Total posts: 395
-->
@Greyparrot
I had Taco Bell on ash Wed. Did that count?
Do that every day and you can be like Paul when he says "I die daily. . . " 1 Cor 15:31
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
Why? Because Jesus didn’t want to get wet again. He showed his fear of getting wet again when he walked on water.
That is funny. Never saw it that way.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
You are quite good at telling what Jesus' baptism was not about, (although the bible does tell us) but fail at every turn to tell us what Jesus' baptism was, actually about.
I never claimed I knew it all but the scripture was plain that Jesus was sinless and therefore, did not have a need of a repentance baptism. Unless you have an ace up your sleeve, which I would like to see, that tells otherwise.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
How can you be gentle when you are” still in the school of Hard Knox.”?
Go find out.
Created:
-->
@cristo71
This is what a landed gentry might look like, and it isn’t pretty:
LOL! I thought this was going to be a freakish documentary that you linked. A terrifying look into the lives of billionaires and the ruling class with freak parties and all!
I love Monty Python BTW. I was introduced to them at a wee age of 7 with The search for the Holy Grail. I didn't get a lot of references as a kid by the slap stick was funny enough at the time.
Created:
-->
@ludofl3x
As I said, philosophically irreconcilable it seems. Good luck with your business all the same!
It seems the philosophy is more of a government intervention rather than a personal freedom, would you agree? Meaning, we both feel it would be a good thing for the ultra-rich to help out the poor, except you feel it should be governed through legislation and I feel it should be governed by conscience. Am I seeing this correctly?
No, it's not like that at all. I'm talking about taxing personal wealth, not corporate wealth, in this case. How would you "raising your rates" as someone who died with 250M dollars work to your advantage, what's it even mean? I'm confused.
It was just a reference of how the government would get those greedy bastards by imposing fees and such and they just slip out of it and move it on to us. It will be the same song and dance with the ultra rich.
If the end result is you spend the last ten years of your life thinking "I don't want to government fumbling my money, so I better do something good with it rather than accumulate three more airplanes", then the goal is achieved AND you had control over the money.
Works in theory, I guess. My only argument is that it give the government to authority to so with that money that the existing government want to do with it. IF this were to happen to me, I wouldn't wanting to go to organizations that I don't believe in, such as Planned Parenthood, or a Catholic group. On top of this, it is forcing a person to lose his fortune that he has gained and demanding he do something good with it. I don't think the government should be the one determining what is good or not.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
So then why did the Jesus, "the sacrificial lamb"#67 need cleansing?
To fulfill all righteousness, I.E. the law, I guess. It wasn't because he was sinful. The baptism may only have been significant to the ministry purification and not the sacrifice.
Created:
-->
@ludofl3x
This is all well and good, and ideally, I'd love for it to be this way.
Then let's not change the ideals. The idea to insert the government to meddle with "moral" affairs is a bad idea. If a billionaire wants to give to global hunger or have a freak off, then it's their business and we should not be able to tell them what is and is not good or bad with their money, legislatively.
Yes, that "ability" was having a rich dad. Everything else follows from that.
I believe it was a rich uncle, but none the less, he had to have abilities to keep it and make it grow.
Why not? What if we imposed a tax of 100% on anything over $200M at death?
Sounds great and all but this is like charging corporations environmental fees because they can afford it. The corporations will turn around and raise their rates to make up for that fee. They are not giving up that extra money. They will pass it to the consumer and raise the inflation rate because of government intervention. Keep the government out of the finance business. It has only made things worse.
Somehow, the rich will find a way to by-pass this and stick it to us.
but I don't think America became America by a bunch of people at the bottom of a mountain thinking "That looks really hard to do, so I'm not gonna do it."
Actually, America came to be by rich elites, most of them losing everything to form this country. This would be a good example of the rich doing good wit their riches, but I pretty sure it was not because they had such a good heart to see mankind thrive.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
You appear to have skipped this, David.
Oops! I sure did. Thanks!
