A flat tax in the works for the US?

[MalevolentLight]

I don't think god or christianity has anything to do with the right. I happen to be a complete atheist.

[David Floyd]

I agree, I was countering Imran's strawman.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I don't think god or christianity has anything to do with the right.

Of course it does. Conservatism is about tradition. You don't get more tradition than religion.

[David Floyd]

Conservatism is about tradition. You don't get more tradition than religion.

Fine, show me in the Bible where Jesus or God supports laws forcing us to help the less fortunate.

You can't, of course.

[MalevolentLight]

And there Imran you are wrong. The dictionary definition of conservatism is that yes, but dictionary terms don't apply to the US political system. If that were true Bush wouldn't be pushing a flat tax and we never would have gone to Iraq. So if you want to apply historical terms then Bush is actually a liberal...and that doesn't make alot of sense now does it?

[Imran Siddiqui]

You do realize the Bible supports slavery? You know, slaves be obedient to your masters and all that... does any Christian today believe that?

Throughout history, Christian Rulars have been the ones to pass laws requiring people pay to the church, partly to help the less fortunate. That was the tradition.

[Ted Striker]

I look terrible in red but these hot Commie mail order bride chicks look alot better:

Ekaterina


Natalia


Indira

[Imran Siddiqui]

The dictionary definition of conservatism is that yes, but dictionary terms don't apply to the US political system.

What the Hell do you think you are trying to 'conserve' then? The environment?

Read Edmund Burke, William Bennett, George Will, etc., and then come back to me and tell me what conservatism is.

If that were true Bush wouldn't be pushing a flat tax and we never would have gone to Iraq. So if you want to apply historical terms then Bush is actually a liberal

Plenty of people see Bush as a free spending liberal, but that's beside the point. I fail to see how such a deeply religious man that lets his religion guide his hand in policy can be called a liberal. Historically, liberals have been the free market types. That changed with the Depression and FDR.

A flat tax is regressive, so it'd be reactionary (ie, on the conservative side). The war in Iraq? Depending on what it was actually for, it could be liberal or conservative.

[MalevolentLight]

Throughout history, Christian Rulars have been the ones to pass laws requiring people pay to the church, partly to help the less fortunate. That was the tradition.

Actually it was used to fund an empire. But that was a nice look at history through rose colored glasses, I enjoyed it.

[David Floyd]

You do realize the Bible supports slavery? You know, slaves be obedient to your masters and all that... does any Christian today believe that?

Well, you're the one who implied that the Bible should be the basis for tax laws. Don't blame me if you don't like everything the Bible supports

Throughout history, Christian Rulars have been the ones to pass laws requiring people pay to the church, partly to help the less fortunate.

"Christian" rulers also started the Crusades and the 30 Years War, for starters. "Christians" were responsible for the Inquisition.

So, either you don't believe our laws should be based on the Bible, in which case your original statement is just a silly strawman, you do believe our laws should be based on the Bible, in which case the duel question arises of why you don't support slavery, which is somewhat sanctioned in various parts, but do support a progressive tax system, which is not sanctioned, OR you believe that some Biblical principles should be embodied in law, and some shouldn't be, and that we should make those choices along the lines of "Christian" rulers throughout history.

Three equally unpalatable choices, I would think - so which is it?

[Imran Siddiqui]

either you don't believe our laws should be based on the Bible, in which case your original statement is just a silly strawman

Why would it be a silly strawman? The Governor of Alabama says Christian principles compels him to raise taxes on the rich to help the poor. Most Churches today plead with the state to help the poor. How is there equal free will in order to adequately be judged by God?

It seems to me when so many Christians around the world want the state to take care of the less fortunate, and the Church has been doing it for centuries, that is probably the better interpretation.

And if you consider yourself a Christian, you should probably follow that example. After all, centuries of Christianity have spoken.

People don't follow the Bible to the letter, because of its prescription of things like slavery, making women slaves (basically), etc. They follow the slow evolution of Christianity, which is what Christianity really is today. The Christianity of the literal Bible is an anachronism.

[MalevolentLight]

Plenty of people see Bush as a free spending liberal, but that's beside the point. I fail to see how such a deeply religious man that lets his religion guide his hand in policy can be called a liberal. Historically, liberals have been the free market types. That changed with the Depression and FDR.

A flat tax is regressive, so it'd be reactionary (ie, on the conservative side). The war in Iraq? Depending on what it was actually for, it could be liberal or conservative.

We are trying to conserve the US and keep it from becoming endangered. Based on your definition that conservatism is keeping with tradition then Iraq can be seen as none other than liberalism. And since the progressive tax system has been in place now a very long time changing it to the flat tax system (while it has been used before) would be considered liberal since it is still changing the status quo. Hell we could change the tax system every year and call it anarchy. These terms really don't apply to the US political system anymore.

[MalevolentLight]

Why would it be a silly strawman? The Governor of Alabama says Christian principles compels him to raise taxes on the rich to help the poor. Most Churches today plead with the state to help the poor. How is there equal free will in order to adequately be judged by God?

It seems to me when so many Christians around the world want the state to take care of the less fortunate, and the Church has been doing it for centuries, that is probably the better interpretation.

And if you consider yourself a Christian, you should probably follow that example. After all, centuries of Christianity have spoken.

A look at history will show that the church didn't take care of the poor.

[Imran Siddiqui]

We are trying to conserve the US and keep it from becoming endangered

Conserve what? What the US is? What it should be? The traditional notions of America? I think I've hit on it.

And since the progressive tax system has been in place now a very long time changing it to the flat tax system (while it has been used before) would be considered liberal since it is still changing the status quo.

Um... a change backwards has been called reactionary for a long, long, long time.

A look at history will show that the church didn't take care of the poor.

Of course it did. The poor were treated much better by the Church than before. For the first time they weren't treated like vermin.

[Moral Hazard]

Dick Armeys Flat Tax
My Flat Tax
Ted Striker and his ladies
The rest of the discussion