It's a subtle but important distinction: money of any kind is a tool, existing for a valid purpose; otherwise inert.
Accumulating money in a manner viewing it as a score versus others easily leads to looking down on those who have less, and to practices that optimize return over anything else. This can dehumanize others in the eyes of a money lover.
Jesus proclaimed Jewish leaders of the day as hypocrites for telling people to do as they said while not following their own preaching; in other words: committing sin.
Likewise, there is a great deal of biblical interpretation that goes off the rails and opposes Jesus' teachings as well as Old Testament (Torah/Tanakh) precedent.
As for historicity - the Bible has been repeatedly found to be accurate on many issues. Parts of Leviticus even read like a survival guide for a species[1] which includes what today would be considered food safety standards, quarantine procedures, etc. Highly effective practices for a nascent culture.
I was surprised when I read the Old Testament myself, since it was nothing like what I had previously thought. Unless a person reads it himself, it's effectively impossible to understand the impact - it is no normal book, no simple collection of poetry or wisdom.
Western civilization is build upon a Judeo-Christian value foundation, yet we hardly have a conscious connection to it anymore - many only have a vague notion of all religiouns having some element of truth. Even the scientific method is a magnificent tool that is described biblically: we are to test everything! Regardless of which translation is read, the core message comes through powerfully - it is easier to accept when we admit to not knowing everything; humanity as a superorganism is like an overly-confident teenager.
I have found no other teaching that denies its followers any humanly-possible way to enter heaven/paradise/transcendence - I am not aware of anyplace in the Old Testament that describes a process for getting there, only atonement; Jesus explicitly stated that it is impossible for man to get there on his own[2]. Other beliefs put a balancing scale in the mix, where doing more good than bad is what gains entry.
Judaism & Christianity focus on relationship, not religion. This grace is also what gets a person into heaven, since nobody can buy or work their way in - it is a gift for anyone who accepts God[3]. This is different from mercy - being lenient when another is due punishment. Mercy is reducing a fine; grace is opening a door for a child who is struggling to do so himself - God gives us both since we're guilty and yet still children as a whole.
Additionally, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob pursues humanity[4] instead of the other way around elsewhere. What other god serves rather than demands, only asking us to do the same?
[1] If it is a white bright spot on the skin of his body, but it does not appear to be deeper than the skin, and the hair has not turned white, then the priest is to quarantine the person with the infection for seven days. ~Leviticus 13:4
[2] Jesus looked at them and replied, “This is impossible for mere humans, but not for God; all things are possible for God.” ~Mark 10:27
[3] For by grace you are saved through faith, and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God ~Ephesians 2:8
[4] What do you think? If a man has a hundred sheep, and one of them goes astray, does he not leave the ninety-nine and go to the mountains to seek the one that is straying? ~Matthew 18:12
This is suspiciously quickly after military exercises in LA right next to a Wells Fargo. It looked like something was being carried out of the building.
I find it even more interesting that my comment, which is factually correct, has been flagged.
The Yellow Vest movement started in France and has been prominent in the countries listed within the article. The governments of those countries have also been defying popular wishes, particularly regarding Brexit.
So I am curious as to why my comment should be flagged instead of replied to. Interesting indeed - hit a nerve?
A highly dense population will always experience activity. Unless you're going into private properties, which is generally a prosecutable offence so don't do it, you wouldn't know which buildings have high or low occupancy. This is reflected by a decline in a number of luxury real estate markets worldwide - the lights are on, but nobody's home.
Taxes across the board became oppressive in Rome - it was corruption that funneled funds to those who benefited. Not all wealthy are the same in their quest for control and power, or lack thereof.
Coinage records show a rapid collapse in the economy after a long period of gradual decay[1].
They're actually getting even better at it - 1.12% in 2009-10!
I like how you've pointed out the amount relative how much theft^H^H^H^H^H "tax" revenue is brought in rather than the absolute amount of:
£3,673,797,000
That's pretty astronomical to me. I'm sure you'll find other ways to break it down and try to refute but it still doesn't change the waste of time taxation incurs.
My stance will not change from the perspective that income tax is more destructive to low-income earners than it is to the wealthy, and that it drives away wealth.
Let's just settle this as "we won't agree" since I have more productive things to spend my time on than arguing over what shouldn't exist in the first place. Pray for Brexit or go down with socialist Europe.
Human behavior is quite simple - it's the magnitude of interactions that that make it appear more complex than it is.
I do agree that it is easier to be lazy and obtain instant gratification than delay it for great reward but it can be learned by anyone if the cushy safety net of socialism is removed. Everyone has something that motivates him to become greater than what he is now; it's just a matter of discovering what that is - often he has to find it himself. One-size-fits-all socialism destroys this freedom.
>every "self made man who didn't need help from nobody and just smarted his way to the top" was likely helped in countless circumstances that have nearly nothing to do with his direct actions
Correct: nothing happens in isolation. However, mindset greatly changes the likelihood of an outcome. Without being able to cultivate and learn outside of indoctrination institutions, the world would be static and soulless.
>The goal is to lower the upper limit and raise the lower limit.
This is the core: give those whom are lazy a cushy retirement and shackle people who dream big so they can no longer fly.
Slavery and child labor comes from power vacuums that are created by control freak communists/Marxists/socialists who keep things from changing and improving. The rest go along because change can be scary and we all want stability. A face of true evil is the deception that we all must be equal - we are not. We have borders, both conceptual and physical - doors on our homes and personal space that we want respected; yet socialism cries that borders are bad and we need to take care of everyone regardless of our own situation... and let's use other peoples' money to do it since we don't have any. Crabs in a bucket.