So Jesus was sinless but was baptised in a ritual that was said to "wash away your sins" as in one of many examples:
The ritual of baptism for "washing away sins" is a New Testament ritual. There were all kinds of washings in the OT law for priests and so that is my opinion of why Jesus was baptized by John, to start his ministry of being a high priest.
“And now what are you waiting for? Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name.” (Acts 22:16)
This is strictly NT baptism of the church, Christians. The reason being is that baptism in Jesus Name is the identity of Christ's death being transferred to the baptized. This is where Romans chapter 6 comes in about Jesus Name Baptism.
But you then attempt cover this little dilemma by having us believe that Jesus' baptism had nothing to do with either washing away of sins nor was it to do with repentance but was all to do with-as you say - " It was a ritual cleaning for the sacrificial lamb. "#67
Yes. It was to fulfill all righteousness. John wouldn't baptism him and Jesus demanded it.
Just so I am clear, Who was the sacrificial lamb?
It was Jesus Christ.
Created:
-->
@ludofl3x
What is the point of having literally more money than you could ever spend while your fellow man struggles to have their basic needs met?
I see what you are saying. It would seem to me that is something you would try to do if you had more than you needed, then share the wealth with others who would need it. I would actually agree with that and it is biblical 1 John 3:17 "But whoso hath this world's good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him?"
I think the difference between what we are saying is that I would give the owner of the money the ability to decide where that money should be given rather than the government.
I just don't get why people who think they're rebels and so anti "The System" want to prop up oligarchs and the financial status quo and continue this way.
There is a fine line between admiring a person's ability and making them a role model. I could say that Hitler, in his own way, was a dynamic leader and pulled Germany out of a pit of despair and made them a world power again. He improved the lives of many millions of Germans and others around the world through their technological advances, BUT I DO NOT think Hitler was a good person or someone to follow, or prop up.
So, Donald Trump is a billionaire and the next President. You will have to agree that he has some sort of ability to get to where he was at. Is he a good person? Not hardly and I do not think he is a great role model.
They think they're vile because they hoard it, and look at poor people as one of two things: the problem, or a way for them to make more money.
I don't fully disagree with this. I saw a meme once that showed a Wal-Mart self checkout asking the customer if they wanted to give a dollar to such and such charity. The caption stated "you guys make billions a year, why don't you give them a dollar?", which I couldn't argue with. It does show the greediness of some companies, like Wal-Mart, that will beg the patron for money then tout that they (walmart) gave millions to such and such charity.
So the answer is "oh well, guess that's how it is"?
That is not what I was implying. Just saying that a ultra rich stays rich through the government. Imposing more taxes would not change it.
Or, we could have been.
What do you mean by this statement? Are you saying we past the point of no return?
And again I'm not arguing against wealth, what I'm arguing against is hoarding wealth.
I wouldn't be against obtaining wealth either, but I'm against taking the wealth by force. I would say it's a slippery slope and we, the middle class, are already facing huge challenges because of it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
The question remains. , “Why did God send Jesus to die for our sins which only continue to multiply when he could have removed sin once and for all?"
You have asked this question multiple times which I have answered at least once. Why do you keep asking the same question? Is it not to your satisfaction or is it not making sense?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
@Shila
In Luke 7:18-23, why did John the Baptist ask Jesus if he was the Messiah since he baptized Jesus and heard God speak about Jesus? Did John not trust his own baptism of Jesus with water or John began to doubt Jesus?
My personal opinion is that John had figured that since he was the forerunner of Christ that he would be living pretty high as the Messiah would "restore the kingdom" and he figured like the rest of the Jews, the actual nation of Israel and drive out the Romans from their land. He would be able to eat at the king's table with honor, BUT when he was in prison, he started to doubt this. When troubles started coming, then his faith started getting low and he asked again through his disciples about Jesus. Jesus was making it clear to John because of the miracles he performed, so, somehow, that was something that would jog his memory or set him at ease.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
@CatholicApologetics
That's not what scripture tells us.
I will stand corrected on this fact that the scripture does say that "Luke 3:3 And he came into all the country about Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins" but we know that this was done as a pre-emptive baptism according to Paul in Acts 19:4 Paul said, “John baptized with a baptism of repentance, telling the people that they should believe in the One who would come after him, that is, in Jesus.”.
