Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Should Churches Pay Taxes?


  • Please log in to reply
76 replies to this topic

#61 Mr. Scot

Mr. Scot

    Football Historian

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 36,703 posts
  • LocationSC

Posted 10 December 2012 - 06:35 PM

Yes. Because you are not telling the church how to spend its money. Youre simply stating that if you want the preferential tax status there are requirements.

Its already been established that churches cant campaign for or against a political candidate without risking their exemption. This would be no different.


Semantics, and not the same as what Pstall said.

But tell me this: how well do you trust the government to be given power and not use it?

Pretty sure none of this passes a court challenge for constitutionality.

#62 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,298 posts

Posted 10 December 2012 - 06:53 PM

120k?

inexcusable.

Why?

If its a huge church with thousands of members, it can be tougher than running a medium sized business. The minister of my Mother's church runs all the church business, and is at the hospital 3-4 nights a week visiting with sick members and their families. And they have about a thousand members. He puts a lot more hours than I do. IMO, when it comes to the minister salary, its between the parishoners and the minister and no one else.

Besides, its not like the minister's salary is tax free.

#63 PhillyB

PhillyB

    hug it chug it football

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,653 posts
  • LocationGreensboro

Posted 11 December 2012 - 12:17 AM

Why?

If its a huge church with thousands of members, it can be tougher than running a medium sized business. The minister of my Mother's church runs all the church business, and is at the hospital 3-4 nights a week visiting with sick members and their families. And they have about a thousand members. He puts a lot more hours than I do. IMO, when it comes to the minister salary, its between the parishoners and the minister and no one else.

Besides, its not like the minister's salary is tax free.


i'm not saying they don't do full-time work (and then some) but i have a fundamental problem with a pastor making that kind of cash when the primary purpose of a church is outreach. i give ten percent of my income to my church where the pastor accepts a barely-livable wage (granted it's a small church) and the rest of the money goes to fund foster families, homeless meals, and orphanages overseas.

i'm not saying every pastor should live on barely-livable wages but the moment i learned my money was paying for a 120k salary my ass would be gone.

#64 GOOGLE RON PAUL

GOOGLE RON PAUL

    fleet-footed poster

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,973 posts

Posted 11 December 2012 - 04:43 AM

Screw you and your "inequality".

You make your own opportunities is life....you don't sit around and bitch about what you don't have.

My parent's families were dirt poor....my parents did not have college degrees....I went to a high school that less than 20% of the students went to either a 2 or 4 year degree....I had the same classes and teachers available to me that every other student there had.

Please explain to me how anyone from that same area/school did not have the same opportunities that I did.


you're a white male, correct?

ps: get fuged

#65 GOOGLE RON PAUL

GOOGLE RON PAUL

    fleet-footed poster

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,973 posts

Posted 11 December 2012 - 04:53 AM

Apparently not as stupid as you. National Sales Tax = Value Added Tax, not HR25. There is a reason why the distinction has been made repeatedly in conventional talk and national media.

A national sales tax stands by itself as an added tax for extra generated "revenue" for the federal government. HR25 is a national sales tax alone on ONLY new goods AT THE END OF SALE along with the ABOLISHMENT of ALL OTHER TAXES. Used goods are NOT taxed again. The IRS is to be cut to the lowest degree and eventually made a part of the FBIs white-collar crime division to consolidate costs and cut unnecessary federal spending. The prebate is the "fair" portion of it to remove the "regressive portion of the tax burden".

The current codification of the tax code is RIFE with the means for corporations, individuals, and political entities to exploit for the purposes of evasion. Of course there is discussion about tax evasion at the retail level, but you are now looking at a much smaller footprint of scrutiny as opposed to the goliath that stands today. The national sales tax (again the VAT, not FairTax) still retains multiple levels of sale tax before the end of sale.

All of this was spelled out in the wiki and countless other google sites. To call you a retard is to assume you have made an honest mistake and are simply too dense to understand the not-so-subtle nuance. It is clear that you are a liar to the nth degree in the hopes that no one will call you on your obvious brand of bullshit.

Care to continue?


first, i'm well aware of the fact that the fairtax eliminates all semblance of progressiveness from our tax code, as was illustrated in the charts that you completely ignored with you ABLOO BLOO BLOO ITS NOT THE SAME when that study was specifically commissioned in response to libertarian dipshits advocating their fuging stupid tax plan

also, in response to this:

Apparently not as stupid as you. National Sales Tax = Value Added Tax, not HR25.


http://www.fairtax.o...HowFairTaxWorks

The FairTax is a national sales tax


here let me quote that for you again

The FairTax is a national sales tax


and one more time

The FairTax is a national sales tax


now shut the fug up about your stupidly regressive sales tax. it increases the tax burden on all incomes between $15,000 to $200,000. it will not generate the revenue necessary to keep necessary social programs alive so that, even though incomes <$15,000 will see a negative tax burden, they will essentially receive far less assistance in exchange for like a few hundred bucks. this bullshit is championed by neal fuging boortz, so it's no wonder that you made that appeal to "conventional media and national media," because you are insulated within the echo chamber of conservative talk radio. the fairtax is very regressive and would undoubtedly cause the middle class to pay MORE for LESS. now please stop embarrassing yourself.

