Serving the Poor: The Christian Virtue of Charity

[ryan3434]

Today's Gospel reading in the story of the conversion of the rich tax collector Zacchaeus.

Zacchaeus said to Jesus:
"Behold, half of my possessions, Lord, I shall give to the poor,
and if I have extorted anything from anyone
I shall repay it four times over."
And Jesus said to him,
"Today salvation has come to this house."
Luke 19:8-10

A report by a leading antipoverty organization claims that the eight (just eight) wealthiest people in the world have more money than 50 percent of the world's population (reported by OXFAM International on January 16, 2017). That's a breathtaking statistic. What if those wealthy men and women gave just half of those billions to the poor as did Zacchaeus? My guess is that it would make a huge dent in world poverty.

And what if they don't wanna give should we steal it from them. I don't think jebus would like that

 

[Big Nasty Edison]

As a self made person what are your feelings regarding the nanny / welfare state?

Unfortunately for me it wasn't as glorious as Sherdog posters would lead you to believe.

 

[Ezekiel 2517]

Today's Gospel reading in the story of the conversion of the rich tax collector Zacchaeus.

Zacchaeus said to Jesus:
"Behold, half of my possessions, Lord, I shall give to the poor,
and if I have extorted anything from anyone
I shall repay it four times over."
And Jesus said to him,
"Today salvation has come to this house."
Luke 19:8-10

A report by a leading antipoverty organization claims that the eight (just eight) wealthiest people in the world have more money than 50 percent of the world's population (reported by OXFAM International on January 16, 2017). That's a breathtaking statistic. What if those wealthy men and women gave just half of those billions to the poor as did Zacchaeus? My guess is that it would make a huge dent in world poverty.

You know what made the greatest dent in world poverty ahead of schedule???

CAPITALISM

 

[luckyshot]

I would be more than happy to pay for many of these services, if I was simply asked, and not forced.

In what other area of life is an implicit, unilateral "contract" upon an entire geographic area considered valid?

And what if they don't wanna give should we steal it from them. I don't think jebus would like that

Is this the taxes are theft bit?

Jesus has one for that delusion, too:

Mark 12:15-17

“Teacher is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar or not?”
Jesus said, “Bring me a coin.”
They brought him a coin.
Jesus asked, “Whose image is on the coin?”
They answered, “Caesar’s”
Jesus replied, “Give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s, but give to God what is God’s.”

You know what made the greatest dent in world poverty ahead of schedule???

CAPITALISM

That’s fine.

Charity is not incompatible with capitalism, in theory. It’s also not incompatible with a progressive tax structure, or anything else, so I’m not real sure what your point is.

I will tell you one thing, though, the love of money has been the downfall of a whole lot of folks, whatever it did for their wallets.

“For the love of money is the root of all evil.” 1 Timothy 6:10

 

[Islam Imamate]

If the money has to be taken by force, than it's no longer a charitable, or moral act.

Charity must be a chosen behavior, otherwise it's no longer charity.

True, this is why I think the Christian values of charity are clearly insufficient at affecting large scale change. Expecting enough people to be Christ-like enough to make enough of a difference at a societal level is delusional, I'd rather rely on a robust estate tax.

 

[ryan3434]

Is this the taxes are theft bit?

Jesus has one for that delusion, too:

Mark 12:15-17

“Teacher is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar or not?”
Jesus said, “Bring me a coin.”
They brought him a coin.
Jesus asked, “Whose image is on the coin?”
They answered, “Caesar’s”
Jesus replied, “Give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s, but give to God what is God’s.”


That’s fine.

Charity is not incompatible with capitalism, in theory. It’s also not incompatible with a progressive tax structure, or anything else, so I’m not real sure what your point is.

I will tell you one thing, though, the love of money has been the downfall of a whole lot of folks, whatever it did for their wallets.

“For the love of money is the root of all evil.” 1 Timothy 6:10

Keep em coming I need more. I use the 'an elephant through a needle hole before a rich man gets into heaven' shtick on my boss who's a nutbar Christian. He still hasn't given me his money yet

 

[Thycidides]

Do you not understand that someone like me is subject to more State coercion than just the state agents in my small town?

Through my tax dollars, I'm forced to associate with every state and federal employee that pulls a wage from tax dollars.

This is forced association, and a violation of my freedom of association. As I said earlier, the freedom of association entails the freedom to disassociate.



Why?

Of all the things you've said, I find this the most fascinating. Why would you find a conversation that analyzes the violence and coercion of the state depressing?

I don't see how paying for medicare and social security is some big burden, if that's what you mean. I brought up NATO but you didn't suggest demobilizing it , or even reducing the amount the USA gives to the alliance etc. NATO is extremely violent and coercive, much more so than anything you are talking about.


Seems to me you should be able to articulate your grievances better and be aware of where tax money goes. Give concrete examples and so on and suggest a feasible policy to address the problem.

If you were as disaffected as you claim you would also try to change the system or do something about and/or you'd have tried to avoid paying the IRS a dime and work in the underground economy. Its not that hard to do and millions of people do it.

 

[Jack V Savage]

People also pay for "protection" to the Mafia, they may even get a few "benefits". That still doesn't make the transaction any less of an extortion and theft.

