That is not how they view it and that is absolutely relevant to the point you are making. Liberals are overwhelming less charitable with "their" money as evidenced by a myriad of studies. They view government money as some sort of magic money that isn't actually "theirs". Therefore, my point absolutely refutes your point and is quite relevant.
No, my government should not be involved in "charity" to any country in the world, ally, enemy, or neutral. If someone like you wants to save sudanese babies or whatever you said, donate some of your income to whatever charity meets the goals you have.
My government should tax me and my fellow citizens at a rate that allows for infrastructure and defense of our country/borders and thats it. My government should also damn sure not be borrowing money (we are 36 TRILLION dollars in debt and climbing) to send out as charity to other goverments/countries.
@Devon_Eriksen_@jessesingal If only these people possessed enough empathy to crowdsource the funding to keep these "vital" projects going. They only ever spend other people's money on these "worthy" causes.
Not to split hairs but that is an 84Lumber delivery truck saying "We're hiring". They may be the builder of record in this development as they do install in many regions but that isn't a given. That specific type of truck is used by 84Lumber to deliver millwork related items and other products that need hand unloaded and weather protection.
It didn't take any propoganda whatsoever. It simply became actually feasible due to technology over the last 50 years. This is all due to the curse from original sin in the garden of Eden. Men were cursed with toilsome work, women were cursed with painful childbearing and to want men's role in the world (Gen 3:16b).
@michaeljknowles Not quite 1st century seems to be a stretch. 80 years ago in America, we were just about to finish off the Pacific theater of WW2. Do you think anyone alive then would have predicted this America?
That's not how income for tax purposes works. If these "rich parents" are paying their children as part of a legitimate business, that business will still be required to pay payroll taxes and to deposit said income in an account of the employee's. Which is completely legal even today as long as child is of a certain age.
If you are arguing that the "rich parents" are just paying them out of pocket then that would have no impact on the parents tax liability. The rich parents would still have existing requirements to show that said payments were a legitimate tax write-off such as 1099's etc.
There's obviously a lot more to it but basically you can't just give your kids money and deduct it from your taxable income.
@ChefGruel@joelpollak If they didn't get the job by being competent, why is it logical that they should lose it for not being competent? They were hired for identity traits, those traits haven't changed so why would they believe they are doing a bad job?
@mattmlandis@megbasham Ya she definitely got that wrong. Also, who would choose to believe in a God that tells people to go do the "impossible". The point of the parable has to be that the good Samaritan's example is the level we are called to love our neighbors. And no, it ain't easy.