Good catch.
And how does washing away "repentance" work then. ? Do babies "repent" before they are christened or baptised?
Baptizing Babies is a Catholic invention and not biblical. I will have to defer this to CA for the answer this.
So.
Meaning that forgiveness of sins was given at a time when Jesus was on the Earth, not the norm. Just an FYI.
So then are you claiming that the baptism Jesus received from John was nothing to do with "repentance" , as per your claim it is above?
Yes, if Jesus is sinless, then he has no need for repentance. However there were Jewish customs about washing (baptizing). Again, I don't fully know what "fulfill all righteousness" means, but that's why Jesus did it. It was not because he was sinful.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
This often happens, and it follows to apply the eternal adage that a fool and their money are soon parted.
This is true for many people that gain an inheritance. An investor told me that a person will spend their inheritance within 60-90 days. This is where the idea of not thinking like a poor man comes in. Care about your finances and future.
Created:
-->
@ludofl3x
You mean at $250K per year, right? And the 1M is already in the stock market, correct?
Correct on both. Sorry for the non-clarification.
I do. It's at the point where you cannot spend it, literally, where it does nothing for the economy at all. I think we have a fundamental and likely irreconcilable difference in philosophy here, so I won't argue about it, we're only going to talk past each other.
I actually would like to hear this philosophy where more than needed or more than possible to spend riches will be considered immoral.
I would think a lot of the whole "rich is bad" and "poor mentality" stems from this philosophy.
THis is strange, because if all it takes to be rich is to think like a rich person, then your children and grandchildren aren't going to learn this lesson that you seem to value. They will, though, think like a rich person: born on third base thinking they hit a triple, figuring they're just smarter or better than the poor people who are too stupid and lazy to think themselves out of poverty.
Great point, but there is a lot of grey on this. I think there are proud rich people who look down on the poor because they are so smart and I also believe there are proud poor people who look down on the rich because they are so vile as to have so much money. Both will never understand the other since they are so proud.
The raising and doctrine of a child will be the determining factor of the mindset of the inheritors. There will be stipulations in my will when/if this happens so the kids will not be abuse the inheritance.
What did they do to earn this advantage, after all? I'm obviously a big proponent of the inheritance tax, but not at a "I own a small steelworking shop" level. I don't want a landed gentry in this country, and without the inheritance tax it seems impossible to avoid.
They would not earn this. This is a benefit of being my child. As for a landed Gentry, I get what is wanted to be avoided, but the ultra rich really don't pay taxes since the tax laws are made to help them too. Imposing a tax on them would not work since they will always figure a way around it. It will just bite people like you and me in the butt.
As for ultra rich, keep in mind that there would never have been a Microsoft, Amazon, Facebook, Walmart etc without these guys creating these things and making billions of dollars from it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Romans came after Christs death.Regardless.
Romans is explaining the purpose of his death. It explains that we (Christians) have been buried with Jesus when we get baptized in Jesus name. We "die" with Jesus and therefore the pull of sin no longer has power over a dead man. Therefore, sin has been destroyed in our lives, WHO TAKE PART of his death.
Your brain is gobbledygook.
What is your point about the book of Romans coming after Jesus's death anyways?
John the Baptist was "washing away sins" before Jesus arrived on the scene.
It did not "wash away the sins". You are reaching for straws here. You would know that is was a washing of repentance and it was to prepare the hearts of men for the messiah.
In fact Jesus was forgiving sins before he was crucified and believed to have died.
True, but that was before the death and creation of the church. Also, God can do whatever he wants while he is on Earth, and he did.
Tell me: What sins had Jesus committed that he needed baptism by John?
None. It was a ritual cleaning for the sacrificial lamb. It started his ministry. Jesus said it would fulfill all righteousness, though I do not know what that means entirely.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
It needs to change from being poor.It cant.
Can you explain why it can't?
Take a few things at a time and over a year, you will be a different person, hopefully for the better.
Impossible.
Again, why?
