Question for fiscal conservatives

[Rational Agnostic]

I have spent a fair amount of time bashing the left on this forum in the past few days, so to be fair, now it's the right's turn. My question for the religious right is this, how can you possibly believe that it is fair that the world's eight richest men have as much money as half of the world? The World's 8 Richest Men Are Now as Wealthy as Half the World's Population And, specifically, to the Christian conservative, do you really think that Jesus (the guy who criticized the rich and encouraged everyone to give to the poor) would approve of this scenario? How can you endorse economic policies that lead to scenarios like this, and then go read your Bible in good conscience. Y'all remind me of the "goats" in Matthew 25. "For 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. They will also answer, '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 He will reply: 'Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'" (Matthew 25:42-45). Sounds like he's talking to right-wingers to me.

 

[Rival]

The religious right aren't all fiscal conservatives. They tend to be social conservatives and economic socialists like I am.

 

[Twilight Hue]

To me, although not religious in the Christian sense, fiscal conservatism just meant not over-extending your credit and ability to pay.

 

[Father Heathen]

The religious right aren't all fiscal conservatives. They tend to be social conservatives and economic socialists like I am.

That's rare within the U.S., despite economic socialism being more in line with Jesus' teachings.

But that's cherry picking for ya.

 

[sun rise]

I'm a left-wing fiscal conservative who believes government as well as us individually should be aiding the needy. I don't think we need to spend as much on the military as the next 6 combined let alone much more as the right wants to spend.

 

[bobhikes]

I don't believe you titled the OP correctly. I am a fiscal conservative but have no religious alliances and also have no problem taxing the rich.

 

[SinSaber]

I have spent a fair amount of time bashing the left on this forum in the past few days, so to be fair, now it's the right's turn. My question for the religious right is this, how can you possibly believe that it is fair that the world's eight richest men have as much money as half of the world? The World's 8 Richest Men Are Now as Wealthy as Half the World's Population And, specifically, to the Christian conservative, do you really think that Jesus (the guy who criticized the rich and encouraged everyone to give to the poor) would approve of this scenario? How can you endorse economic policies that lead to scenarios like this, and then go read your Bible in good conscience. Y'all remind me of the "goats" in Matthew 25. "For 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. They will also answer, '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 He will reply: 'Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'" (Matthew 25:42-45). Sounds like he's talking to right-wingers to me.

It's not like he's anti rich. In the parable of the prodigal son, the wealthy father was the only one who had it right all along.

 

[Valjean]

The religious right aren't all fiscal conservatives. They tend to be social conservatives and economic socialists like I am.

How are you defining economic socialist? Don't socialists discourage hoarding wealth when your comrades are starving?
Whatever happened to "To each according to need, from each according to ability?"

I'm a left-wing fiscal conservative who believes government as well as us individually should be aiding the needy. I don't think we need to spend as much on the military as the next 6 combined let alone much more as the right wants to spend.

Good point. but in addition to Ike's prophetic warning about the military-industrial behemoth, I'd also criticize our promotion of rabid consumerism; our advertiser induced ethos of buying new stuff even before the old stuff was irreparably broken or worn out.

 

[Rival]

How are you defining economic socialist? Don't socialists discourage hoarding wealth when your comrades are starving?
Whatever happened to "To each according to need, from each according to ability?"

You know, socialism. Universal healthcare, free schooling, welfare, foodbanks &c.

 

[Valjean]

You know, socialism. Universal healthcare, free schooling, welfare, foodbanks &c.

But you said:

The religious right aren't all fiscal conservatives. They tend to be social conservatives and economic socialists like I am.

I don't know what world you live in, but in my neck of the world the religious right is pretty much a sink-or-swim, work-or-starve crowd -- the opposite of socialist, at least outside their own, insular religious communities.

 

[Rival]

But you said:
I don't know what world you live in, but in my neck of the world the religious right is pretty much a sink-or-swim, work-or-starve crowd -- the opposite of socialist, at least outside their own, insular religious communities.

Europe.

 

[Valjean]

Europe.

Alas, here in Amur'ca the right believes it's not government's job to care for it's citizens; to "promote the general welfare," as our constitution states.

 

[Rational Agnostic]

It's not like he's anti rich. In the parable of the prodigal son, the wealthy father was the only one who had it right all along.

What about the Rich Man and Lazarus?

 

[Ultimatum]

My question for the religious right is this

I know you are catastrophic when you assume fiscal conservatives with "the religious right".

how can you possibly believe that it is fair that the world's eight richest men have as much money as half of the world?

More catastrophe. This has nothing to do with fiscal conservatism. It has all to do with Government failure, which has facilitated market failure. You would remove market failure if you removed the bad Government policy. In this case, the reason for such a disparity is poor competition policy.

Neostatism is an atrocity.

 

[Rational Agnostic]

I know you are catastrophic when you assume fiscal conservatives with "the religious right".



More catastrophe. This has nothing to do with fiscal conservatism. It has all to do with Government failure, which has facilitated market failure. You would remove market failure if you removed the bad Government policy. In this case, the reason for such a disparity is poor competition policy.

Neostatism is an atrocity.

Catastrophic? Your word choice doesn't make sense to me.

 

[Ultimatum]

I don't believe you titled the OP correctly. I am a fiscal conservative but have no religious alliances and also have no problem taxing the rich.

This must be qualified, however. I have no problem taxing the rich, for example, but you and I will have vastly different ideas as to, first of all, why the rich should be taxed and how the tax system should work.

 

[Ultimatum]

You know, socialism. Universal healthcare, free schooling, welfare, foodbanks &c.

None of that is socialism. That is social democracy.

 

[Ultimatum]

Catastrophic? Your word choice doesn't make sense to me.

Calamitous: A Description.

 

[Laika]

None of that is socialism. That is social democracy.

Isn't Social Democracy is a form of Socialism?

 

[bobhikes]

This must be qualified, however. I have no problem taxing the rich, for example, but you and I will have vastly different ideas as to, first of all, why the rich should be taxed and how the tax system should work.

I am for the flat tax system with no exemptions.