Skip to comments.I need some facts concerning poverty and the Bush tax cut
Posted on 12/01/2004 6:04:00 PM PST by OklaRancher
I belong to a Methodist Church in a rural area with a small congretion of 30 or so. This past Sunday the Pastor started his sermon by saying how much good the Bush tax cut could have done if it had been used to alleviate poverty.
While I don't have hard facts in front of me at the moment, I hope that you get what your looking for and set your pastor straight.
Just tell him you gave part of your tax cut as tithing to the church instead of letting the government fund the ACLU, National Endowment for the Arts (cross in urine), and planned parenthood.
If your pastor believes that more taxes equals giving to the poor, ask him how much of his income above the required amount he gives to the government. Liberals are so screwed up. They actually believe that taxes equal charitable giving. This is why the states that are taxed the highest (all blue) have the LOWEST per capita giving despite having 50 million FEWER adults.
The Methodist Church has been taken over by liberals who don't even bother to read the bible. Find a good Southern Baptist church and go there.
We've spent 4-6 trillion dollars in the "war on poverty" in the past 40 years. At what point do you accept that a transfer of wealth doesn't work.
It's the old "give a man a fish........."
Some people will be poor even if given a million dollars. There will just be a short period in their life that they weren't poor.
You might want to remind the pastor that taking care of the poor is the moral responsibility of (properly led)Christians as individuals, not the Government.
In any well functioning economy the gap between rich and poor will always be getting larger as there will always be people with zero.
You're going to have a very tough time disputing what the preacher says...However; when you find out his/her views on queer preachers and marriage, Israel, salvation, etc.,, you probably would have walked out anyway...
i was told once that for every dollar the USG spends (taxes) the private sector would turn that dollar over 5 to 7 times. i think there is some truth to this but not sure of exact numbers
Ask him how much LBJs Great Society has spent on stamping out poverty and why it's been such a failure.
The tax cut will alleviate more poverty the way it's being worked now than if double the amount had been tendered to the poor in the form of handouts.
I don`t have any idea the theology of the church you attend but if this is an issue of more pressing concern than salvation through Jesus it may be time to find another place of worship.
As far as your search for facts, this web page; http://www.econ.umn.edu/~bplatt/Rational/TaxCuts.htm gives some factual information directly related to the Bush tax cuts as well as a tax chart showing who got what cut and how they were effected economically. A quote from the page being
"Bear in mind that this is actual historical data coming straight from the 1040 forms that you and I submit - we aren't just talking about what happened "in theory," but what actually happened. Notice that every taxpayer earning less than $200,000 dollars received a tax cut, effectively giving them between a 1.4% to 2.6% raise in income. Remarkably, the only people seeing savings of 2% or more are those earning less than $20,000. The idea that the tax cut only helped the rich is complete falsehood."
Hopefully this'll help in your search.
in order for government to end poverty, they must hire four people to oversee the spending, one to collect, one to verify collection, one to verify distribution and one to distribute. for those government employees, poverty ends. unfortunately, the government does not earn money, but must take it from taxpayers. these taxpayers if not supporting government, would be supporting charities that actually would help the poor.
you will not change your pastor's mind... you are better off in another church.
Rodney King is a prime example. He got millions after his nationally televised role as an LAPD piñata, but pissed it all away and wound up back in jail inside of two years. Poverty isn't a financial circumstance, it's a state of mind.
Those are good ones. Private charity is simply far more effective that government spending:
"...if an individual gives a dollar to charity, he should be able to reduce his tax liability by a dollar. Since current federal welfare spending is equivalent to 41 percent of the revenue generated from personal income taxes (for all major means-tested programs), the credit could be capped at 41 percent of tax liability.
Private charities are able to individualize their approach to the circumstances of poor people in ways that governments can never do. For example, private charities may reduce or withhold benefits if a recipient does not change his or her behavior. Private charities are much more likely than government programs to offer counseling and one-on-one follow-up rather than simply providing a check. "
"Private charities are also much better able to target assistance to those who really need help. Because eligibility requirements for government welfare programs are arbitrary and cannot be changed to fit individual circumstances, many people in genuine need do not receive assistance, while benefits often go to people who do not really need them. More than 40 percent of all families living below the poverty level receive no government assistance. Yet, more than half of the families receiving means- tested benefits are not poor. Thus, a student may receive food stamps, while a homeless man with no mailing address goes without. Private charities are not bound by such bureaucratic restrictions."