Created:
-->
@ludofl3x
Not remotely, at least not inherently. But this once again makes me want to understand how much is "a lot".
A lot means different things to different people. I would say someone at $250K can live very comfortable and have money to sock away for a leisurely retirement.
But do you have a threshold of wealth that would cross the line of morality? At what dollar amount does a person become bad? Is there a point that a wealthy man should not have so much?
What are you basing this figuring on? I am not saying this doesn't happen, but how many of the top, say, 2% of wealth in this country do you think built it from the ground up? Zuckerberg maybe?
I posted to BK earlier about millionaires in the USA. There are around 17M of them that came from the middle class. I would say a person that has a million dollar portfolio is wealthy and is on the fast track to retirement if invested correctly.
How do you feel about inheritance tax?
I think its terrible. The money has already been taxed and anything passed down to others upon the death of someone should be the wealth of those people. It a double tax of the monies. If I save up a nest egg for my children and grand children because I worked hard to do it, why are my children punished for my hard work? It's uncle Sam getting his dirty hands on more of American's money to blow like a drunken sailor.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
It didnt change to being rich.
It needs to change from being poor.
Habits take about 30 days to break and reform. Take a few things at a time and over a year, you will be a different person, hopefully for the better.
Created:
-->
@Shila
Jesus purpose was to offer salvation and eternal life. But Christians mission is diagonally opposed focusing instead to sustain and renew the life of the earth.
You cannot compartmentalize the salvation of a soul and the life that now lives differently. When a man decides to live for God, God will change his heart. He is now wanting to makes things around him better and we are called to do good works. How far does that extend is dependent on the person, but for sure it should effect your family, marriages, church and neighborhood.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
Not all people have same mindset.
Agree. Mindsets are achieved through life experiences and doctrinal training with your nurturing (or lack of) environment.
I cant change the mindset.
Not so. Your mindset has changed many times and you have not realized it. The best way to change a mindset is to decide what you want to change and to change the HABITS that are formed from those mindsets. One habit you could start with is your self talk about how much you can't change. Stop the tape that plays in your mind and change the message.
Created:
-->
@ludofl3x
What do you think would (I hate to say this, but WILL) happen to your wages as an ironworker when someone invents a reliable machine that does what you do? And your boss thinks "I'm paying David $29 an hour plus benefits to do what this $75,000 machine will do"? Because a rich person thinks "Sorry David. You're out."
This will and has happened. I have out grew the companies I worked for twice, meaning I made more than what the position was able to support. I quit 5 years ago because I was the highest paid employee and the demands were outrageous to try to keep up with my pay. I found out that after I left, my duties were divided within other people in the company. The same thing happened last year as I was a commission based employee and the company grew and my pay started getting too much for the owner's liking. I quit there and now I started my own. Now I will be the top man and cannot be told that I am not performing well enough for my wages.
This sounds good on the surface, but it sneakily equates being rich / financially stable (THIS may be a better term to debate over rather than "rich") with some sort of virtue. That's just not the case, I'm afraid.
Are you saying that having a lot of money is UN-virtuous?
And in this particular very real example (a labor action at the docks is still pending after being averted in Q4 of 2024), there are less and less foremen, less and less managers, why? Because when you have 2 machines reliably doing the job that forty people did, how many managers and foremen do you need now? Start his own longshoreman business?? Like open his own port?? I mean theoretically okay but in reality, how can he do something like that on his (let's use your) $29 / hr salary?
I'd hate to say it this way, but if its a dying trade, they need to jump ship and use their skills elsewhere.
Would it be fair to say that you think the way things are SUPPOSED to work are such that a financially stable person should be someone who started out at the bottom and just worked his or her way to financial stability, and this should be the preferred path to wealth, the most respectable?
No, but I figure that most wealthy people come from humble beginnings. I would say any path to wealth is respectable as long as it's a moral way to do things.
Created:
-->
@Cerulean
The only source I found on this was a self-reporting survey, so I think you might want to lower your estimate. It wouldn't surprise me if some of these people were reporting as "middle-class" falsely either mistakenly or because they wanted to feel better about their achievements.
