:
Good thoughts. It is certainly important for pastors and Christian leaders to give careful thought to how they approach political issues.
I would like to submit to you and your readers another important consideration: the distinction between what pastors should or shouldnâ€™t do vs. whether or not the government should be deciding what pastors should or shouldnâ€™t do.
Here is what I mean.
We can debate amongst ourselves as Christians what role we want our spiritual leaders to play in informing us about politics. Some will prefer their leaders say little, some will prefer their leaders take a strong stand. You have articulated well in this article a very common belief that American Christians happen to have about this issue.
It is very different, however, for the National Government to prohibit or restrict the free speech of pastors. Whatever we believe pastors should be doing, I hope we can all agree that the IRS should not in any way be inhibiting religious expression of political speech!
The Congress has committed a serious moral error by including the prohibition on endorsing candidates (for churches) in the tax code. The restrictions on working to influencing legislation are inappropriate as well. I submit that both of these sections of the tax code need to be repealed.
The debate about â€œhow much do we want to participate in politicsâ€ should be an internal debate inside the Church of Christ, not an external restriction placed by the federal (or state, or city) governments.