Do you think we should tax churches to solve our social security crisis?

Question

Lets face it with religous lobbying groups being some of the most powerful. And most politicians being religous, Church and state are not separated. Its about time they should be taxed like any other enterprise.

Answer 1

No, we should only tax churches if they insist on sticking their two cent worth into politics.

Answer 2

Religion is a business like any other .many wealthy families have members who go into religion .
This allows them sweet land deals and cash that is not reported donated to churches .
Think about it for aminute a church with say a thousnad members all contributing say 2 dollars a week . Thats 5000 a month of none taxed money that is available to continue the work of that institution .Now when i was a kid some 40 years ago we use to stick in 10bucks and each kid stuck in a dollar so that was 13 a week easy plus fund raisers and charity drives ,you get the picture .Churches take in so much money .
Now consider those people who leave homes and property and money to churches .Over 80 years that is everyone who once attended and was sold these lies .True many fall away but in the end they try to buy there way back in .Donate half a million for a new church or build and donate a residence for the leader of the cult to which they belong .
Religion is in the game of selling a dream and is more damaging then drugs ,alcohol and terrorism combined .
Lets place a 50% tax on churches and anual fee's in the amount of 100 dollars per person .who attends on average during the christmas service or easter season .

Answer 3

If I were permitted to invest my payments to Social Security, I would retire a millionaire.

It is too bad that Social Security is a "Ponzi Scheme" that takes my payments and uses them to pay current recipients (hope that is not a surprise for you). The surplus created by the Baby Boomers has all been spent and replaced with IOUs (Treasuries = more debt). If you do not privatize this system and take it out of the hands of thieving Congressmen who are totally unqualified to manage the program, we will be in ever more sorry shape as time goes on. The only reason Social Security ever worked was because the program was limited in scope and people hardly felt the financial strain of it in its early life (many workers, few recipients). Unfortunately, it has grown and expanded to become another government boondoggle that is a poster child for government largess run amok. The original design was totally flawed, but no one really cared at the time because it did not cause financial pain.

Taxing more will never lift us out of this mess. Privatization is the program's only salvation. Between this program and Medicare and Medicaid, we are living on very borrowed time. It will begin to explode within the next 20 years and the solution will cost us trillions more because of the reactionary style of government.

Sorry young and future generations.

Answer 4

The Social protection believe fund has over 2 trillion earnings government bonds - and its anticipated to construct up extra beneficial than 3 trillion money extra in bonds in the time of the subsequent 15 years. - On paper the device is solvent - a minimum of till 2042 or 2052 or perhaps later, according to how the financial device does and how plenty longer we live 35 years from now. - So possibly a payroll tax boost sometime around 2042 could be a competent element - yet there is not any want for it now. the real difficulty with social protection is that the the remainder of the government has been borrowing the excess in the believe fund that develop into earmarked to assist pay for the retirement of the little one boost era - and the government has been changing the money with a document cupboard crammed with IOUs. - elevating the cap on earnings project to the social protection tax could only supply the government extra money to borrow from the believe fund and not pay back. a miles better answer to the situation could be to roll back the Bush earnings tax cuts that have ordinarily benefited the wealthy - and the somewhat some different tax cuts that have been put in place when you consider that Reagan - Its high quality to boost taxes on earning over $ninety 4,2 hundred (so as that the government pays back what has been borrowed from the believe fund) - yet taxes should not be raised in ordinary terms on wages and self employment earnings. - at the instant human beings whose earnings comes from dividends and capital advantageous properties pay Federal earnings tax at a fifteen% fee, no count number how massive the earnings is - Does that look honest on condition that lowest paid minimum salary worker will pay social protection taxes at a 6.2% fee and the employees corporation is had to verify it? - If the medicare factor of the tax is risk-free the full % paid by way of the worker and his corporation is 15.3%- under the value paid by way of the guy with a million earnings dividend earnings.

Answer 5

No.
However there are examples that should be fixed. One of my co workers mother collects social security and she NEVER worked one day in her life. Just because she is 64.
You work, you should get your social security. Or also if you are a widow, widower. And in some cases divorce can transfer that.
But we cant tax the church to fix the problem and we have to stop giving people social security that never worked. Who cares how old they are.

Answer 6

1) The fact that some (I wouldn't say most) politicians are religious has nothing to do with separation of church & state.
2) That doctrine is NOT in the Constitution.
3) The Constitution forbids govt. interference in religion & John Marshall ruled that the power to tax is the power to destroy.

Answer 7

Good thought with the close relationship of church and state now days. Yes tax any profit company/organization.

Answer 8

This is a very good question.

If that where to take effect, all religions must be equally taxed, not just christian. I believe that would be impossible. If we did tax the 'enterprises' that would only give them more persusive power over majority opinions.

Answer 9

I agree to some extend yes. I also believe the "Fair" tax would solve much of this problem. Because EVERYONE would actually pay taxes

Answer 10

YES! Churchs take in billions and don't pay a dime in taxes.