- This topic has 124 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 1 month ago by .
-
Posts
-
@Ens, interesting not a word from you when a Democrat is exposed as a hypocrite
“the constitution is clear”
Actually it is pretty clear that it does NOT provide for an individual right to own a firearm, only for a right to organize militias. The historical background is that in 1708, Queen Anne Stuart vetoed the Scottish Militia Act in order to prevent Scots from joining a rebellion in opposition to the Act of Union. Basically, the Second Amendment was about being able to overthrow the government. No less a figure than the late Chief Justice Warren Burger wrote that the idea that there was an individual right to own firearms was nonsense. Unfortunately far right extremists have taken over the Supeme Court and we pay for that with lives.
Interesting historical trivia: The Scottish Militia Act was the last piece of legislation every to be vetoed by a British Monarch. In theory they still have that power but they have not used it in 312 years.
“Try Arizona”
Haven’t been to Arizona in 30 years but I did see people carrying openly then. One turned out to be an off duty police officer outside of his area of jurisdiction.
Arizona’s homicide rate in 2019 was 83% higher than New York’s, and in the first 11 months of 2020 the homicide rate in Phoenix was 120% higher than New York City’s.
Ens, yeah the science is what the science is, and the “scientific consensus”(there is no actual scientific consensus) has been shifting the goalposts the past 50yrs, Mashiach will be here long before the Earth has a chance to “climate change” to anything significant. Not sure what this is supposed to be saying “As to Gedolim, for one that spends as much effort as you posting stuff here, I question what your adherence to whichever gedolim you prefer is.” Im not sure what my 15-30min/a day on YWN has to do with adherence to gedolim, maybe you can clarify.
“They are about redistributing wealth. And controlling people. Neither of which are Torah concepts.”
Actually they are very much Torah concepts, at least if you get your Torah through Moshe Rabbeinu rather than Ayn Rand. See the numerous agricultural tithes, the mandatory charity contributions that the Rabbis instituted to replace them when we ceased to be an agricutural people (and which were instituted in the diaspora as well as in Eretz Yisrael). Also see regarding business conduct the requirements for honesty and transparency, fair treatment of workers, fair competition, and prohibition of charging or paying interest. And note that you can get flogged and get your property confiscated if you decide that you don’t like your wealth being redistributed or yourself being controlled. Chazan and Rambam talk about this extensively, and in great detail. Regarding business conduct the Torah is arguably to the left of Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren.
charlie, “Unfortunately far right extremists have taken over the Supeme Court and we pay for that with lives.”-Gee, talk about gaslighting…
See the numerous agricultural tithes, the mandatory charity contributions that the Rabbis instituted….”
REALLY CHARLIE, REMIND ME, WHAT WERE THE PERCENTAGE OF MANDETORY TITHES???>Regarding business conduct the Torah is arguably to the left of Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren<
Not quite.
The Torah demands the same tax percentage from all income brackets.
Sounds more like to the right of Trump, doesn’t it?In general, I don’t think the Torah’s economic system is compatible to ours.
Charlie >> Regarding business conduct the Torah is arguably to the left of Bernie Sanders
This is an interesting topic. You can find both pro-business and pro-worker laws in the Torah. Obviously, and Can we be more specific with the claims?
for example, we have a Gemora how Talmidei Chachamim tried to ban yetzer hara when coming back from Bavel (Sanhedrin 64)- and caused a chicken recession. We see here that yes we want people to not follow their own interest and desires, but economy is not working without it. A pro-business President Coolidge said something similar to his wife, but this is a family website.Rav Huna had some ideas about helping poor (Taanit 20b): he would break dangerous walls. If the owner could afford it, he would have to rebuild himself. If not, R Huna would (not sure, whether it means as his private charity or community funds). More interesting is his approach to an imperfect market where farmers bring food into the city. He did not buy food to feed the poor so they would not rely on him. Instead, he would pay farmers for left-over food and send it down the river. That is, farmers are not afraid to bring more food and, thus, there will be more competition and poor will get cheaper food. So, he worried about helping poor, keeping them independent, and making economy better.
AAQ, no one is saying we shouldnt help the poor. No one. But the tax on the wealthy, taxing those who worked their behinds off through college, paying back student loans, and using it for free college, things like this is completely not in line with TorahValues. (btw i personaly can benefit tremendoulsy from free college.)
“Mashiach will be here long before the Earth has a chance to “climate change” to anything significant.”
It is already significant. Where is Mashiach?
“The Torah demands the same tax percentage from all income brackets.”
The Rabbis changed that. See Yerushalmi Peah Perek Chet. There is no fixed percentage given for the mandatory contributions for support of the poor.
“I don’t think the Torah’s economic system is compatible to ours.”
Correct. It requires a much more generous welfare state. And certain things we take for granted today like interest on loans, limited liability corporations. securitization of debt, bankruptcy, the cancellation of debts at death, caveat emptor on purchases (except for real estate), and freehold land tenure do not exist in the Torah’s system.
Maybe it is good that Bernie Sanders is an unlearned Jew. Could you imagine what he would be like if he discovered that the Torah does not permit corporations at all?
“his approach to an imperfect market”
This is actually proof for the absolute brilliance of Chazal. They inderstood 1500 years ago that markets are imperfect. Too many right wing Jews today don’t understand what Chazal did, which is a proof for yeridot hadorot.
Charlie: They inderstood 1500 years ago that markets are imperfect
Maybe I was too brief – R’ Huna’s solution was specifically to combine charity with market power. The market was “imperfect” before his intervention, he enabled/”made the market” (same thing that midrash mentions about Yaakov): R’ Huna waited till the end of the market to buy leftovers. Farmers, who would know R’Huna would buy leftovers, would not hesitate to bring a little more perishables, thus lowering the prices to benefit poor people. Furthermore, he will _not_ distribute food he bought. If he were, the poor will not buy on the market and wait for his charity. Question was asked – how could he waste that food? answer – “throwing down the river” means people in other places (not connected to this market) will pick it up. Similar to USDA buying extra food from US farmers and donating overseas.
It shows that it is possible to pursue both goals – economic activity and charity. You may have to do trade-offs some time, but you need to keep both in mind.
>> much more generous welfare state.
Not always. It is somewhat hard to compare policies across mutiple times and income levels, but again we have arguments for being generous and for having limits:
We have an argument that even a poor person has to have Pesach wine EVEN MIN hatamhui! usually, a person is eligible for public food if he does not have food for 2 meals. [similar to medicaid requirement to have no more than $2,000 or something like that]. At other times, a person “should make his shabbat like chol” but not ask for support. At the swame time, we are supposed to maintain a rich person at his level (this sounds like a distinction between unemployment and welfare).THere are several agadot, I think in Bava Kamma, about poor people asking for “stuffed chicken”, one does not get it, is offered same beans as Rav (?) himself is eating and dies fromn it. In the other case, Rav(?)’s sister arrives at that very moment from far away and brings a “stuffed chicken” with her.
I thin this is “complicated”
>It is already significant. Where is Mashiach?<
It is? Did I miss the end of the world? I always miss those important things! Maybe next time…
>“The Torah demands the same tax percentage from all income brackets.”
The Rabbis changed that. See Yerushalmi Peah Perek Chet. There is no fixed percentage given for the mandatory contributions for support of the poor.<Point is, no progressive income tax.
>“I don’t think the Torah’s economic system is compatible to ours.”
Correct. It requires a much more generous welfare state. And certain things we take for granted today like interest on loans, limited liability corporations. securitization of debt, bankruptcy, the cancellation of debts at death, caveat emptor on purchases (except for real estate), and freehold land tenure do not exist in the Torah’s system.<That’s not what I meant.
The Torah economy relies on the land being a permanent property that cannot be fully sold.
Modern states cannot use that model for obvious reasons.>Maybe it is good that Bernie Sanders is an unlearned Jew. Could you imagine what he would be like if he discovered that the Torah does not permit corporations at all?<
🤣🤣
Charlie, you avoided the question. What is the % that is mandatory l’fi the torah?
You mentioned Yerushalmi Peah Perek Chet, I cant exactly learn the entire perek, perhaps you can tell me the specifics of what it says there, then we can discuss how it (doesnt)compares to bernie Sanders tax agenda.
And I second MadeAliya, I’m pretty sure id be aware if the world has ended. We’re doing just fine.If someone has stock in a chametzdig corporation, is that a problem on Pesach? He can have a part in tbe non chametzdig ownership of the corporation.
May I point out a person decides if he wants to give 1/40, 1/50, or 1/60 for peah so it’s his choice ultimately which bracket he’s in
>> no progressive income tax.
here are a couple of principles I can glean from Bava Basra –
1) taxes should preferably be allocated according to the benefit: paying for the wall may be according to number of people, level of danger, etc. That is, when possible, use “user fees”. For example, gasoline tax or turnpike fees look better than income tax – as long as they pay for the roads themselves.2) apply wisdom, if possible, and use majority if not. A case of a guild who limited competition and then cut the skins of those who broke the rules. They are told that they should go to a Talmid Chacham in their city. If there is none, they are ok to follow majority.
>> If someone has stock in a chametzdig corporation,
I see quotes By Dayan Shlomo Cohen from Igrot Moshe Even Ha’Ezer 1:7 that an insignificant ownership is not a problem (Rav Cohen’s estimate 3%), and Minhat Yitzhak, Vol. 3 1:11 that it is but be sold with your other hometz. The latter opinion makes investment in treif, shabbat violations, forbidden interest. Badatz offers kosher stocks.
On a lighter nbote, I hope you do not hold HMZ and HMTZ stocks (looks like some Metals and a Russian Chemical plant, but they just do not sound right!)
Re: progressive taxation.
1894 US debate on income tax referred to Biblical source of 10% income tax, and after that used their testament to argue for progressive tax – exempting first $4,000 of income. In practical terms, it made tax very popular and easy to pass as most people were fully exempt. The opponents referred to “not stealing and Rehovoam excessive taxation.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.