#66 MadHatter

MadHatter

    The Only Voice of Reason

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,954 posts
  • LocationDark Side of the Moon

Posted 11 December 2012 - 07:03 AM

you're a white male, correct?

ps: get fuged


You're a deadbet liberal.

ps: get fuged

#67 MadHatter

MadHatter

    The Only Voice of Reason

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,954 posts
  • LocationDark Side of the Moon

Posted 11 December 2012 - 07:06 AM

You're a deadbet liberal.

ps: get fuged

EVERYONE who went to that same High School had exactly the same opportunities at an education. Some took advantage of it and some did not. Has nothing to do with gender or race. It has to do with personal accountability and work ethic.

The only advantage that I had was parents that gave a poo and taught me the value of hard work. Which, based on your posts, is something that was totally lacking in your upbringing.



#68 GOOGLE RON PAUL

GOOGLE RON PAUL

    fleet-footed poster

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,973 posts

Posted 11 December 2012 - 07:31 AM

my parents taught me the value of hard work, therefore i became a corporate desk jockey, forever sucking the teat of the financial elites (you know, those guys who nearly tanked the world economy by themselves, then got "bailed out" by the government)

#69 SZ James

SZ James

    1 888 CAM PAIN

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,429 posts

Posted 11 December 2012 - 08:11 AM

temporarily embarrassed millionaires, etc.

#70 twylyght

twylyght

    The picture of how I care

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,328 posts

Posted 11 December 2012 - 08:14 AM

first, i'm well aware of the fact that the fairtax eliminates all semblance of progressiveness from our tax code, as was illustrated in the charts that you completely ignored with you ABLOO BLOO BLOO ITS NOT THE SAME when that study was specifically commissioned in response to libertarian dipshits advocating their fuging stupid tax plan

also, in response to this:

http://www.fairtax.o...HowFairTaxWorks

here let me quote that for you again

and one more time

now shut the fug up about your stupidly regressive sales tax. it increases the tax burden on all incomes between $15,000 to $200,000. it will not generate the revenue necessary to keep necessary social programs alive so that, even though incomes <$15,000 will see a negative tax burden, they will essentially receive far less assistance in exchange for like a few hundred bucks. this bullshit is championed by neal fuging boortz, so it's no wonder that you made that appeal to "conventional media and national media," because you are insulated within the echo chamber of conservative talk radio. the fairtax is very regressive and would undoubtedly cause the middle class to pay MORE for LESS. now please stop embarrassing yourself.


And here's for you:

http://www.fairtax.o...out_faq_answers

Scroll down to point 45 if it isn't too hard for you.

You are clearly incapable of being embarrassed. You have no clue as to what you are speaking about. No amount of repeating a false claim will make it true. Go back to Ricki Lake and engage in your scream fest. You'll get no quarter from me.

Social programs are not necessary insofar as the federal government is concerned. To say as much tells me all I need to know about your supposed "equal opportunity". What you are advocating is preferential treatment.

Riddle me this Batman? If I make 1 million dollars and pay 15% in tax, do I pay the same amount as someone that pays 15% on 100K? No? What's the difference? The millionaire pays more? How did that happen? I thought they were cheating the system!

What EXACTLY does FAIR mean to you? Maybe we should just crown Gospodin King of Goddamn America and let you do as you see fit. I mean, you ARE the arbiter of fairness, right? You know what's best for us all right?

Gospodin: All the rich (those making more than 250K yearly) shall pay 70% for their fair share.
[The rich leave town]
Loyal Subjects of GKoGA: We don't have enough money for our necessary social programs!
Gospodin: All the rich shall (those making more than 150K yearly) pay 90% for their fair share.

[The rich laugh from across the border as politicians continue to live the good life off of everyone else]
Loyal Subjects of GKoGA: We don't have enough money for our necessary social programs!
Gospodin: All the rich shall (those making more than 50K yearly) pay 95% for their fair share.
<Gospodin wins because he has all of the money>

Congratulations! You are yet another failed government to fail for the benefit of the country.

#71 GOOGLE RON PAUL

GOOGLE RON PAUL

    fleet-footed poster

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,973 posts

Posted 11 December 2012 - 08:25 AM

it's 8:30 in the morning and you're already higher than a goddamn kite

e: props though for abandoning the whole "fairtax isn't regressive as all hell" thing and treading on to "what's wrong with regressivity anyway?" argument

#72 Cat

Cat

    Terminally bored

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,054 posts

Posted 11 December 2012 - 09:34 AM

Yes of course they should.

#73 twylyght

twylyght

    The picture of how I care

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,328 posts

Posted 11 December 2012 - 04:04 PM

it's 8:30 in the morning and you're already higher than a goddamn kite

e: props though for abandoning the whole "fairtax isn't regressive as all hell" thing and treading on to "what's wrong with regressivity anyway?" argument


feel free to engage any particular point. the whole "regressive = less of more taxing" is a false premise. it's no wonder that people like you think that a smaller increase in spending equals a cut

#74 GOOGLE RON PAUL

GOOGLE RON PAUL

    fleet-footed poster

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,973 posts

Posted 11 December 2012 - 07:35 PM

what fuging point are you trying to make? how many times have you brought up ricki lake? it's almost as if you've been spewing lolbertarian talking points verbatim without actually attempting to check the veracity of "your" (by that i mean talk radio's) claims; expecting me to take neil boortz's claims seriously. lol.

#75 twylyght

twylyght

    The picture of how I care

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,328 posts

Posted 12 December 2012 - 03:19 AM

what fuging point are you trying to make? how many times have you brought up ricki lake? it's almost as if you've been spewing lolbertarian talking points verbatim without actually attempting to check the veracity of "your" (by that i mean talk radio's) claims; expecting me to take neil boortz's claims seriously. lol.


I can explain it to you. I can't understand it for you.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com - IP Content Design by Joshua Tree / TitansReport.