|
|
|
|
|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Barack Obama = Karl Marx - 10/21/2008 4:41:16 PM
|
|
|
stamper_ben
Posts: 8741
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lone Star State
Status: offline
|
quote:
Indeed, Marx’s ideal socialist state ultimately would not include progressive taxation at all. No. There's no need for any taxation when it is all owned by the State.
_____________________________
We will be known as His by the love we show one another.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Barack Obama = Karl Marx - 10/21/2008 4:52:20 PM
|
|
|
Lapidoth
Posts: 4461
Joined: 4/13/2005
From: OKLAHOMA
Status: offline
|
Socialist Barney Frank:
quote:
I think at this point, there needs to be an immediate increase in spending, and I think this is a time when deficit fear has to take a second, uh, a second seat. I do think this is the time for a very important kind of dose of [unintelligible]. Yes, I think later on, there should be tax increases. Speaking personally, I think there are a lot of rich people out there who we can tax at a point down the road to recover some of this money.
VIDEO
quote:
It is amazing how Marxisant radical Barack Obama gets away with campaigning on how he will give a tax break to 95% of Americans when his record shows that he has voted for tax increases 300 times as a state senator and 94 times as a US Senator.
But, he’s not alone.
Most Democrats believe in “spreading the wealth around.”
_____________________________
Why does He keep quoting Torah? Doesn't He know He's about to abolish it?
http://www.tedpearce.com/Videos/TheForgottenpeople.html
BARUCH HABA BASHEM YAHUAH
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Barack Obama = Karl Marx - 10/21/2008 5:08:28 PM
|
|
|
henny
Posts: 1011
Joined: 4/15/2005
From: MN
Status: offline
|
quote:
The communist manifesto say; take from those according to their wealth, and give to others according to their need.
No it doesn't say this.
As I said earlier, in a true socialist state wealth would ideally not exist at all. Thus no one could be wealthy and taxation would be absent entirely.
The correct quote is,
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need"
This is a far cry more radical than your run of the mill progressive tax.
_____________________________
If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable.
THEY MUST BE PUT TO DEATH; their blood will be on their own heads -Leviticus 20:13
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Barack Obama = Karl Marx - 10/21/2008 5:25:18 PM
|
|
|
Psalms274
Posts: 3152
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: henny
quote:
The communist manifesto say; take from those according to their wealth, and give to others according to their need.
No it doesn't say this.
As I said earlier, in a true socialist state wealth would ideally not exist at all. Thus no one could be wealthy and taxation would be absent entirely.
The correct quote is,
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need"
This is a far cry more radical than your run of the mill progressive tax.
Your post is kinda like reading a scripture from KJV and saying, "that's not what it says ... it says ..." then giving the same scripture in the NLT. 
Each according to his ability (to create wealth), to each according to his need (in reference to wealth).
_____________________________
I pray that you, being rooted and established in love, may have power, together with all the saints, to grasp how wide and long and high and deep is the love of Christ.
http://piswa.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Barack Obama = Karl Marx - 10/21/2008 5:35:11 PM
|
|
|
Psalms274
Posts: 3152
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: mapachito13
quote:
ORIGINAL: rcjames
For sure he has the Karr Marx playbook in his head.
The communist manifesto say; take from those according to their wealth, and give to others according to their need.
Obama modernized it and says, "Distribution of wealth"!
Dear Lord save us now.
Thanks
RC
How did they get Acts 4:35 into the Communist Manifesto?
"They used to lay them at the feet of the apostles to be distributed to everyone according to his need."
The early Christians sound too socialistic for my taste. I'm going to return to Judaism where I can make as much money as I want as a sign of God's blessing! 
The government was not involved in the distribution of money in the early church as referenced by Acts 4:35. That was the Holy Spirit at work within the church. Big difference.
2 Cor. 9:7 states, "Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver." God's desire is for us too be individually responsible for the wealth He gives us ... and to use it to further His Kingdom, which includes aiding the widows, orphans and the poor. When the Government steps in to do the job, not only is it done poorly, but we have a tendency to sit back and let the Government do our job. It takes away from our personal responsibility, and from our chance at worship through our giving. It is also a very poor use of our money in that the Government is notorious for wasteful spending ... and we are charged to be good stewards with what He gives us.
In short, it is a lazy way to mistakenly state we have done our duty ... when the truth is paying taxes to Caesar is a completely different responsibility than giving to God's Kingdom. Jesus made that very clear in Matthew 22.
_____________________________
I pray that you, being rooted and established in love, may have power, together with all the saints, to grasp how wide and long and high and deep is the love of Christ.
http://piswa.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Barack Obama = Karl Marx - 10/21/2008 5:58:31 PM
|
|
|
rcjames
Posts: 6542
Joined: 7/15/2005
From: Oklahoma
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Psalms274
The government was not involved in the distribution of money in the early church as referenced by Acts 4:35. That was the Holy Spirit at work within the church. Big difference.
I was under the impression that the Obama kool-Aid drinkers thought that Obama was the Holy Spirit or the Meeeiah.
I agree that he is definately spirit driven, but not driven from the Holy side of things.
Thanks
RC
_____________________________
Just a country Preacher's humble opinion
Read the first chapter of my latest book here;
http://www.deliveranceofsara.com
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Barack Obama = Karl Marx - 10/21/2008 6:00:30 PM
|
|
|
rcjames
Posts: 6542
Joined: 7/15/2005
From: Oklahoma
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Psalms274
The government was not involved in the distribution of money in the early church as referenced by Acts 4:35. That was the Holy Spirit at work within the church. Big difference.
Do not the Obama Kool-Aid drinkers believe that he is the Holy Spirit or the Messiah?
I agree that he is spirit driven, but not driven from the Holy side of things.
Thanks
RC
_____________________________
Just a country Preacher's humble opinion
Read the first chapter of my latest book here;
http://www.deliveranceofsara.com
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Barack Obama = Karl Marx - 10/21/2008 6:35:27 PM
|
|
|
henny
Posts: 1011
Joined: 4/15/2005
From: MN
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Psalms274
Your post is kinda like reading a scripture from KJV and saying, "that's not what it says ... it says ..." then giving the same scripture in the NLT.
Each according to his ability (to create wealth), to each according to his need (in reference to wealth).
No, because the original quote allows for personal wealth (and more importantly, personal ownership) while the corrected quote doesn't. It's a big difference, as the first quote makes it seem as if socialism is nothing more than taxing the rich to give to the poor. As the actual quote demonstrates, however, it's not a matter of taxing the rich to give to the poor, as there would be no personal ownership (as far as the mode/means of production are concerned), no large opportunity to amass personal wealth or property, and thus nothing to tax in an ideal socialist state. Everyone would simply work to the fullest of their ability, just as everyone would receive (in payment for this work) no more than what they needed in return -a more or less equal amount. So you couldn't "take from those according to their wealth," as everyone would have the same amount of wealth to begin with, just as any business or place of work you were employed at would not be owned by yourself, but rather would be owned collectively by everyone one.
If the first quote were true (take from those according to their wealth, and give to those according to their need), Marx would never have had to reinvent socialism at all. He would have in stead just written a "Let's increase taxes on the Rich Manifesto," but as I said that was not enough for him as he did not see the mere implementation of a progressive tax system as ideally socialist.
< Message edited by henny -- 10/21/2008 7:02:47 PM >
_____________________________
If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable.
THEY MUST BE PUT TO DEATH; their blood will be on their own heads -Leviticus 20:13
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Barack Obama = Karl Marx - 10/21/2008 6:50:05 PM
|
|
|
okrox
Posts: 124
Joined: 4/28/2005
Status: offline
|
And all that believed were together, and had all things common; And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need. (Acts 2:44-45)
...
Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, and laid them down at the apostles' feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need. (Acts 4:34-35)
********
Interesting that "socialism" is a fightin' word. I'm not a socialist, myself, basically for purely pragmatic and logistical reasons. But it's interesting that a discussion about money and stuff produces such hysteria.
Just a comment.
Carry on.
_____________________________
Redeeming love has been my theme, and shall be 'til I die.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Barack Obama = Karl Marx - 10/21/2008 6:52:03 PM
|
|
|
relady
Posts: 1134
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Greater St. Louis Metro
Status: offline
|
quote:
We've had a democrat controlled legislature for the past two years. Where are the changes they promised? Obstructed because they don't have enough of a majority - yet - to enact anything without much weeping, wailing and gnashing of Republican teeth.
quote:
Do not the Obama Kool-Aid drinkers believe that he is the Holy Spirit or the Messiah? This is just insulting.
quote:
But it's interesting that a discussion about money and stuff produces such hysteria. Yes, it is isn't it? From the people who should be LEAST concerned with money and stuff comes most amazing amount of concern that something of THEIRS might be taken to benefit someone they find unworthy of such benefit. Very Christian indeed.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Barack Obama = Karl Marx - 10/21/2008 8:36:01 PM
|
|
|
TheosCentric
Posts: 2393
Joined: 2/26/2006
Status: offline
|
Considering the fact that the person who started this thread would be one of the recipients of the wealth makes the whole thing ironic, does it not?
_____________________________
God uses our bad will to accomplish His good will. - R.C. Sproul
Blog|Facebook|Twitter
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Barack Obama = Karl Marx - 10/21/2008 8:50:30 PM
|
|
|
stamper_ben
Posts: 8741
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lone Star State
Status: offline
|
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need"
If my ability is to create wealth, and your need is that you need some of that wealth, then it fits perfectly into what Obama said.
_____________________________
We will be known as His by the love we show one another.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Barack Obama = Karl Marx - 10/21/2008 8:57:05 PM
|
|
|
shemaromans
Posts: 2224
Joined: 3/30/2007
Status: offline
|
Since we're posting scripture...
...But we urge you, brothers, to do this more and more, 11and to aspire to live quietly, and to mind your own affairs, and to work with your hands, as we instructed you, 12so that you may walk properly before outsiders and be dependent on no one.
1 Thessalonians 4:10-12
9It was not because we do not have that right, but to give you in ourselves an example to imitate. 10For even when we were with you, we would give you this command: If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat. 11For we hear that some among you walk in idleness, not busy at work, but busybodies. 12Now such persons we command and encourage in the Lord Jesus Christ to do their work quietly and to earn their own living.
2 Thessalonians 3:9-12
1You then, my child, be strengthened by the grace that is in Christ Jesus, 2and what you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also. 3 Share in suffering as a good soldier of Christ Jesus. 4No soldier gets entangled in civilian pursuits, since his aim is to please the one who enlisted him. 5 An athlete is not crowned unless he competes according to the rules. 6It is the hard-working farmer who ought to have the first share of the crops. 7Think over what I say, for the Lord will give you understanding in everything.
2 Timothy 2:1-7
28Let the thief no longer steal, but rather let him labor, doing honest work with his own hands, so that he may have something to share with anyone in need.
Ephesians 4:28
_____________________________
"But as for me, it is good to be near God." Psalm 73:28
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Barack Obama = Karl Marx - 10/27/2008 10:47:57 PM
|
|
|
angkol
Posts: 2
Joined: 10/27/2008
Status: offline
|
"'Need' now means wanting someone else's money. 'Greed' means wanting to keep your own. 'Compassion' is when a politician arranges the transfer." -- Joseph Sobran
What happened to the American Dream? Working hard to pull yourself up by your boot straps? My grandparents were poor coal mining immigrants in central PA. They worked long, hard hours to better their lives. My parents learned trades. I went to college and will be getting a masters degree soon.
Just for the record, dispite household annual income - over $100,000 - my family is living paycheck to paycheck. Driving to work, paying for my education, and childcare are not free.
I have been working 60 hour weeks, going to graduate school part-time. I received a $10,000 raise this year for my hard efforts. Now, tell me why someone who is "poor" - like my grandparents were - should receive more of MY money which is taken from me forcefully? Even if I manage to not move into a higher tax bracket, the government is already receiving more money because I'm earning more. Why should I be penalized further while the lazy receive my money?
And before you call me greedy or incompasionate - I have no issue with a system of some basic assistance programs for those truely in need. And I currently donate 3% of my paycheck directly to charity. And that's in addition to other charities to which I donate and my local church.
If the government takes more of MY MONEY, our local United Way and my church will be losing out on donations from me. If I know that I'll move into another tax bracket next year if I receive another good raise, why should I work hard this year at all? Maybe I should just quit, sit on my rear and collect. Then who will Obama tax?
A friend of mine and 11 of his co-workers was just laid of from a company of about 50 employees. They were told that the company hopes to rehire them in spring. Now, if Obama is elected, and this small business has to pay higher taxes, what are the chances of those 12 men being hired back? What are the chances of more of them being laid off?
Yes, Barack said small business is exempt. What does that mean? Has he defined small business? 50 employees isn't tiny. And if the company is owned by one man, the owner "income" will be over $250,000 because it goes by the business in general. If the company is a corporation, he's defintily getting higher taxes.
If Barack requires this company to now pay for health care for the remaining 40 employees, there's no way they'll be able to afford to hire the other 12 back.
If Barack increases the company's tax rate, what's to keep the owner from saying "Mexico is looking better and better for our new location."
If everyone is so against how the government has been running things, why in the world would you vote to make government bigger?????
This has been tried before. It's called a Welfare State, and it doesn't work.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Barack Obama = Karl Marx - 10/27/2008 11:06:47 PM
|
|
|
angkol
Posts: 2
Joined: 10/27/2008
Status: offline
|
A Democracy is Temporary
At about the time our original 13 states adopted their new constitution, in the year 1787, Alexander Tyler (a Scottish history professor at The University of Edinborough) had this to say about "The Fall of The Athenian Republic" some 2,000 years prior.
A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, (which is) always followed by a dictatorship."
"The average age of the worlds greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence:
From Bondage to spiritual faith;
From spiritual faith to great courage;
From courage to liberty;
From liberty to abundance;
From abundance to complacency;
From complacency to apathy;
From apathy to dependence;
From dependence back into bondage."
Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University School of Law, St. Paul, Minnesota, points out some interesting facts concerning a recent Presidential election:
Counties won:
Gore = 677 Bush = 2434
Population of counties won by:
Gore=127 million Bush=143 million
Square miles of land won by:
Gore=580,134 Bush=2,427,039
States won by:
Gore=19 Bush=29
Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by:
Gore=13.2 Bush=2.1
Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory Bush won was mostly the land owned by the tax-paying citizens of this great country. Gore's territory encompassed those citizens living in government-owned tenements and living off government welfare..."
Olson believes the U.S. is now somewhere between the "apathy" and "complacency" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy; with some 40 percent of the nation's population already having reached the "governmental dependency" phase
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Barack Obama = Karl Marx - 10/27/2008 11:42:02 PM
|
|
|
ManimalX
Posts: 2068
Joined: 10/25/2005
Status: offline
|
angkol,
That was fascinating, thank you for the history lesson. I think Dennis Prager read this whole piece from Alexander Tyler on the air. I missed who he was quoting haven't taken the time to figure it out. I am glad you satisfied my curiosity.
_____________________________
"But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a roar, and the heavenly bodies will be burned up and dissolved, and the earth and the works that are done on it will be exposed." - 2nd Peter 3:10
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Barack Obama = Karl Marx - 10/28/2008 1:32:47 PM
|
|
|
NoShow
Posts: 542
Joined: 5/10/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
From each according to his ability, to each according to his need
It only works when the latter portion is followed. If people truly only take according to their "need". Once "need" gets replaced by "want", the whole thing falls apart.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Barack Obama = Karl Marx - 10/28/2008 2:02:51 PM
|
|
|
Peter_Gunn
Posts: 1414
Joined: 6/12/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: NoShow
Acts 4:34 "Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold"
The Believers brought forth from their own posessions, it doesn't say that they went to those that had more, took the excess from them and laid them at the apostle's feet.
So the question is what do YOU posession that you can sell, to provide for those in need; not what can you point out that someone else has.
Which verse says, "And lo, a gun was heldeth to their heads and they forkedeth over all they had"?
When I see that verse, I'll know that forced income redistribution is Biblical.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Barack Obama = Karl Marx - 10/28/2008 3:18:58 PM
|
|
|
ken1906_4
Posts: 132
Joined: 10/6/2006
From: Maryland
Status: offline
|
quote:
I've said it before but I'll say it again: TAXING WITH ANY OTHER RATE THAN A FLAT TAX (I.E. A PROGRESSIVE TAX RATE) IS NOT SOCIALISM. We've had unequal tax rates based on income for a good portion of this country's history. Indeed, if it were true that this alone makes you a socialist then McCain, Bush, Clinton, and even Reagen would all be socialists.
Well, the Earned Income Credit tax is Socialistic in nature. This policy was signed by Ronald Reagan. So can we call him a socialist?
Social security is socialistic in nature. So is Medicare and of course I already mentioned Education and the owning of financial institutions in another posts.
_____________________________
"Choosing between Republicans and Democrats is like choosing between the Pharisees and Sadducees. Both are enemies of Christ."
True colors are being revealed
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Barack Obama = Karl Marx - 10/28/2008 3:27:48 PM
|
|
|
stateofgrace
Posts: 1723
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: NoShow
quote:
From each according to his ability, to each according to his need
It only works when the latter portion is followed. If people truly only take according to their "need". Once "need" gets replaced by "want", the whole thing falls apart.
Well, in modern American culture, very few understand the difference.
_____________________________
America Needs Revival. Will you commit to pray for it?
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