"In 1965, 70 cents of every dollar spent by the government to fight poverty went directly to poor people. Today, 70 cents of every dollar goes not to poor people, but to government bureaucrats and others who serve the poor. Few private charities have the bureaucratic overhead and inefficiency of government programs."
Read the whole thing at the Cato institute website. Its a congressional testimony.
No sorry that's wrong, they just let us keep more of our money already earned.
Matthew 26:11 "26:11 For ye have the poor always with you; but me ye have not always."
Here is Tony Campolo (Kerry voting Christian) accompanying Bill Clinton out of Ron Brown's funeral. Tony advocates socialism at the cost of baby-slaughter and Christian persecution.
I think the key in dealing with problems like this if realizing where the church stands on the inerrancy of Scripture. Usually those denominations or branches of denominations which do not hold to the inspiration of Scripture by the Holy Spirit, are the ones who then theink it is okay to interpret things they way they want, rather than the intent of the Author. A greater issue than your pastor souting off without facts on a politiacl issue, is that it might be indicative of how he handles other issues. Spiritual matters are too important to allow to rest on some preacher's opinion.
The inerrancy of Scripture just mans that the Holy Spirit inspired the original authors, and that God got written what He wanted written. The copies we have today are very good, and the studying of the texts shows they are the best attested documents in history.
What this means is, if it really was God Who was speaking, and if we really have what God wants us to know, there is an accountability. He says lying is wrong, so spouting an opinion on politics which is not based on fact, would be a sin to Him. If the pastor twists other areas of Scripture to allow for homosexuality, for abortion, etc., God is not pleased.
Discernment on alot of issues comes from one's understanding of inerrancy. Where do we get truth?
I used to be a UM pastor, and even was an associate to one of the most liberal senior pastors in a liberal conference! My tenure with him was the beginning of my life as a conservative, as I saw his beliefs as bankrupt and dishonest and basically a grab for power.
First of all, pastors are poor economists. You'll see that whenever you see the resolutions passed by your Annual Conference (as well as the governing bodies of most "old line" denominations). Don't expect to actually argue economics with him/her. You begin by telling him/her that you're going to use "Scripture, Reason, Tradition and Experience" in your discussions. Even they you're fighting 4 years of seminary liberal indoctrination.
Second, you might remind the pastor of John Wesley's advice ("Standard Sermons", as I recall) of "Earn all you can, save all you can, that you might give all that you can." I think this is the definitive statement of conservative charity. It doesn't mention "tax all you can that you can send all the welfare checks you can."
Third, John Wesley didn't advocate taxation for the support of the poor. Wesley's ministries, along with those of early Methodists, never turned to the Church of England or the Crown to address the very distressing social and economic problems of the era. Instead they used religious beliefs, along with limited acts of charity, to change the behavior of those in poverty, and thus bring them out of poverty.
In my 43 years on earth, the United Methodist's liberal voices (the ones you hear at Annual and General conferences) have never had a president that they thought was liberal enough. Their idea of social change (unlike Wesley) is to stay in their upscale NYCity headquarters, hang with the United Nations crowd, and demand that governments do something with other people's taxes.
It's impossible to quantify how Bush's tax cuts have impacted the poor. What we know is that this country had the worst stock market crash in history, followed by a war caused by the worst attack on the USA in our history, and we barely had a recession. My opinion is that Bush's tax cuts, along with low interest rates, greatly softened the blow. To the extent that wealthy people were able to resume their charitable acts sooner, the poor most certainly were the beneficiaries.
You beat me to it. Post#3 suggested a hope to "set your pastor straight" but I've never known any pastor to ever be 'set straight' by a parishioner. OTOH, fellow believers may be another story...
Tony Campolo and Bill Clinton are good buds.
God is not a Southerner, either. We have pretty good Evangelical churches in the North, too.