Possibly. I just googled "how many millionaires," etc etc. and it spit out this result. Point is that there are a LOT of millionaires from the middle class.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
Contrary to popular belief, not all people have same abilities.
Of course not. I love music but I have friends that are musical geniuses. My brother is a mechanical mastermind, I only like to tinker. But we are not talking abilities, we are talking about mindsets.
On the road of life, I cannot guarantee that you will not wreck the car, but I will guarantee a wreck every time you refuse to grab the wheel.
Change the mindset and you will achieve more. You may not become Warren Buffet with money or a Jimmy Hendrix with music, but you will become better when you advance.
Created:
-->
@Shila
Jesus was the central figure in Christianity. Jesus had to be accepted to be a Christian. So Christianity started with Jesus.
Agree. The term Christian started because of Jesus. If there was no Jesus, there would be no Christians.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
@Shila
In reference to the "sin of all the world" argument, you both are not taking into account that Jesus did not destroy sin worldwide, but rather within our own lives that choose so, BUT you ignore this fact and keep saying the same thing.
Romans 6 talks about the sin is destroyed due to baptism because we identify with the death or sacrifice of Jesus.
What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?
2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?
3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.
7 For he that is dead is freed from sin
2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?
3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.
7 For he that is dead is freed from sin
This is the reference to the destruction of sin. The whole world is saying it is available to the whole world.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Irrelevant to the thread. And Irrelevant to my question. Which I remind you was:Instead of any story about miraculous conception, virgins, exiles, , arrests , trial, torture, blood scourging, crowns of thorns, and crucifixion, and rising from once being dead why couldn't god simply have waved his hand and tell the people of all nations of all the world that their sins have been forgiven and that he has banished and scourged all sin and evil from the earth for eternity and never shall it return.?
Actually, it was relevant since you asked why couldn't God do it a different way. All I said it was God's prerogative, but maybe you didn't understand that.
OR are you setting this question up because you actually have the answer and you are waiting for misc people to make guesses until you come out with a "Stephen's Super Scripture Slappin'" to answer the question for all of us?
Created:
-->
@Mall
@Shila
I think you are splitting hairs here in regards to the actual name of Christian. The term "Christian" literally means "of Christ" and the name was coined to them that followed Christ's teachings. The church was started by God and not man, but the name "Christian" was not coined by God.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
Its not impossible for them.
But it is impossible for you? Why?
Created:
-->
@ludofl3x
As far as the poor people I've encountered, I haven't met one I think is poor because they "think like a poor person."
Also, let me clarify that I do know poor people who will remain poor because they are literally retarded or have low IQ's. These people will stay poor and these are not the poor mentality I am referring.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
Recommending impossible solutions isnt a win win
Impossible in what way?
There are over 22M millionaires in America. Stats say that around 80% of those millionaires came from middle class families (I.E. didn't inherit the money).
So that's 17.6M people that say it is not impossible.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
I think I need not to explain why I home school. My wife and I were raised in the public school system and we did not want our children to be brainwashed.
Thanks for the synopsis of the Gattos books, BTW.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
I guess you gave up.
Not really. Just didn't have anything different to say other than "nuh-uh!"
Actually, how about YOU become rich?! Then you can be rich AND give to those in need? A win-win!!
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
I prefer the rich to be the ones to pay money
LOL. Of course.
See my "poor man's mentality" in action. It's the rich's fault that I don't have money and since I can't control the rich, I don't/can't have any money. Curse the rich! (but not too bad so they become poor like me, I still want their money to flow in).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
This doesn't explain why it took a bloody, vile, agonising torturous death to save us from our sins, does it ?
Sure doesn't and I've said before that it is only speculation why it happened just like that.
BTW, do you drink coffee or tea or neither in the morning? If you drink something, do you have a favorite mug? Where is it located? Why it there and not here?