I know you mean well because I was in your shoes after the dot-com collapse. The difference is that I've seen the hypocrisy - there is no perfect system but socialism is a slow, agonizing death.
The other part of that is doing something about it. No action, no success.
Of course, by the time you figure it out you'll realize that most wealthy people are not the evil sleaze we expect them to be and you'll take the same actions they do to protect yourself against destructive governments and financial regulations. It's sad that the perspective of those with scarcity mentality regarding wealth are often their own worst enemies.
The benefits are not purely monetary - raising the quality of an area due to investment that otherwise would never come in is an enormous benefit for people already living there.
That isn't too say throwing money at a bad neighborhood is guaranteed to succeed but it gives a far better shot than letting the area simmer in stagnation.
So complicate the tax issue which increases costs elsewhere and contribute to government managed funds that prove inept? Taking funds from a farmer growing crops successfully and giving them to the one nextdoor who still hasn't been able to get a seed to sprout is a textbook definition of idiocy, not to mention theft.
None of that changes the fact that tax breaks will be greater in absolute numbers for wealthier individuals than for those earning less. Play games to fudge numbers so all is not equal as much as you want - those with resources avoid participating in socialistic wealth redistribution.
No income tax is far simpler. Do you know what the cost for enforcement of individual income tax is? Hint: think astronomical.
Go after about 140 million individuals vs working with approximately 28 million businesses? Do you think business or individuals are more professional? Who had the bright idea to create such a logistical nightmare?
You can keep working with an insane system if you want but people with resources do what people without resources would eventually do in the face of direct taxation, whether financially or physically - leave.
Imagine if you weren't allowed to use a calculator without a $5,000 license and six months of training. Sounds absurd? Welcome to the financial world, where outsiders are frowned upon.
The market is highly regulated in large part due to the notion that "manipulation" occurs (spoiler: it does, but manipulation always fails on its own eventually and the crash is typically made worse by regulators). Restrictions are made on who can invest, when and how much to the point where it's not a surprise that average wage earners avoid doing so - most of the worthwhile options are only for millionaires or higher. No wonder so many think the markets don't work - they can scarcely be considered markets!
Allow people to be educated and learn how to handle their finances rather than being protected from all danger to the point of being locked out, and you'll have informed individuals capable of handling their own affairs. Let Johnny touch the stove to see that it's hot and he'll learn right quick!
Socialism just wants to save everyone from themselves without looking in the mirror and realizing how dysfunctional it is itself. Forced collectives self destruct; voluntary cooperation survives and thrives, but it takes effort and time instead of a quick fix.
Any tax decrease "disproportionately" benefits the wealthy because they have more.
A 1% decrease on $50,000 income is going to be less than the same percentage decrease on $500,000.
Of course, you could argue that "progressive" tax take care of that, but it only serves to drive away a portion of high meet with individuals to the point where tax revenue generally doesn't change much anyway while it can actually increase the overall burden on lower income earners.
Better solution: goodbye income tax.
Much like open source software where individual usage is free, only consumption/sales and corporate taxation has any legitimacy now.
Businesses need a commerce-positive, safe environment for such activity. In order to attract that, no income tax is an excellent incentive. Businesses, which are fictitious entities, support the services needed to entice localized growth; as population grows, so does business activity and revenue, thus tax revenue for services as well.
Of course, any system is prone to corruption filling the power vacuum so eventually it would fail. However, so long as individuals are as
unencumbered as possible, people can opt out rather than continue to be abused.
Additionally, taxes serve as a psychological leash and intellectual substitute. Financial/investment education is virtually non-existent in the US and it's generally misguided or even wrong in some instances. If individuals are coddled and promised to be taken care of, they become unprepared for difficult situations.
Let a dog be a dog and let a person be a person, not a slave.
No other factors are provided: were you in an affluent area? What other demographics influenced your school? Is there a high ratio of homeschooling or private schools to public schooling?
Your anecdote is one data point, nowhere near enough to draw conclusions about the entire state.
I will not do business in California or NY due to excessive costs. Many others are either already moved out or are scaling back in high tax areas; Florida, Puerto Rico and Texas seem to be the top tax-friendly destinations currently.
There is still plenty of activity in CA & NY on a sheer volume basis but the barriers are high, the types of businesses are shifting[1] in a detrimental manner and the overall trend is declining.
Don't get stuck in a purely domestic perspective. Absentee ownership is rising in many major cities due to international capital seeking safe havens for preservation of wealth - empty dwellings purchased at high rates results in elevated prices for working individuals, ensnaring them in a life-long debt cycle. If CA & NY continue resorting to taxation as the primary method for increasing revenue, they will end up like Detroit.
Rome's final collapse occurred over the span of approximately a decade and offers a glimpse at what is likely to occur: taxes became oppressive and property owners simply walked away because it no longer made financial sense - the benefits are outweighed by the costs.
How much more revenue loss can be endured by property owners in NYC before capitulation? They can hold out for a while and everything will appear to be doing alright, then the stampede begins and collapse takes place so fast you'll wonder what happened.
It seems you assume I was taking about tax collection and government being highly funded - I'm referring to the economy as a whole, of which government is only one component; preferably a shrinking one.
Investment is accelerating in low and no-tax countries or regions while it is waning in high-tax locations. There is a growing realization that silicon valley is not all it's cracked up to be.
Simple incentive structures explain a great deal of capital movement.
It's a subtle but important distinction: money of any kind is a tool, existing for a valid purpose; otherwise inert.
Accumulating money in a manner viewing it as a score versus others easily leads to looking down on those who have less, and to practices that optimize return over anything else. This can dehumanize others in the eyes of a money lover.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love_of_money