Ironically Marxism actually creates the kind of income inequality its supposed to prevent.

After what Jesus did it comes down to this - "There are no Jew or Gentile. No slave or free man. NO RICH OR POOR."

Of course that is about giving everyone an equal shot at Redemption and Forgiveness before it's too late.

However can it be applied to other things like social standing, the life one is stuck in, etc. The duty of the Haves should be to help the Have Nots, not by sacrificing everyhing they(Haves) own but to find ways to lift up the Haves Not with things like better schools and education and of course creating businesses that can provide the Have Nots with a job.

I find it interesting the Haves among the Dems/Leftists aren't exactly providing any of that to the Have Nots even though they have the influence and money to do so.

The duty of the haves is to voluntarily help the have nots. There's an important distinction there. Charity is not forced. Charity must and can only be done voluntarily otherwise it's not charity. If its not voluntary it is redistribution of wealth which is accomplished by stealing from those whose produce wealth and giving to those who do nothing. Well.... almost nothing. They do vote Democrat because they don't want that "free" money to stop. Because then they'll have to put some effort into earning that money. It's much easier for them to be parasites, like the government, and be a burden on us slaves.

And you're exactly right. Statistics don't lie. Dems, libs and any other leftist rarely give charity. Everyone on the right gives far more to help the needy than any Democrat ever will. I think Dems think forced wealth redistribution is what works, even though welfare has spent trillions of taxpayer dollars and have absolutely nothing to show for it. Poverity hasn't decreased in the slightest since welfare was enacted.

Yes. As the Bible state - Charity is part free will to do the act and being a joyous giver. The former is obvious, the latter is about trying to give hope in what appears to be hopeless situation.

Leftists: But maybe we just need to tax the rich a little more so they pay their fair share, and increase the welfare state!

Sane person: the definition of insanity is doing the same thing the same way again and expecting a different result.

Well said. If they don't like the rich at all then why on earth would they implement policies that mandate the poor be utterly reliant on them for their wellbeing?

NOOOOOO!!!! No! No! No! That is the exact opposite of what needs to happen.

There is absolutely nothing "fair" about forcing people to "share" the products of their own labor with a completely irresponsible government. And I don't mean any specific president, I mean the government under all presidents since Woodrow Wilson. Coolidge, JFK, Reagan and Trump seem to be the most responsible presidents we've had since Wilson but even under them the government is just far too wasteful and should never be trusted with the money they steal from all of us.

Did you know the rich pay 80% to 90% of all taxes collected by the IRS. That stat is from the IRS. They already pay far too much as it is.

If you took 100% of every bit of money the rich have, it would only fund the government for a little over half a year. After that all of the rich people's money is gone. Who is the government going to get it from then? You? Me? YES. Everyone earning under $150,000 will have to see a massive tax hike and that is EVERYONE. All the way down to the guy earing less than minimum wage.

The problem with the left is 1) they are economic illiterates and 2) they don't know how to math very well.

First of all taxation is theft. The government does not have a right to anything you own. Nothing. Secondly what moron invent the concept of "fair share". Theft is not fair. Are you under any obligation to give your money to someone just because they're pointing a gun at you? NO!!! The only difference between the guy pointing a gun at you and the government is the government has bigger guns.

And speaking of insanity, we have been doing the tax and spend shuffle for ever a century now and all that has happened is our money is now worthless which caused prices to skyrocket. The tax and spend shuffle is why we can't have nice things and it is killing America. The poor are especially hard hit.

And welfare is only making the situation worse. First we have the same poverty level right now and ever since LBJ's Great Society welfare program that we had before it. Trillions has been throw down the drain. Welfare fixed nothing and as a result has cause the destruction of the family among the poor.

If Trump can't get everything done that he campaigned on then we are going to be in bad shape. The Democrats are doing everything in their power to stop or slow down anything Trump wants. Because Democrats hate America, freedom, Trump and everyone who voted for him.

Exactly precisely. Governments have been forcing the “rich” to pay their “fair share” with the promise that “just a little more from the rich and all our problems will go away.” Then they never do, so government soaks them a little more with the same result. It’s like I said — the definition of insanity.

Every Democrat take increase is sold with that "we must pay our fair share". So the last tax hike wasn't our "fair share".

I still want to know what's fair about it. I work and work and work. They just take it from me a want to call that fair.

That is true, we must forgive one another equally.

We are born with equal opportunities ahead of us. We are (or should be) equal under the law. But after that, in a free society there is no equality. In an authoritarian society equality is achieved be taking liberty away.

True on forgiveness.

What the Preamble of the Constitution states - All men are created equal.

Obvious what the Founders meant was, "All men are created equal under God(Creator as they put it)."

Exactly. The goal of the socialist left is to make everyone equal in everything including property and earnings. That can only ever happen if the individual is deprived of their inalienable rights.

Equal people are never free and free people are never equal.

In a free society if several people line for a race there will only be one winner. In a socialist society everyone who participated wins. It doesn't matter how much you trained you still are just one of the winners.

Which goes against the Bible which states - "All that property and stuff you own? Doesn't matter in the long run. Can't take it with you. Also when Jesus returns for good it all becomes a giant moot point that will be forgotten."

Yes, but that not the point of private property ownership. If you don't own your land (for example) than someone else does. If someone else owns the land then you have to live under their rules. However, if you own your own land then you make your own rules.

Private property ownership is essential to liberty.

It not just land. If you don't own your TV set then you can only use the TV with the permission of the owner. The same applies to cars and everything else.

This what Marxism is so evil, it takes away private property rights. It even takes your right to you family and your own life. Everything is owned by the collective and controlled by the state.

Unfortunately we've allowed local governments in almost every state to impose property tax on land. That has been there since the founding. Why it was continued from the British government is unknown to me. It means you don't fully own your land because if you fail to pay your property tax, the government will take your land away. That's just evil.

Taxation is theft. The government, federal, state, county, or city has absolutely not right to steal the product of your labor especially land ( which includes housing). They've already taxed your purchase of your land. That's still wrong but that's all they should ever tax you on. Instead they've created jobs in the local governments just to monitor property values so they can tax you on the value of you property. That's absurd.

Arizona tried to take a step in the right direction by eliminating property taxes for everyone 65 and older but that bill got struck down.

If they must tax you then set the tax to end once your mortgage is paid off or once you turn 62 (the earliest age you can collect social security) which ever comes first. That means if to bought a house the day before you turned 62 then you own 1 day's worth of property tax. If you bought a house on your 62nd birthday or any time after that, no property tax.

Sorry. I went off on a rant about property taxes but I hate the idea of being forced to pay a stupid tax every year for no reason at all other than I want to live in my own house.

Yeah, that's true. Marx and especially Engel ripped off Henri de St. Simon's ideas for 'socialism'. Whenever someone says they're a socialist, I ask if they are an Engels or Henri socialist. Either they don't answer or AOC blank look moment.

I knew socialism had been around for a long time but I didn't know there was another person who tried to define it. I only knew of Marx and Engels.

I'll have to look up Henri and find more about him.

Thanks.

I went his Wikipedia page (you know, the source of absolute truth [sarcasm]). It seems like Saint-Simon had some good ideas but I would have to research him some more.

I think his idea of socialism might be closer to a free market but I still am opposed to any economic and social ideas being enforced by the government.

I believe Adam Smith (who appears to be a contemporary of Saint-Simon) had the best vision of economics in his The Theory of Moral Sentiments and Wealth of Nations books.

Because freedom of the individual to live his or her life without government interference makes the best society. And laws established by the individual to protect our inalienable rights are necessary for a free society.

Rights are freedoms that do not impose or infringe on the rights of another.

Smith's concept that if a person operates his/her business in a way that will benefit the business owner in the long run will inadvertently benefit society.

Businesses that do not operate in their own best interest will fail on their own. That also benefits society as well.

If the government gets involved and props up a failing business they are harming society.

All taxation must be made on the premise that all who are taxed get an equal return on their taxation. The government cannot just steal money from the people. Unless all who are taxed gets some benefit then that tax is theft.

Henri's in blunt terms is 'getting annoying people off the backs of workers'. It's interesting Henri pointed out the two biggest reasons why workers of any type have a hard time care the same culprits causing the suffering today - Government and the Welfare State(what Henri called Parasites). Also Henri didn't push class division either. His 'division' was a person worked or a person better have a darn good reason why they can't work.

I like Adam Smith. If anything he was the first to state that Capitalism/Free Markets need a Moral Center for either models to be legitimate. Even today we see what happens when a business doesn't have a moral center. . .