Whatever the answer, I'm sure it's your desire to do so and no real need to explain to me why you chose to do this morning routine. It is just the way YOU want to do things.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
In the case of the question asked, “Why did God send Jesus to die for our sins which only continue to multiply when he could have removed sin once and for all?"The solution did not make the problem go away, the problem of sin continued to multiply. Therefore the solution was a failure. Jesus’s sacrifice was not necessary and was done in vain.
I probably have not portrayed this correctly since you just repeat what you said before. You say that Jesus's death would have removed all sin once and for all, but sin is still around and ever multiplying. That is true if you are referring to a worldwide problem. Sin is obviously in the world and many people are taking part of it.
What I am saying is that Jesus's death was not a cure all, for all, whether they believe or not. It was not a "I just saved all of you, if you wanted it or not" kind of thing. It provided an opportunity for us to take part of the sacrifice of Jesus's death, removing the burden of sin on ones who believed in his death, that is baptism.
It was a cure all to the individual himself/herself that believed, not humanity as a whole. I'm not sure what people you hang around that call themselves Christians, but the people I know are true Christians and keep themselves away from sin and are not bond by that sin any longer. Therefore, sin is removed IN THEIR LIVES, once and for all. They are changed people and refuse to be what they were before, slaves to sin.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
Or the government could give them by taxing the rich
Or the government could start a fund directly from the bleeding hearts of Americans that want the poor to have more money and YOU could give to that cause.
Created:
-->
@ludofl3x
Where is his path to $250K? Or $150K? 90K?
I agree that rich will be determined in different ways and that really is irrelevant. My point is that a poor man will think like a poor man.
The path for the longshoreman to EARN the larger amounts of money will be HIS desire to earn more. I'm not sure if the longshoreman idea was a real scenario or if it was plucked form the air, but I just googled their pay and it's anywhere from $13 to $19 per hour. This looks like a tradesman type of job. Wages for ironworkers (my trade) is $29 and some change for a journeyman ironworker, last I checked. That is still poor wages here in Phoenix.
So I told my boys to learn a trade but don't limit your education of business to only in the field/shop. Learn how the WHOLE trade works. Estimating, project management, marketing, etc. The longshoreman needs to do his research and notice his pay ceiling. What can he do to earn more? Become a foreman? Become a manager? Start his own? All of this will require this man to learn and to discipline himself. If he is not aware of / care for his finances, then these will not be something on his mind. Then one day he will find himself on the streets because he didn't look ahead, because he didn't care about his financial future.
I don't mean to sound elitist or harsh but something that is claimed to be important needs to be considered, IE money. If a man complains about people being rich, why not do what the rich do? But his problem is not about making money, it's his mentality and the excuses he will make about why he can't compete.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
The solution did not make the problem go away, the problem of sin continued to multiply. Therefore the solution was a failure. Jesus’s sacrifice was not necessary and was done in vain.
I would agree IF the solution was to dissolve sin entirely, but this is not the case with the death of Jesus. It gave an opportunity for us to choose or decide if we want the sacrifice in our place for sin for our own lives.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
But it will help them buy things. People like to have money.
True, so they should earn it themselves.
Created:
-->
@ludofl3x
How often are you encountering poor people?
As an exact amount per hour, beats me. I do know a lot of poor people, lived with poor people, work with poor people AND I WAS a poor people. So I do have a lot of interaction with them and see the same mentality within the "poor ranks".
And probably good to define what you see as "rich." How much money do you think qualifies as rich?
Good question. I would say "not poor" is making around $100K a year. Anything less is just about survival in Phoenix. Rich would be over $250K a year (I would think).
Created:
-->
@ludofl3x
Hey Ludo!
Do you believe poor people are all poor because of their "mentality"?
Not entirely, but the majority, YES. I was raised "poor" and had poor friends due to the neighborhood I lived in. My dad was a very bad money manager and I learned from him how to handle money. I was always broke after each week. I never saved money as a kid an only really got a hold of it when I got married. My wife, who is very cautious, wanted a budget and wanted to save money. I told her I would budget and save when I had money to do so. Point is, my mentality was not that I couldn't make enough money, it was that I didn't care about it enough to manage it. I was carefree with taco bell and video games and not caring about my money. While in this state of mind, I only made $15 per hour for a while. I didn't care to improve on my job. I was envious of other people's new trucks, houses, vacations, etc.
After I learned to care about my finances, my work ethic improved, my financial status improved, I bought a house, and I started earning more money than my dad when I was 25. Now I am running my own business and making twice as much as my dad has ever made in his life, per year. I know there are other certain factors with this, but your views on life and money will change a man. My dad is the smartest guy I know, a math wiz, numbers muncher, a regular MacGyver, a hard worker and has been at the same company for 15-20 years but he never learned to look at himself as worthy until recently and was able to get about a $20K raise with in 5 years.
Conversely, then, are rich people rich because of their mentality?
Not entirely, but the majority, YES.
That poor people don't like, want or care about money? I'm not sure I understand what you mean.
Money is always important to all and it makes the world go 'round, but some people have the idea that being poor is being righteous or being rich is being greedy. Therefore it is a self sabotaging mentality. They either are not worthy or money or they want to be seen as the underdog or whatever. They always want the money but never want to live it.
Created:
-->
@n8nrgim
@Sidewalker
@Savant
@WyIted
The motivation for rape is not sex, it is violence.
I agree with Sidewalker on this point. Rape is not about the victim, but rather about the perpetrator.
Therefore, a provocative dressing woman is NOT asking for rape, even though she is asking for sexual attention. There is a certain responsibly on the woman to "flaunt" to the correct person just as it is her responsibility to marry someone of good character. But if her husband turns out to be a pedophile, is the charge laid at her feet? She married him, right? She should take part in his punishment. She enabled him by bearing children for him to assault.
So if she struts in front of known rapist, then I would say she too stupid and deserved it, but he still goes to jail. If she struts in front of typical man, she is looking for sex/attention and not to be raped and if she is, then the man is not aware of the clues given.
Created:
What if Shila is an Acronym? Each letter is for a specific person on this site. Maybe the 5 got together to create an AI bot to control at their discretion. That would make sense why sometimes Shila is nice, other times rude, other times senseless with responses. The account could be used differently by different people. Also, see post #110 above, Shila refers to "herself" as them. Shila is an Indian name which professes catholic doctrine, in Canada. Not impossible, but I would say unlikely.
Just my two cents. . .
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Instead of any story about miraculous conception, virgins, exiles, , arrests , trial, torture, blood scourging, crowns of thorns, and crucifixion, and rising from once being dead why couldn't god simply have waved his hand and tell the people of all nations of all the world that their sins have been forgiven and that he has banished and scourged all sin and evil from the earth for eternity and never shall it return.?
I think CA answered it with the idea of free will and love towards humanity with a lot of words. If God wants someone to love them of their own choice, then eliminating the choice of sin would only leave the option of following God's laws. So in God's way, he gave us an option to be free from sin by the blood of Christ if we so choose to be baptized.
The idea of why did he do the whole virgin birth, blood scourging, etc, etc, is beyond me and one could only speculate, but for sure it was planned from the beginning and foreshadowed throughout the law.
PS it was a brilliant question from Shila.
Curious to know why you thought this was such a brilliant question.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
Equal pay is nonsense, but one can tax some wealth of the rich and give it to the poor.
In theory, yes, if all people thought like rich people but why are people poor? Are they poor money managers, are they unskilled at a job and cannot get more pay, are they actually too dumb to do anything but ditch digging, do they refuse to follow directions so they cannot ever stay at a job long enough to learn or rise to the top? To throw more money are people who don't like, want or care about money will not solve a poor person mentality.
Created:
-->
@n8nrgim
@Savant
Whichever party can make everyone poor.
I agree with Savant. The only way to make everyone with equal pay is to bring everyone down. There are estimates that the average pay, if divided equally in the USA. would only bring the average pay per person to $60K-$90K a year. That is barely enough to afford to live in Phoenix for sure.
To answer your question, income equality does not involve the government, but it involves the mind set of the population. Any government program that gives to the population is making it harder on the population to depend on themselves. We create our own wealth, NOT the government, so I would say the party with less hand outs and regulations.
Created: