Political Crossfire Forums

[Black Sheep 5]

ontheyslay wrote: Black Sheep 5 wrote: StrawHat wrote: That's interesting... but I think it's more complicated than that. Especially since in my experience, liberals tend to think of the poor more. Or could it be that there are different flavors of conservatives? There are religious conseratives, whose values may make them give more. There are economic conservatives, who think of what's best for the economy. Question is, does an improved economy necessarily help everyone? If not, can we really call people who are interested in improving the economy charitable, even if it doesnt help those that need it most? Doesn't an imporved economy just help the people that already have the money do whatever they want? Or maybe i'm just to naive about these issues... :(

At any rate, i'll try to make time to read the book, and look forward to seeing if anybody can find kinks in the argument, if in fact there are any. I wonder to what degree this will affect politics? Especially poor minority voters. They, from my experience, are more socially conservative, and if it turns out that conservatives really want to help them more, then "voting your wallet" as my mom has called it, would mean a vote for conservatives.

Could be interesting I think.... All of the conservatives I know give to their respective churches and or charities, which in turn give to the poor. The thing is, bragging about how much you give to your church is very very unethical.

Are Warren Buffet and Bill Gates conservatives or liberals?

Bill Gates and Warren Buffet are atheists, so I'm assuming they are liberals. But obviously I could be wrong. I am unsure of their political affiliation either. Your right Atheist doesnt mean left.

[sLiPpY]

ontheyslay wrote: Black Sheep 5 wrote: StrawHat wrote: That's interesting... but I think it's more complicated than that. Especially since in my experience, liberals tend to think of the poor more. Or could it be that there are different flavors of conservatives? There are religious conseratives, whose values may make them give more. There are economic conservatives, who think of what's best for the economy. Question is, does an improved economy necessarily help everyone? If not, can we really call people who are interested in improving the economy charitable, even if it doesnt help those that need it most? Doesn't an imporved economy just help the people that already have the money do whatever they want? Or maybe i'm just to naive about these issues... :(

At any rate, i'll try to make time to read the book, and look forward to seeing if anybody can find kinks in the argument, if in fact there are any. I wonder to what degree this will affect politics? Especially poor minority voters. They, from my experience, are more socially conservative, and if it turns out that conservatives really want to help them more, then "voting your wallet" as my mom has called it, would mean a vote for conservatives.

Could be interesting I think.... All of the conservatives I know give to their respective churches and or charities, which in turn give to the poor. The thing is, bragging about how much you give to your church is very very unethical.

Are Warren Buffet and Bill Gates conservatives or liberals?

Bill Gates and Warren Buffet are atheists, so I'm assuming they are liberals. But obviously I could be wrong.

You'd be correct to say that Buffet and Gates are Liberal.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NmE4NWY3Yjc4YmJmMDJmOGU0ZmQwNGE0MjNlMDJiZTY=

National Review also offers an interesting analogy...

"Limosine Conservatives" "Lear jet Liberals" :lol:

[JLB]

sLiPpY wrote: JLB wrote: sLiPpY wrote: JLB wrote: Liberals give more, it's just that they steal it first from somebody else.

JLB is correct. Liberals are more generous with their err...cash.

Especially the billionare Liberals such as Bill Gates, and what's the old crusty Liberal's name that was the wealthiest man in the USA for a while?

Dang it I can't remember...

But when you add up the wealth. Liberals do indeed have infinately more money than Conservatives when all's done and said. :lol:

Sam Walton.

After Gates the list gets pretty slim, doesn't it?

Dick Cheney gave away over $7 million, all of his Halliburton options to charity last year.

Bill Clinton gave away his old underwear.

See the difference?

Actually it doesn't :lol:

I could rattle off the names of about 80 out of 100 of the wealthiest Americans. And they're all Liberals...and they all gave $1 Million dollars a piece to a George Soros "Think Tank" so that us progressive folks could whip the tar out of joo publicans. :lol:


OK, I'll take that information, and even make it easy on you.

Here are 98 of the top 100, in order.

Point out which 80 for us.


Rank Name Net Worth ($bil) Age Residence Source
1 William Henry Gates III 53.0 50 Medina, WA Microsoft
2 Warren Edward Buffett 46.0 76 Omaha, NE Berkshire Hathaway
3 Sheldon Adelson 20.5 73 Las Vegas, NV casinos, hotels
4 Lawrence Joseph Ellison 19.5 62 Redwood City, CA Oracle
5 Paul Gardner Allen 16.0 53 Seattle, WA Microsoft, investments
6 Jim C Walton 15.7 58 Bentonville, AR Wal-Mart
7 Christy Walton & family 15.6 51 Jackson, WY Wal-Mart inheritance
7 S Robson Walton 15.6 62 Bentonville, AR Wal-Mart
9 Michael Dell 15.5 41 Austin, TX Dell
9 Alice L Walton 15.5 57 Fort Worth, TX Wal-Mart
11 Helen R Walton 15.3 86 Bentonville, AR Wal-Mart
12 Sergey Brin 14.1 33 Palo Alto, CA Google
13 Larry E Page 14.0 33 San Francisco, CA Google
14 Jack Crawford Taylor & family 13.9 84 St Louis, MO Enterprise Rent-A-Car
15 Steven Anthony Ballmer 13.6 50 Bellevue, WA Microsoft
16 Abigail Johnson 13.0 44 Boston, MA Fidelity
17 Barbara Cox Anthony 12.6 83 Honolulu, HI Cox Enterprises
17 Anne Cox Chambers 12.6 86 Atlanta, GA Cox Enterprises
19 Charles De Ganahl Koch 12.0 70 Wichita, KS oil, commodities
19 David Hamilton Koch 12.0 66 New York, NY oil, commodities
21 Forrest Edward Mars Jr 10.5 75 McLean, VA candy
21 Jacqueline Mars 10.5 67 Bedminster, NJ candy
21 John Franklyn Mars 10.5 70 Arlington, VA candy
24 Carl Icahn 9.7 70 New York, NY leveraged buyouts
25 John Werner Kluge 9.1 92 Palm Beach, FL Metromedia
26 Kirk Kerkorian 9.0 89 Los Angeles, CA investments, casinos
27 Donald L Bren 8.5 74 Newport Beach, CA real estate
27 George B Kaiser 8.5 64 Tulsa, OK oil & gas, banking
27 George Soros 8.5 76 Westchester, NY hedge funds
30 Philip H Knight 7.9 68 Beaverton, OR Nike
31 Philip F Anschutz 7.8 66 Denver, CO investments
32 Keith Rupert Murdoch 7.7 75 New York, NY News Corp
32 Pierre M Omidyar 7.7 39 Henderson, NV Ebay
34 Charles Ergen 7.6 53 Denver, CO EchoStar
35 Dan L Duncan 7.5 73 Houston, TX energy
35 Edward Crosby Johnson III 7.5 76 Boston, MA Fidelity
35 Sumner M Redstone 7.5 83 Beverly Hills, CA Viacom
38 Donald Edward Newhouse 7.3 76 Somerset County, NJ publishing
38 Samuel Irving Newhouse Jr 7.3 78 New York, NY publishing
40 Leonard Blavatnik 7.0 49 New York, NY Access Industries
40 Ronald Owen Perelman 7.0 63 New York, NY leveraged buyouts
42 Eli Broad 5.8 73 Los Angeles, CA investments
43 Robert Muse Bass 5.5 58 Fort Worth, TX oil, investments
44 Michael Rubens Bloomberg 5.3 64 New York, NY Bloomberg L.P.
45 John R Menard Jr 5.2 66 Eau Claire, WI home improvement stores
45 Robert Rowling 5.2 53 Dallas, TX oil & gas, investments
45 Eric Schmidt 5.2 51 Atherton, CA Google
48 Micky Arison 5.0 57 Bal Harbour, FL Carnival Cruises
49 Steven Paul Jobs 4.9 51 Palo Alto, CA Apple Computer, Pixar
50 David Geffen 4.6 63 Malibu, CA movies, music
50 Charles R Schwab 4.6 69 Atherton, CA discount stock brokerage
52 James Goodnight 4.5 63 Cary, NC SAS Institute
52 Charles Bartlett Johnson 4.5 73 San Mateo, CA Franklin Resources
52 Herbert V Kohler & family 4.5 67 Kohler, WI plumbing fixtures
52 H Ty Warner 4.5 62 Chicago, IL Beanie Babies
52 Samuel Zell 4.5 65 Chicago, IL real estate, private equity
57 Henry Ross Perot 4.3 76 Dallas, TX computer services, real estate
57 James L Sorenson 4.3 85 Salt Lake City, UT medical devices, real estate
59 Robert Earl Holding 4.2 79 Sun Valley, ID energy, resorts, ranching
59 David Howard Murdock 4.2 83 Los Angeles, CA investments
61 Lester Crown & family 4.1 81 Wilmette, IL investments
61 Bradley Wayne Hughes 4.1 73 Malibu, CA Public Storage
61 Harold Clark Simmons 4.1 75 Dallas, TX investments
64 William Morse Davidson 4.0 83 Bloomfield Hills, MI glass
64 James H Simons 4.0 68 East Setauket, NY hedge funds
66 Ralph Lauren 3.9 66 New York, NY fashion
67 Edward S Lampert 3.8 44 Greenwich, CT investments
68 Rupert Harris Johnson Jr 3.7 65 San Mateo, CA Franklin Resources
68 Leonard Norman Stern 3.7 68 New York, NY real estate
70 Jeffrey P Bezos 3.6 42 Seattle, WA Amazon
70 George Lucas 3.6 62 Marin County, CA Star Wars
70 Richard M Schulze 3.6 65 Edina, MN Best Buy
73 Richard M DeVos 3.5 80 Ada, MI Alticor
73 Ray Lee Hunt 3.5 63 Dallas, TX oil, real estate
73 Paul Milstein & family 3.5 84 New York, NY Emigrant, real estate
73 Stephen A Schwarzman 3.5 59 New York, NY investments
77 Gordon Earle Moore 3.4 77 Woodside, CA Intel
77 Patrick Soon-Shiong 3.4 54 Los Angeles, CA generic drugs
77 Joan H Tisch 3.4 80 New York, NY Loews
80 Edgar M Bronfman Sr 3.2 77 New York, NY liquor
80 William Alfred Cook 3.2 75 Bloomington, IN medical devices
80 John Richard Simplot & family 3.2 97 Boise, ID potatoes, microchips
83 Steven Udvar-Hazy 3.1 60 Beverly Hills, CA International Lease Finance
83 Leslie Herbert Wexner 3.1 69 Columbus, OH Limited Brands
85 Roland Arnall 3.0 67 Holmby Hills, CA mortgage banking
85 Lee Marshall Bass 3.0 50 Fort Worth, TX oil, investments
85 Sid Richardson Bass 3.0 63 Fort Worth, TX oil, investments
85 Matthew Bucksbaum & family 3.0 80 Chicago, IL real estate
85 Steven A Cohen 3.0 50 Greenwich, CT hedge funds
85 Henry Lea Hillman 3.0 87 Pittsburgh, PA industrialist
85 Bruce Kovner 3.0 61 New York, NY hedge funds
85 Patrick Joseph McGovern 3.0 69 Hollis, NH IDG
85 A Jerrold Perenchio 3.0 75 Bel Air, CA Univision
94 Martha R Ingram & family 2.9 71 Nashville, TN Ingram Industries
94 Leonard Alan Lauder 2.9 73 New York, NY Estee Lauder
94 Steven Allen Spielberg 2.9 59 Pacific Palisades, CA movies
94 Donald John Trump 2.9 60 New York, NY real estate
98 Maurice Raymond Greenberg 2.8 81 Ocean Reef, FL American International Group
98 Barbara Piasecka Johnson 2.8 69 Monte Carlo, Monaco inheritance
98 Richard Kinder 2.8 62 Houston, TX pipelines

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2006/54/biz_06rich400_The-400-Richest-Americans_Rank.html

There's a tie for 99 and 100 between about 12 people.

[homerjay_s]

Black Sheep 5 wrote: homerjay_s wrote: JLB wrote: homerjay_s wrote: I would like to point out that the overwhelming majority of those that label themselves conservative are are required by their religious denomination to give away 10% of everything they make to the church(read charity).

The church knows how to levy a tax. Even across the board for everyone, and rather than spending a huge percentage of that revenue on accounting and threatening people that don't cough it up, they threaten eternal damnation and the sheeple give until it hurts.

I'm not a Christian, but I seem to remember that tithing is voluntary, while excessive taxation is not.

Getting into heaven is "voluntary", too. If you don't want to burn in hell, you'll pay their tithe.

Anything it voluntary if you're willing to accept the consequences of your own actions. This hyperbolic BS. There are very few mainstream Christians who believe you can buy your way into heaven. Keep in mind that most Christians do not consider Tammy Faye Baker a Christian. Very few people consider preachers who drive Mercedes and wear Rolexes to be devout in their faith.

10% across the board...who said anything about buying your way into heaven? We're talking about voluntarily tithing to avoid the pains of hell.

[Black Sheep 5]

homerjay_s wrote: Black Sheep 5 wrote: homerjay_s wrote: JLB wrote: homerjay_s wrote: I would like to point out that the overwhelming majority of those that label themselves conservative are are required by their religious denomination to give away 10% of everything they make to the church(read charity).

The church knows how to levy a tax. Even across the board for everyone, and rather than spending a huge percentage of that revenue on accounting and threatening people that don't cough it up, they threaten eternal damnation and the sheeple give until it hurts.

I'm not a Christian, but I seem to remember that tithing is voluntary, while excessive taxation is not.

Getting into heaven is "voluntary", too. If you don't want to burn in hell, you'll pay their tithe.

Anything it voluntary if you're willing to accept the consequences of your own actions. This hyperbolic BS. There are very few mainstream Christians who believe you can buy your way into heaven. Keep in mind that most Christians do not consider Tammy Faye Baker a Christian. Very few people consider preachers who drive Mercedes and wear Rolexes to be devout in their faith.

10% across the board...who said anything about buying your way into heaven? We're talking about voluntarily tithing to avoid the pains of hell. Paying to not get into hell is the same as paying to get into heaven, or if your Catholic paying to get into purgatory. Also I am curious where it states in the Bible that you must tithe to reach the Kingdom of Heaven? Tithing is a good practice but not a necessary one.

[sLiPpY]

JLB wrote: sLiPpY wrote: JLB wrote: sLiPpY wrote: JLB wrote: Liberals give more, it's just that they steal it first from somebody else.

JLB is correct. Liberals are more generous with their err...cash.

Especially the billionare Liberals such as Bill Gates, and what's the old crusty Liberal's name that was the wealthiest man in the USA for a while?

Dang it I can't remember...

But when you add up the wealth. Liberals do indeed have infinately more money than Conservatives when all's done and said. :lol:

Sam Walton.

After Gates the list gets pretty slim, doesn't it?

Dick Cheney gave away over $7 million, all of his Halliburton options to charity last year.

Bill Clinton gave away his old underwear.

See the difference?

Actually it doesn't :lol:

I could rattle off the names of about 80 out of 100 of the wealthiest Americans. And they're all Liberals...and they all gave $1 Million dollars a piece to a George Soros "Think Tank" so that us progressive folks could whip the tar out of joo publicans. :lol:


OK, I'll take that information, and even make it easy on you.

Here are 98 of the top 100, in order.

Point out which 80 for us.


Rank Name Net Worth ($bil) Age Residence Source
1 William Henry Gates III 53.0 50 Medina, WA Microsoft
2 Warren Edward Buffett 46.0 76 Omaha, NE Berkshire Hathaway
3 Sheldon Adelson 20.5 73 Las Vegas, NV casinos, hotels
4 Lawrence Joseph Ellison 19.5 62 Redwood City, CA Oracle
5 Paul Gardner Allen 16.0 53 Seattle, WA Microsoft, investments
6 Jim C Walton 15.7 58 Bentonville, AR Wal-Mart
7 Christy Walton & family 15.6 51 Jackson, WY Wal-Mart inheritance
7 S Robson Walton 15.6 62 Bentonville, AR Wal-Mart
9 Michael Dell 15.5 41 Austin, TX Dell
9 Alice L Walton 15.5 57 Fort Worth, TX Wal-Mart
11 Helen R Walton 15.3 86 Bentonville, AR Wal-Mart
12 Sergey Brin 14.1 33 Palo Alto, CA Google
13 Larry E Page 14.0 33 San Francisco, CA Google
14 Jack Crawford Taylor & family 13.9 84 St Louis, MO Enterprise Rent-A-Car
15 Steven Anthony Ballmer 13.6 50 Bellevue, WA Microsoft
16 Abigail Johnson 13.0 44 Boston, MA Fidelity
17 Barbara Cox Anthony 12.6 83 Honolulu, HI Cox Enterprises
17 Anne Cox Chambers 12.6 86 Atlanta, GA Cox Enterprises
19 Charles De Ganahl Koch 12.0 70 Wichita, KS oil, commodities
19 David Hamilton Koch 12.0 66 New York, NY oil, commodities
21 Forrest Edward Mars Jr 10.5 75 McLean, VA candy
21 Jacqueline Mars 10.5 67 Bedminster, NJ candy
21 John Franklyn Mars 10.5 70 Arlington, VA candy
24 Carl Icahn 9.7 70 New York, NY leveraged buyouts
25 John Werner Kluge 9.1 92 Palm Beach, FL Metromedia
26 Kirk Kerkorian 9.0 89 Los Angeles, CA investments, casinos
27 Donald L Bren 8.5 74 Newport Beach, CA real estate
27 George B Kaiser 8.5 64 Tulsa, OK oil & gas, banking
27 George Soros 8.5 76 Westchester, NY hedge funds
30 Philip H Knight 7.9 68 Beaverton, OR Nike
31 Philip F Anschutz 7.8 66 Denver, CO investments
32 Keith Rupert Murdoch 7.7 75 New York, NY News Corp
32 Pierre M Omidyar 7.7 39 Henderson, NV Ebay
34 Charles Ergen 7.6 53 Denver, CO EchoStar
35 Dan L Duncan 7.5 73 Houston, TX energy
35 Edward Crosby Johnson III 7.5 76 Boston, MA Fidelity
35 Sumner M Redstone 7.5 83 Beverly Hills, CA Viacom
38 Donald Edward Newhouse 7.3 76 Somerset County, NJ publishing
38 Samuel Irving Newhouse Jr 7.3 78 New York, NY publishing
40 Leonard Blavatnik 7.0 49 New York, NY Access Industries
40 Ronald Owen Perelman 7.0 63 New York, NY leveraged buyouts
42 Eli Broad 5.8 73 Los Angeles, CA investments
43 Robert Muse Bass 5.5 58 Fort Worth, TX oil, investments
44 Michael Rubens Bloomberg 5.3 64 New York, NY Bloomberg L.P.
45 John R Menard Jr 5.2 66 Eau Claire, WI home improvement stores
45 Robert Rowling 5.2 53 Dallas, TX oil & gas, investments
45 Eric Schmidt 5.2 51 Atherton, CA Google
48 Micky Arison 5.0 57 Bal Harbour, FL Carnival Cruises
49 Steven Paul Jobs 4.9 51 Palo Alto, CA Apple Computer, Pixar
50 David Geffen 4.6 63 Malibu, CA movies, music
50 Charles R Schwab 4.6 69 Atherton, CA discount stock brokerage
52 James Goodnight 4.5 63 Cary, NC SAS Institute
52 Charles Bartlett Johnson 4.5 73 San Mateo, CA Franklin Resources
52 Herbert V Kohler & family 4.5 67 Kohler, WI plumbing fixtures
52 H Ty Warner 4.5 62 Chicago, IL Beanie Babies
52 Samuel Zell 4.5 65 Chicago, IL real estate, private equity
57 Henry Ross Perot 4.3 76 Dallas, TX computer services, real estate
57 James L Sorenson 4.3 85 Salt Lake City, UT medical devices, real estate
59 Robert Earl Holding 4.2 79 Sun Valley, ID energy, resorts, ranching
59 David Howard Murdock 4.2 83 Los Angeles, CA investments
61 Lester Crown & family 4.1 81 Wilmette, IL investments
61 Bradley Wayne Hughes 4.1 73 Malibu, CA Public Storage
61 Harold Clark Simmons 4.1 75 Dallas, TX investments
64 William Morse Davidson 4.0 83 Bloomfield Hills, MI glass
64 James H Simons 4.0 68 East Setauket, NY hedge funds
66 Ralph Lauren 3.9 66 New York, NY fashion
67 Edward S Lampert 3.8 44 Greenwich, CT investments
68 Rupert Harris Johnson Jr 3.7 65 San Mateo, CA Franklin Resources
68 Leonard Norman Stern 3.7 68 New York, NY real estate
70 Jeffrey P Bezos 3.6 42 Seattle, WA Amazon
70 George Lucas 3.6 62 Marin County, CA Star Wars
70 Richard M Schulze 3.6 65 Edina, MN Best Buy
73 Richard M DeVos 3.5 80 Ada, MI Alticor
73 Ray Lee Hunt 3.5 63 Dallas, TX oil, real estate
73 Paul Milstein & family 3.5 84 New York, NY Emigrant, real estate
73 Stephen A Schwarzman 3.5 59 New York, NY investments
77 Gordon Earle Moore 3.4 77 Woodside, CA Intel
77 Patrick Soon-Shiong 3.4 54 Los Angeles, CA generic drugs
77 Joan H Tisch 3.4 80 New York, NY Loews
80 Edgar M Bronfman Sr 3.2 77 New York, NY liquor
80 William Alfred Cook 3.2 75 Bloomington, IN medical devices
80 John Richard Simplot & family 3.2 97 Boise, ID potatoes, microchips
83 Steven Udvar-Hazy 3.1 60 Beverly Hills, CA International Lease Finance
83 Leslie Herbert Wexner 3.1 69 Columbus, OH Limited Brands
85 Roland Arnall 3.0 67 Holmby Hills, CA mortgage banking
85 Lee Marshall Bass 3.0 50 Fort Worth, TX oil, investments
85 Sid Richardson Bass 3.0 63 Fort Worth, TX oil, investments
85 Matthew Bucksbaum & family 3.0 80 Chicago, IL real estate
85 Steven A Cohen 3.0 50 Greenwich, CT hedge funds
85 Henry Lea Hillman 3.0 87 Pittsburgh, PA industrialist
85 Bruce Kovner 3.0 61 New York, NY hedge funds
85 Patrick Joseph McGovern 3.0 69 Hollis, NH IDG
85 A Jerrold Perenchio 3.0 75 Bel Air, CA Univision
94 Martha R Ingram & family 2.9 71 Nashville, TN Ingram Industries
94 Leonard Alan Lauder 2.9 73 New York, NY Estee Lauder
94 Steven Allen Spielberg 2.9 59 Pacific Palisades, CA movies
94 Donald John Trump 2.9 60 New York, NY real estate
98 Maurice Raymond Greenberg 2.8 81 Ocean Reef, FL American International Group
98 Barbara Piasecka Johnson 2.8 69 Monte Carlo, Monaco inheritance
98 Richard Kinder 2.8 62 Houston, TX pipelines

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2006/54/biz_06rich400_The-400-Richest-Americans_Rank.html

There's a tie for 99 and 100 between about 12 people.

Well JLB, it'd be a hell of a lot less time applied if I just bolded the Republicans in the bunch. :P

Did you know that Hillary Clinton was on the Board of Directors for WalMart, at the behest of Sam Walton himself? :lol:

[agentkgb]

Rich people are more likely to be conservatives as a rule, therefore it's not surprising that they can give more away. It doesn't say anything about the validity of their ideas or much of anything else.

[perdidochas]

StrawHat wrote: That's interesting... but I think it's more complicated than that. Especially since in my experience, liberals tend to think of the poor more. Or could it be that there are different flavors of conservatives? There are religious conseratives, whose values may make them give more. There are economic conservatives, who think of what's best for the economy. Question is, does an improved economy necessarily help everyone? If not, can we really call people who are interested in improving the economy charitable, even if it doesnt help those that need it most? Doesn't an imporved economy just help the people that already have the money do whatever they want? Or maybe i'm just to naive about these issues... :(

At any rate, i'll try to make time to read the book, and look forward to seeing if anybody can find kinks in the argument, if in fact there are any. I wonder to what degree this will affect politics? Especially poor minority voters. They, from my experience, are more socially conservative, and if it turns out that conservatives really want to help them more, then "voting your wallet" as my mom has called it, would mean a vote for conservatives.

Could be interesting I think....

It does explain why conservatives so often say that they would provide welfare if the government were off their backs. Seems to me that liberals may think more about the poor, they just don't do anything for the poor out of their own pockets--they prefer to use the coercive police power of government to do so.

Compare GW Bush's charity record with John Kerry's.

[perdidochas]

homerjay_s wrote: I would like to point out that the overwhelming majority of those that label themselves conservative are are required by their religious denomination to give away 10% of everything they make to the church(read charity).

The church knows how to levy a tax. Even across the board for everyone, and rather than spending a huge percentage of that revenue on accounting and threatening people that don't cough it up, they threaten eternal damnation and the sheeple give until it hurts.

Don't know about other churches, but Catholics are asked (not that we actually do) to give 5% to the Church, and 5% to other charities.

[perdidochas]

homerjay_s wrote: Black Sheep 5 wrote: homerjay_s wrote: JLB wrote: homerjay_s wrote: I would like to point out that the overwhelming majority of those that label themselves conservative are are required by their religious denomination to give away 10% of everything they make to the church(read charity).

The church knows how to levy a tax. Even across the board for everyone, and rather than spending a huge percentage of that revenue on accounting and threatening people that don't cough it up, they threaten eternal damnation and the sheeple give until it hurts.

I'm not a Christian, but I seem to remember that tithing is voluntary, while excessive taxation is not.

Getting into heaven is "voluntary", too. If you don't want to burn in hell, you'll pay their tithe.

Anything it voluntary if you're willing to accept the consequences of your own actions. This hyperbolic BS. There are very few mainstream Christians who believe you can buy your way into heaven. Keep in mind that most Christians do not consider Tammy Faye Baker a Christian. Very few people consider preachers who drive Mercedes and wear Rolexes to be devout in their faith.

10% across the board...who said anything about buying your way into heaven? We're talking about voluntarily tithing to avoid the pains of hell.

Well, as a Catholic, I have never once heard that if you don't tithe that one goes to hell

[sLiPpY]

agentkgb wrote: Rich people are more likely to be conservatives as a rule, therefore it's not surprising that they can give more away. It doesn't say anything about the validity of their ideas or much of anything else.

Did you not notice the National Review article that pointed out the fallacy of that type of thinking?

NRO says unequivocably, it's the Left that owns the money powerhouse.

Now I will say and agree that as a matter of fact....that

Middle Class Americans who are Religious, whether left or right in their preferences, or even if they're just middle. Are more likely to donate to "community charities." at a higher percentage.

But what are you counting as Charities? I'll give you an example. I'm more likely to donate to the Seirra Club, the NC Zoo, the ACLU, PBS, the local Arts Council...and my total contributions just might out weigh what a local Christian chooses to give to their local soup kitchen.

How are those "charities" being counted?

Which donations are being counted?

[Black Sheep 5]

perdidochas wrote: homerjay_s wrote: I would like to point out that the overwhelming majority of those that label themselves conservative are are required by their religious denomination to give away 10% of everything they make to the church(read charity).

The church knows how to levy a tax. Even across the board for everyone, and rather than spending a huge percentage of that revenue on accounting and threatening people that don't cough it up, they threaten eternal damnation and the sheeple give until it hurts.

Don't know about other churches, but Catholics are asked (not that we actually do) to give 5% to the Church, and 5% to other charities. Really, I am Catholic and only give to the collection plate as it goes around. Never heard a priest say give 10% or your going to hell. I have however heard them say you should give 10% if possible.

[sLiPpY]

Black Sheep 5 wrote: perdidochas wrote: homerjay_s wrote: I would like to point out that the overwhelming majority of those that label themselves conservative are are required by their religious denomination to give away 10% of everything they make to the church(read charity).

The church knows how to levy a tax. Even across the board for everyone, and rather than spending a huge percentage of that revenue on accounting and threatening people that don't cough it up, they threaten eternal damnation and the sheeple give until it hurts.

Don't know about other churches, but Catholics are asked (not that we actually do) to give 5% to the Church, and 5% to other charities. Really, I am Catholic and only give to the collection plate as it goes around. Never heard a priest say give 10% or your going to hell. I have however heard them say you should give 10% if possible.

You obviously haven't attended a Southern Baptist service. :lol:

[Black Sheep 5]

sLiPpY wrote: Black Sheep 5 wrote: perdidochas wrote: homerjay_s wrote: I would like to point out that the overwhelming majority of those that label themselves conservative are are required by their religious denomination to give away 10% of everything they make to the church(read charity).

The church knows how to levy a tax. Even across the board for everyone, and rather than spending a huge percentage of that revenue on accounting and threatening people that don't cough it up, they threaten eternal damnation and the sheeple give until it hurts.

Don't know about other churches, but Catholics are asked (not that we actually do) to give 5% to the Church, and 5% to other charities. Really, I am Catholic and only give to the collection plate as it goes around. Never heard a priest say give 10% or your going to hell. I have however heard them say you should give 10% if possible.

You obviously haven't attended a Southern Baptist service. :lol: 1st Baptist yes (the women are easier) Southern Baptist no.

[agentkgb]

sLiPpY wrote: agentkgb wrote: Rich people are more likely to be conservatives as a rule, therefore it's not surprising that they can give more away. It doesn't say anything about the validity of their ideas or much of anything else.

Did you not notice the National Review article that pointed out the fallacy of that type of thinking?
How many homeless people vote Republican?

[sLiPpY]

agentkgb wrote: sLiPpY wrote: agentkgb wrote: Rich people are more likely to be conservatives as a rule, therefore it's not surprising that they can give more away. It doesn't say anything about the validity of their ideas or much of anything else.

Did you not notice the National Review article that pointed out the fallacy of that type of thinking?
How many homeless people vote Republican?

If you don't have a mailing address. You can't vote. :wink:

[agentkgb]

sLiPpY wrote: agentkgb wrote: sLiPpY wrote: agentkgb wrote: Rich people are more likely to be conservatives as a rule, therefore it's not surprising that they can give more away. It doesn't say anything about the validity of their ideas or much of anything else.

Did you not notice the National Review article that pointed out the fallacy of that type of thinking?
How many homeless people vote Republican?

If you don't have a mailing address. You can't vote. :wink:
Clever.
How many homeless people are conservatives? There's obviously no way to tell for certain as I doubt a study of such an issue has been conducted, but my guess is that very few are.

[sLiPpY]

Black Sheep 5 wrote: sLiPpY wrote: Black Sheep 5 wrote: perdidochas wrote: homerjay_s wrote: I would like to point out that the overwhelming majority of those that label themselves conservative are are required by their religious denomination to give away 10% of everything they make to the church(read charity).

The church knows how to levy a tax. Even across the board for everyone, and rather than spending a huge percentage of that revenue on accounting and threatening people that don't cough it up, they threaten eternal damnation and the sheeple give until it hurts.

Don't know about other churches, but Catholics are asked (not that we actually do) to give 5% to the Church, and 5% to other charities. Really, I am Catholic and only give to the collection plate as it goes around. Never heard a priest say give 10% or your going to hell. I have however heard them say you should give 10% if possible.

You obviously haven't attended a Southern Baptist service. :lol: 1st Baptist yes (the women are easier) Southern Baptist no.

Baptist Summer Camp at the beach, was always the best place to go to get laid. :lol:

Thank you Grammy and Grumps! I wruved going!

[Black Sheep 5]

sLiPpY wrote: Black Sheep 5 wrote: sLiPpY wrote: Black Sheep 5 wrote: perdidochas wrote: homerjay_s wrote: I would like to point out that the overwhelming majority of those that label themselves conservative are are required by their religious denomination to give away 10% of everything they make to the church(read charity).

The church knows how to levy a tax. Even across the board for everyone, and rather than spending a huge percentage of that revenue on accounting and threatening people that don't cough it up, they threaten eternal damnation and the sheeple give until it hurts.

Don't know about other churches, but Catholics are asked (not that we actually do) to give 5% to the Church, and 5% to other charities. Really, I am Catholic and only give to the collection plate as it goes around. Never heard a priest say give 10% or your going to hell. I have however heard them say you should give 10% if possible.

You obviously haven't attended a Southern Baptist service. :lol: 1st Baptist yes (the women are easier) Southern Baptist no.

Baptist Summer Camp at the beach, was always the best place to go to get laid. :lol:

Thank you Grammy and Grumps! I wruved going! Baptist summer camp in the mountains for me, your absolutely right. Catholic chicks just want to make out, Baptist chicks love the ****.

[sLiPpY]

agentkgb wrote: sLiPpY wrote: agentkgb wrote: sLiPpY wrote: agentkgb wrote: Rich people are more likely to be conservatives as a rule, therefore it's not surprising that they can give more away. It doesn't say anything about the validity of their ideas or much of anything else.

Did you not notice the National Review article that pointed out the fallacy of that type of thinking?
How many homeless people vote Republican?

If you don't have a mailing address. You can't vote. :wink:
Clever.
How many homeless people are conservatives? There's obviously no way to tell for certain as I doubt a study of such an issue has been conducted, but my guess is that very few are.

I would also guess that the majority of homeless people, don't subscribe to a political affiliation.

But then again, I tend to believe that there are a good amount of people who might just willingly choose to "drop out" of modern society.

God only knows that if I could find a place, where I could feed and clothe myself...develop some meaningful social relationships. Not have a TV, Cell, Blackberry, Computer etc.

I'd be tempted to drop out too. :wink: