Posted on 01/05/2014 6:44:01 AM PST by Innovative
Is it a sin to be rich?
Not if your resources are used to help others and create jobs.
If you listen to most of the discussions of income inequality, it certainly seems like affluence itself is a crime. We hear increasing calls for higher taxes on the wealthy and other policies designed to redistribute income.
We also need wealthy Americans to create those jobs. Start-ups in ventures that produce middle-class jobs require investments by those willing and able to take risks. Over the last five years, according to the Economist magazine, those start-ups have accounted for almost all of the net increase in new American jobs paying at least middle-class salaries.
(Excerpt) Read more at providencejournal.com ...
Related:
Democrats Continue Class Warfare Rhetoric
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3108522/posts?page=1
The corrolary is the equally idiotic theory that money is bad, so make the good poor bad by spoiling them with free money.
Our society is based in corruption of both rich and poor. Hence just enough money is used to keep the poor poor... a sort of death camp.
Its a sin to be rich if you support leftist bastards like Obama who work to limit opportunities for others to become so through crony capitalism.
All I can add to the conversation is I’ve been poor and I’ve been rich—and rich is better—LOL!
Poor people don’t hire anyone.
But it should be a sin to write 40 bad books in one year. As Truman Capote once said about a different author: that ain’t writing, that’s typing!
The Pope can lead by example. He can have the garage sale of all garage sales dispensing of all those valuable trinkets that wealthy productive capitalists from all over the world have sent over the years to the Vatican. He can feed the hungry , house the homeless, do whatever he wants to materially help the poor.
“Poor people don’t hire anyone.”
Exactly.
Just found a great speech by Ronald Reagan:
“Well, I would suggest that no one should have a vested interest in poverty or dependency, that these tragedies must never be looked at as a source of votes for politicians or paychecks for bureaucrats. They are blights on our society that we must work to eliminate, not institutionalize.
Now, there are those who will always require help from the rest of us on a permanent basis, and we’ll provide that help. To those with temporary need, we should have programs that are aimed at making them self-sufficient as soon as possible. How can limited government and fiscal restraint be equated with lack of compassion for the poor? How can a tax break that puts a little more money in the weekly paychecks of working people be seen as an attack on the needy?”
http://reagan2020.us/speeches/The_Agenda_is_Victory.asp
As the parable said, who has much or made much, in him much shall be trusted and given.
Obama Pollster To Media: Stop Reporting Polls
January 4, 2014 by B. Christopher Agee
http://www.westernjournalism.com/category/news/
Tax breaks are great and they are a small part of spurring job creation but it doesn’t have anything to do with the utter stupidity of FReepers suggesting that the poor should be deported and similar crap.
Self righteous outrage is a poor cover for cowardice.
Yep. The more the insanity the more costly are the grave diggers. Obama keeps paying them to burry himself with the rest of liberal automatons, but it has driven the price up... the process pulls and tugs.
If you get rid of “the rich”, everyone will be euquallhy poor — except the “ruling political class”, of course.
***********
Libs love to portray and stereotype wealthy people as being greedy, unworthy beneficiaries of ill gotten gains while they cast the poor as always being virtuous and suffering from misfortune at the hands of others. This convenient dichotomy is usually the rationale for more spending and bigger government. Funny how all the liberal do-good programs always have the side benefit of employing liberals in the political class who run these programs.
I am so tired of hearing of the poor poor poor. Exactly whom is poor? Today it has become anyone who is either not rich or believes they are poor.
In the early 70s I took a trip to San Diego and had occasion to look over at Tijuana. People were living in shipping containers, there was little sanitation, and no government benefits. My comment then was anyone on welfare in Newark who complains about their lot in life should be sent here and see just how poor poor is. Frankly, this was not the worse place to be either, there were other places where being poor was worse but this is what I saw at that time.
Poor is not having a car, TV, Cellphone and other goodies provided by the state. Poor is having NOTHING. Saying one is poor does not mean they need to have the exact goodies other people have. That is called envy or jealousy. Do I feel we need to help the poor, of course. Do I feel we need to provide things beyond the basic needs: NO.
Off soap box
The problem is serving Mammon. The richest man in the world opening a Bible to read is no more thinking of money and blinded in sin by leisure. He is pretty much “poor”. Giving free stuff to the poor is not so good. It is like serving a steak to a life long Hindu vegan, it can kill them.
Great quote. Thanks for sending.
Dependence is never a good thing, unless you’re a Democrat who can buy votes by institutionalizing social problems.
Eli Broad sucks off the hind tit of government facilitated "sustainable development." Were it not for crooked enviro scams to reduce the cost of his land purchases while inflating the cost of anything else, he wouldn't be rich, and has admitted as much. RINO Riordan made his money as a consolidator doing LBOs, which isn't exactly rags-to-riches entrepreneurialsim either. Neither one of these two comes even close to a David Packard or Steve Jobs.
By feeding the “poor” with “just enough money,” you also remove an incentive to join the race for money and power. By taxing the “near-rich,”you keep them from becoming rich. Best way I can think of to maintain the status quo. The feminists have made marriage unnecessary by providing “just enough” sex, removing a major incentive to males to get enough scratch to marry and raise a family.
Broad Foundation ‘trained’ superintendents are hell bent on destroying public tax payer funded schools and their elected, therefore accountable, school boards. Motive is profit, not good education for the poor or anyone else.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.