If your Methodist minister is like mine there are no facts in existence that will ever sway them from there liberal position. I have tried on Kerry, Iraq, Israel, Boy Scouting, etc. After the election I then got to listen to the sermons on grieving and rightwing christian zealots. Back to your question; ask their definition of poverty and expand it to include morals. Good results with it so far. I haven't been excommunicated.
Maybe they never tried. Either make the effort to set the pastor straight, or find a new parish to attend.
Stay away from preachers that use the pulpit for political commentary. Besides, your pastor is a moron. The tax cut improved the economy and the poor are the first to be hurt by economic decline.
Can't hurt to try and change the pastor's views. I agree, if one can't make the effort to get their views known to the pastor, it's time to move on. One of the things the Lord encourages is a dialogue between you and Him. If your pastor can't feel that way, go somewhere where your voice can be heard freely.
"The greatest tyrannies are always perpetrated in the name of the noblest causes." ~Thomas Paine.
Your pastor is an unmitigated idiot and should be chased out of the parish.
First, he is directly contradicting God's will by advocating that the government should reverse our "Free Will" by forcefull redistributing income to the poverty striken.
By all accounts such charity should come from the Church, voluntarily, from it's members. They would have more money to do so via George Bush's tax cuts, so really, GW has already helped to alleviate poverty in the sense that God would have done so. In doing so, GW is permitting God's children to work to that end via free will as opposed to confiscatory policy of a souless governing force.
It is through this free will that we serve the Lord and in doing so earn our place in heaven.
Your pastor's implication would rob us all of free will, and deprive us from earing that place in heaven, effectively condemning us to damnation in the worst case scenario.
My wife's final words are that your pastor is in no way a real pastor, but a socialist advocating government over God. Government will come to the rescue, and lead all the lost children to the land of milk and honey and limitless entitlements. Whatever his position is, it is in no way based upon biblical teachings. It's a poorly disguised attempt from someone who really doesn't care about what the bible has to say so much as pushing a political position.
So anyway, welcome to FR. I needed to vent, so thanks for introducing me to your pastor...
A agree. Lately I have taken up the sport of pondering the obvious such as the saying, "The Rich get Richer."
People who are good at making, saving and investing money usually stay that way and/or get better at it as they go along. The same goes for those who are not and do not.
I can sum it up this way..............
About 68 cents of every dollar spent by the U.S. government goes to social welfare.
Less than twenty cents goes to Defense.
50% of the people in this nation pay ZERO income taxes.
The "rich" and the middle class get screwed in this country. The "poor" have NEVER had it better, as the wealth transfer process is pushing Marxist type boundaries in America.
Your pastor is nuts. You did right to walk out. I did the same thing when my priest in my Catholic church paraphrased the same crap about four years ago.
If you need actual/offical data, please send me a private email.
The statistics are grossly slanted. A huge portion of the people in poverty are illegal immigrants and the children of single parents.
If you graduate from high school, don't have kids until you are married and stay married your chances of not living in poverty are tremendously elevated.
Higher taxes may hurt the rich but they hurt those trying to break out of poverty even more.
For ye have the poor with you always, and whensoever ye will ye may do them good: but me ye have not always.
And the "go to bed hungry" stat you hear, well if Trump is too lazy to ring for a servant to fetch him a sandwich and he goes to be hungry BY CHOICE, that how the "milions go to bed hungry" stat is counted.
I'm not for people to be in misery or go hungry, but a lot of the liberal "guilt trip" they try and lay on us is bogus.
Here's what a Lutheran Minister has to say on the subject.
By the way, my late grandfather was a Methodist minister, and I believe he'd roll over in his grave if he saw what has become of the church today. Anyway:
Thursday, April 10, 2003
Tax Cuts Benefit Lowest Income Workers
by Joe Watkins
President Bushs proposal to create jobs and stimulate economic growth is the perfect remedy to create jobs and fix the ailing economy. Contrary to what the Democrat mythmakers continue to say the Presidents tax cut benefits lower income families the most. Dont believe it? Check out the facts.
A recent report by the Treasury Department noted that workers earning under $30,000 a year will see an average 17% cut in their taxes. In contrast, those making over $100,000 a year would see their taxes cut an average 11%. Lower income workers will see a larger percentage of their wages returned to them than higher wage earners.
There is more good news, who benefits the most from President Bushs proposal to eliminate the dividend tax cut - seniors living on fixed incomes. Roughly half of the money put back into taxpayers pockets by the dividend tax cut will go to seniors who rely on dividend income as a steady source of retirement income. Again, contrary to the Democrat mythmakers claims, these are not rich Americans. Over 40% of the taxpayers that will benefit from eliminating the double tax on dividends earn less than $50,000 a year.
Under President Bushs jobs and growth plan, families with income under $50,000 will pay a smaller share of the nations total income tax burden than they do today, while those making over $100,000 a year will see their share increase to over 73% of the total income tax burden. While higher wage earners will see their taxes cut they will continue to carry the greatest tax burden for our nation.
This President understands that when government cuts taxes, all Americans benefit. Consumer confidence grows because people have more cash on hand to invest and spend. Businesses benefit from increased consumer spending, and are then able to increase their capital investment, which in turn creates more jobs. Thats not "trickle down" that is trickle up - consumers who have more of their own earnings spend more and fuel economic growth.
For those who need further proof of the soundness of the Presidents plan there is the evidence of history. In the last forty years, the reduction of taxes has specifically resulted in a significant rise in the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), a drop in the rate of unemployment and a rise in federal revenues. This was true of both the Kennedy and Reagan tax cuts. The Bush tax package will do the same for jobs and growth.
His plan includes tax relief that works for working families like reducing the marriage tax penalty, increasing the child tax credit, and accelerating already enacted rate reductions. These are right for the average taxpayer because it puts more money in their pocket and they are the right remedies for the overall economy because they spur consumer spending, thus boosting the economic recovery. Plainly put, President Bush is on our side.
If only the Kerry Edwards supporters would do two things, stop being hypocritres and act like Americans, there wouildn't be any poverty in the US.
The definition of poor has changed.
As someone who became fatherless in the depression I know what poor means. It was a struggle for food,clothing,and shelter and we went without a telephone until 1953.
Poor today means no cable,no computer,no summer camp,neo cell phone,and no "in" wardrobe or jewelry.
It boggles the mind.
Your pastor has probably adopted a social justice interpretation of the bible. This is a big problem. Smoke him out by asking if man can bring God's kingdom here on earth BEFORE Christ returns. Social justice folks think its their role to bring the kingdom ahead of Jesus. This is a very dangerous theology, not to mention flat out wrong.
Or if Kerry had been elected, "He is an enemy of the State."
"For ye have the poor with you always, and whensoever ye will ye may do them good: but me ye have not always"
Thats ridiculous, insofar as it insinuates that we should not care for the poor. The Bible clearly states that giving to the needy is extremely important. It also has plently of examples of the corroption that power brings. Charity is one of the great christian virtues. Government is the enemy of charity because it wastes money that would have been better spent and lulls people into thinking that they have no personal responsobility to alleviate suffering.
People who are saying that the liberal pastor will not listen to reason probably haven't spent a moment of their life talking reasonably to a liberal. Don't have so little faith in the ability of a person to see the light. People do, and they do because the rest of us don't give up. To assume you can't win someone over is to lose.
On the other hand, liberal churches rarely have much respect for the bible, so when it comes to the Christian growth of the poster, it may be good to find a different church.
Simply put, your preacher is evil liar. Go elsewhere.
Ask him if he has any idea of how much the federal government and the state governments give in "Cash and Noncash Benefits for Persons With Limited Income". Persons with limited incomes are the "poor".
See if he comes anywhere near the $437 billion (year 2000).
When you ask him, have in your pocket Table No. 540. Cash and Noncash Benefits for Persons With Limited Income:
1999 and 2000 from the Statistical Abstract of the United States, put out by the Census Bureau. You can find it at:
Then ask him how much charities give to the poor. Have in your pocket a copy of Table No. 581 (scroll down on the linked page) Private Philanthropy Funds by Source and Allocation: 1990 to 2002 and show him how much of the over $200 billion in charitable contributions go the the poor.
Then tell him to STFU.
You must have flown to Europe since Sunday. With a sign up date of 12/2/04. Congretion=congregation, right?
Welcome to FR.