And the team of DV, Savage, Gillen, & Stratton would have you believe the answer to that question is a resounding yes. But remember, the government is the taxpayers. And taxpayers are those who are not rich.. And the rich are not taxpayers.
They are DEMS supporting trickle down economics! These connected millionaires pay nothing but provide below minimum wage waitress, barkeep and bouncer "jobs". As failure Death Ray would put it; "they pay no taxes but per chance they may eat Downtown thus generating economic revival."
Reverse DEM robin hoods. Also called DEM working together! Screwing the poor property owners that can't sell their property and giving to the rich DEM developer promising below minimum wage "jobs". Stealing from the poor at the Walmart checkout to give to the overpaid nonprofit stooges. And don't ask them about paying a PILOT they get violent-they refuse to pay anything-since they already wrote a big political check.
When I read the posts of the drooling idiots who accuse me of raising taxes and making policy at the city, county and other levels of government --- I am convinced that they are mentally sick.
Show me evidence of any one time that I made a vote to raise taxes or make policy as a member of a legislative body at the city, county or other level of government.
Show me evidence of any one time that I made policy as a part of the executive body at the city, county or other level of government.
The FACT is that I have never served in any capacity in the city, county or other level of government .... so all of the statements that have been made are just plain LIES.
George Amedore & Christian Klueg for NYS Senate 2016 Pete Vroman for State Assembly 2016[/size][/color]
"For this is what America is all about. It is the uncrossed desert and the unclimbed ridge. It is the star that is not reached and the harvest that is sleeping in the unplowed ground." Lyndon Baines Johnson
That's the scam. The liberal socialists actually want people poor and dependent. That is the only way they can 'control'! They created and support the poor and uneducated. Schenectady is a prime example. Just look at the school system. It has been on the 'worst achieving' school list for how many years?
Just take a gander inside the dss building and see exactly how many of those folks you could educate and re-direct. I'd have to guess that the percentage would be less than half. And that is just the way the liberal socialists want them.......dumbed down and totally dependent.
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
Re Dec. 20 letter, “Where does it say government has to take care of the poor?”: John Gaetani makes a good point that there will always be poor in the United States. It’s important to remember that this is a government for the people and by the people, and the majority of Americans are suffering. The (“godless”) whiners of the United States are simply requesting that their elected representatives, the people they voted into office (Section 2 and 3 of the Constitution), represent their constituents’ interests. In case you were wondering where the federal government has the power to collect taxes, that would be Section 8, and the money can be used for what is viewed as best for the United States. I’d say funding the Army is a patriotic duty. In addition, a quick Google search provided suffi cient evidence that Jesus was a fi rm believer in wealth redistribution and John F. Kennedy’s presidency led to massive social and economic reforms continued by Lyndon B. Johnson.
Government ? What about YOU . People that quickly point to ' commandments ' - what do I have to do ? You are Christian ? Really - what are you thinking ?
We are told " Whatever you do to the least of my brethren - you do to me "- also the fifth beatitude covers how we should view the poor- Blessed are the merciful for they shall obtain mercy.- Look it up. Some people dont understand mercy- LOVE towards those that are miserable .
Cicero - you and the he-she are something else. Really-
Scrooge Was A Liberal by Ann Coulter Posted 12/22/2010 ET Updated 12/22/2010 ET
It's the Christmas season, so godless liberals are citing the Bible to demand the redistribution of income by government force. Didn't Jesus say, "Blessed are the Health and Human Services bureaucrats, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven"?
Liberals are always indignantly accusing conservatives of claiming God is on our side. What we actually say is: We're on God's side, particularly when liberals are demanding God's banishment from the public schools, abortion on demand, and taxpayer money being spent on Jesus submerged in a jar of urine and pictures of the Virgin Mary covered with pornographic photos.
But for liberals like Al Franken, it's beyond dispute that Jesus would support extending federal unemployment insurance.
This has absolutely nothing to do with the Bible, but it does nicely illustrate Shakespeare's point that the "devil can cite Scripture for his purpose."
What the Bible says about giving to the poor is: "Each of you should give what you have decided in your heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver." (2 Corinthians (9:7)
Being forced to pay taxes under penalty of prison is not voluntary and rarely done cheerfully. Nor do our taxes go to "the poor." They mostly go to government employees who make more money than you do.
The reason liberals love the government redistributing money is that it allows them to skip the part of charity that involves peeling the starfish off their wallets and forking over their own money. This, as we know from study after study, they cannot bear to do. (Unless they are guaranteed press conferences where they can brag about their generosity.)
Syracuse University professor Arthur Brooks' study of charitable giving in America found that conservatives give 30 percent more to charity than liberals do, despite the fact that liberals have higher incomes than conservatives.
In his book "Who Really Cares?" Brooks compared the charitable donations of religious conservatives, secular liberals, secular conservatives and "religious" liberals.
His surprising conclusion was ... Al Franken gave the most of all!
Ha ha! Just kidding. Religious conservatives, the largest group at about 20 percent of the population, gave the most to charity -- $2,367 per year, compared with $1,347 for the country at large.
Even when it comes to purely secular charities, religious conservatives give more than other Americans, which is surprising because liberals specialize in "charities" that give them a direct benefit, such as the ballet or their children's elite private schools.
Indeed, religious people, Brooks says, "are more charitable in every measurable nonreligious way."
Brooks found that conservatives donate more in time, services and even blood than other Americans, noting that if liberals and moderates gave as much blood as conservatives do, the blood supply would increase by about 45 percent.
They ought to set up blood banks at tea parties.
On average, a person who attends religious services and does not believe in the redistribution of income will give away 100 times more -- and 50 times more to secular charities -- than a person who does not attend religious services and strongly believes in the redistribution of income.
Secular liberals, the second largest group coming in at 10 percent of the population, were the whitest and richest of the four groups. (Some of you may also know them as "insufferable blowhards.") These "bleeding-heart tightwads," as New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof calls them, were the second stingiest, just behind secular conservatives, who are mostly young, poor, cranky white guys.
Despite their wealth and advantages, secular liberals give to charity at a rate of 9 percent less than all Americans and 19 percent less than religious conservatives. They were also "significantly less likely than the population average to return excess change mistakenly given to them by a cashier." (Count Nancy Pelosi's change carefully!)
Secular liberals are, however, 90 percent more likely to give sanctimonious Senate speeches demanding the forced redistribution of income. (That's up 7 percent from last year!)
We'll review specific liberals next week.
Needless to say, "religious liberals" made up the smallest group at just 6.4 percent of the population (for more on this, see my book, "Godless").
Interestingly, religious liberals were also "most confused" of all the groups. Composed mostly of blacks and Unitarians, religious liberals made nearly as many charitable donations as religious conservatives, but presumably, the Unitarians brought down their numbers, making them second in charitable giving.
Brooks wrote that he was shocked by his conclusions because he believed liberals "genuinely cared more about others than conservatives did" -- probably because liberals are always telling us that.
So he re-ran the numbers and gathered more data, but it kept coming out the same. "In the end," he says, "I had no option but to change my views."
Every other study on the subject has produced similar results. Indeed, a Google study of philanthropy found an even greater disparity, with conservatives giving 50 percent more than liberals. The Google study showed that liberals gave more to secular causes overall, but conservatives still gave more as a percentage of their incomes.
The Catalogue for Philanthropy analyzed a decade of state and federal tax returns and found that the red states were far more generous than the blue states, with the highest percentage of tightwads living in the liberal Northeast.
In his book "Intellectuals," Paul Johnson quotes Pablo Picasso scoffing at the idea that he would give to the needy. "I'm afraid you've got it wrong," Picasso explains, "we are socialists. We don't pretend to be Christians."
Merry Christmas to all, skinflint liberals and generous Christians alike!
It’s one thing to disagree with the social welfare policies set in place over the past 50 years, but it’s something totally different, and incorrect, to use a limited knowledge of the Christian gospels to justify your political beliefs. That is, of course, what is preached by right-wing political pundits these days and probably explains letters like the one Dec. 20 [“Where does it say government has to take care of the poor?”], but a few minutes actually reading the Christian scriptures tells another story. First of all, the line, “The poor you will always have with you, but you will not always have me.” (Matthew, 26:10) is in reference to an unnamed woman (Mary, sister of Martha, in the Gospel of John) anointing Jesus in preparation for his death and subsequent burial. No one quotes Jesus saying anything like, “Forget about the poor because there’s always going to be more of them!” Secondly, caring for the poor is one of the core values in Christianity, as it is in many faith traditions. In Matthew 25:41-45, Christ the King scolds the “righteous,” saying, “Depart from me, you who are cursed ... I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.” The story continues with the question “Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?” The parable ends with the line, “Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.” Mr. Gaetani is correct that the Bible doesn’t say that the government is responsible for the poor. However, I challenge him to find anything in the Bible (Old or New testaments) that tells the poor to “buck up” and stop whining!
Caring for the poor is a responsibility of each and every person according to your means not a government mandate to seize your money and give it to the poor, that's the difference.
The Bible contains numerous passages regarding giving alms. Jesus said "Give to them that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away" (Matthew 5:42) In Thessalonians 3:10, the Apostle Paul states "For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat."
As many have stated in this thread, the responsibility for helping those who are less fortunate and exhibit genuine need is shared by the families, our people, our churches, and our communities. Those in need should not be supported unless they are willing to work in any way that they can for their maintenance. Christianity does not encourage slothfulness
The Founding Fathers believed in limited government and supported the position that (federal) government should not be allowed to impose any authority over the people unless that power has been specifically granted by the people or their representatives. This principle is addressed by the 10th Amendment which states that the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
The U.S. Constitution holds that all men are created equal; equal before God, equal in our rights, and equal before the the law. Equal rights, however, does not suggest equal results.
Though our government is "of the people, by the people, for the people", the responsibility to give alms belongs individually and collectively to our citizens, not to the government.
Being forced to pay taxes under penalty of prison is not voluntary and rarely done cheerfully. Nor do our taxes go to "the poor." They mostly go to government employees who make more money than you do.
I like this statement by Ann Coulter.....and so true!
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
When I read the posts of the drooling idiots who accuse me of raising taxes and making policy at the city, county and other levels of government --- I am convinced that they are mentally sick.
Show me evidence of any one time that I made a vote to raise taxes or make policy as a member of a legislative body at the city, county or other level of government.
Show me evidence of any one time that I made policy as a part of the executive body at the city, county or other level of government.
The FACT is that I have never served in any capacity in the city, county or other level of government .... so all of the statements that have been made are just plain LIES.
Gee, I can't remember ever stating that one particular poster ever VOTED (or made policy) at any level of government, to have the financially struggling taxpayers pay the property and school taxes of the millionaires, but some people proclaim all these taxpayer funded projects downtown are wonderful, etc etc. But explain to some people that the property and school taxes of the millionaires are paid by the financially struggling homeowners in the city, and then ask some people if they support having the households with $30,000 incomes pay the taxes on the millionaires downtown, and there are no words written opposing such theft.
Optimists close their eyes and pretend problems are non existent. Better to have open eyes, see the truths, acknowledge the negatives, and speak up for the people rather than the politicos and their rich cronies.
There is a moral, if not legal, obligation for us to help the poor
Re Dec. 20 letter, “Where does it say government has to take care of the poor?”: What a sad commentary printed only a few days before Christmas. Having worked 33 years paying into the tax system, I did not begrudge my obligation. The tax dollars provide funding for everyone, even the wealthy. The medical networks that serve the poor are a very necessary requirement. Imagine a child of yours being denied care in a life-and-death health matter? Think about an elderly parent denied services because funding [was] not available. As for the “whiners” the writer referred to, I believe there are more of the poor and oppressed who would rather be working than beating themselves up each day, wondering where to find work to care for their families. While the Constitution may not tell people to pay for another’s lifestyle, it does attempt to preserve equality. While it offers [a] person the right to bear arms, nowhere does it state killing innocent people is a right. All laws can be misinterpreted. As it states in Proverbs (since the writer chose to quote Jesus), “Protect the rights of all who are helpless, speak for them and be a righteous judge of the poor and needy.” Seems to me, the letter writer is the only one whining.
There is a moral, if not legal, obligation for us to help the poor
The point that Ms. Bruno is missing is that you can't 'make' someone moral to your standings. What is moral to one is not moral to another. Same goes for values!
Some people obviously think it is morally ok to rape, steal, rob, murder and torture. Try telling them that it is their moral obligation to take care of the 'poor'. You can't change the heart of man.
Aside from the few morally inept........I believe that the majority of people are compassionate and sensitive to those less fortunate. But they would prefer to dole it out themselves to their liking. Giving money to the government to dole out to the poor only ends up in a bureaucratic government program/dept.. More money is then given to the 'program's government employees' than is given to the poor. Historically, that's what government does.
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
Logged
They are DEMS supporting trickle down economics! These connected millionaires pay nothing but provide below minimum wage waitress, barkeep and bouncer "jobs". As failure Death Ray would put it; "they pay no taxes but per chance they may eat Downtown thus generating economic revival." 
Merry Christmas to you too.