The problem is that all of the arguments you're making along this line apply equally well to property. No one agreed to have all productive land spoken for when they were born. Property ownership is imposed by gov't force. You of all people (as someone who owes your livelihood to unearned wealth maintained by the gov't) should understand that.

 

[Thycidides]

Is that something people generally want?

Not really, at least as I understand the term and its larger significance. Things like intellectual property and patents don't exist without a state organization to enforce them. Banks are very limited within a weak state too.

If you look at places that have the best track record on property rights, enforcement of contracts and so on they all are within strong states with efficient buaracaracy and rule of law.

If your idea of property rights is living on a small subsetance farm which you work with your family than yea there is no need to have a state for that but I don't think that is the lifestyle you want.

 

[Thycidides]

The problem is that all of the arguments you're making along this line apply equally well to property. No one agreed to have all productive land spoken for when they were born. Property ownership is imposed by gov't force. You of all people (as someone who owes your livelihood to unearned wealth maintained by the gov't) should understand that.

Yeah is really bonkers this opinion is so widespread. I guess they don't teach social contract theory in a lot of high schools?

 

[Jack V Savage]

Are you suddenly a Christian? I don't believe any of the 8 richest people are. I know most billionaires do already give a lot to charity, which is not the same as the government confiscating their earnings to take a nice little cut for themselves and then hand scraps to the poor. If we're playing your numbers game, there should already be no poor people just based on the tax revenue they already take in.

Wow. You really have a poor understanding of how gov't works. Only about 5% of federal outlays are paid to workers of any kind, and obviously actual legislators are a very small portion of that 5%.

 

[Jack V Savage]

His solution is getting rid of compulsion as a way of solving society's problems (If I may be so audacious as to speak or him).

But that entails the elimination of property. Keeping property enforcement and eliminating public say in governance is just turning the gov't from an institution by which society manages itself to an occupying force, which is why serious thinkers recognize right-wing "libertarianism" as an extremely authoritarian ideology and why authoritarian personality types are so drawn to it.

 

[Greoric]

But that entails the elimination of property.

We've been over this. No. In fact, government's world-wide have been the biggest risk to your property.

 

[Greoric]

Not really, at least as I understand the term and its larger significance. Things like intellectual property and patents don't exist without a state organization to enforce them. Banks are very limited within a weak state too.

If you look at places that have the best track record on property rights, enforcement of contracts and so on they all are within strong states with efficient buaracaracy and rule of law.

If your idea of property rights is living on a small subsetance farm which you work with your family than yea there is no need to have a state for that but I don't think that is the lifestyle you want.

I didn't ask you about any of that. I asked you if most people wanted their property rights enforced. And your claim is that they dy don't? How odd. Should we put up a poll asking "Who likes their stuff stolen?"

 

[Jack V Savage]

We've been over this. No. In fact, government's world-wide have been the biggest risk to your property.

That's a nonsense claim, though, because your property is a creation of gov'ts. Only gov'ts can take your property away because only gov'ts can recognize your claim and thus enshrine it as "your property."

 

[Jack V Savage]

I didn't ask you about any of that. I asked you if most people wanted their property rights enforced. And your claim is that they dy don't? How odd. Should we put up a poll asking "Who likes their stuff stolen?"

LOL! Most people want *their* property claims to be recognized and defended by the gov't. But do most people want to be shut off at birth from land and other types of property with no compensation?

 

[Greoric]

LOL! Most people want *their* property claims to be recognized and defended by the gov't. But do most people want to be shut off at birth from land and other types of property with no compensation?

Try to stay focused. I didn't ask him by whom most people think they want their property rights protected by. They don't know any other option. I asked him if most people wanted their property rights enforced. They obviously do.

 

[Greoric]

That's a nonsense claim, though, because your property is a creation of gov'ts. Only gov'ts can take your property away because only gov'ts can recognize your claim and thus enshrine it as "your property."

Is it? Police agencies take more money than thieves do through CAF alone. Thats's not including any tax or any other means the government uses to extort you out of your money (and property).

If government creates property, why don't we require a ubiquitous presence of government to make sure people recognize something isn't theirs? Ever been to a party without a cop accompanying everyone there? How do people know if a drink is theirs or not? How do people know if a seat is occupied without government to tell them its reserved?

 

[Thycidides]

I didn't ask you about any of that. I asked you if most people wanted their property rights enforced. And your claim is that they dy don't? How odd. Should we put up a poll asking "Who likes their stuff stolen?"

You're not using the term property rights the same way I am. To be honest id be better off without property rights existing, as I pay more in rent each month than I get from private contracts being enforced and so on.

I'd be kind of screwed of there was no income tax or social security etc though and this county had the infrastructure of a banana republic.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Try to stay focused. I didn't ask him by whom most people think want their property rights protected by. They don't know any other option. I asked him if most people wanted their property rights enforced. They obviously do.

I am focused. In this case, focused on your attempted distraction. Property rights are zero-sum so of course people want their own protected. They want the whole system--property protection, along with regulations to protect workers, the environment, and consumers, along with public education, public roads, parks, a safety net, etc. What you're proposing is essentially turning most of the population into serfs or slaves, and few want that (at the very least not for themselves--might be some sickos who want it for everyone else).