David Siegel, the owner of Westgate Resorts, sent a surprising email to his employees Monday. It said that if President Barack Obama wins re-election and raises Siegel's taxes, he will have to lay off workers and downsize his company - or even shut it down.
"If any new taxes are levied on me, or my company, as our current President plans, I will have no choice but to reduce the size of this company," he wrote. "Rather than grow this company I will be forced to cut back. This means fewer jobs, less benefits and certainly less opportunity for everyone."
In a version of Romney's "47 percent" remarks, Siegel added that "people like me who made all the right decisions and invested in themselves are being forced to bail out all the people who didn't. The people that overspent their paychecks suddenly feel entitled to the same luxuries that I earned and sacrificed 42 years of my life for."...
jpw said "Someone out there knows, but what of everyone else? They can't know?"
I'm sure you're not inferior, how Apostle Paul said we may eat what is sold in the shambles, and not ask questions for conscience sake: it does not say everything should be considered fit for public use (that is in moderation).
Notlocked said "Evil wealthy merchants are obviously not going to be Christian are they? I'm sure there are plenty of wealthy men and women who think they are Chrisitan's."
People will boast membership, but not keep with the prophets and righteousness thereof. That most boast their Christianity, and for any others that do not, the word says that Jesus Christ is our Lord and their's (he is Lord of all): and, if not now at this time, they will bow and confess Jesus, as they are brought under the power being exercised over them. Remember the Psalms that said that the seas would drop down to the depths, and then rise to the heights, and men in their distress would call upon the Lord? he then brings them to their desired haven. Likewise, when Jonah took shipping, the merchants cornered him to ask what his matters and occupation were, and they immediately feared when they knew that it was for his cause that the tempest was upon them, because he had fled from the Lord.
jpw wrote: --- And Romney provides organic foods for his wife on their plane, because she has MS and he wants her to be healthy. Someone out there knows, but what of everyone else? They can't know?
Info about pretty much anything is available for anyone who wants to know. That most do not know something doesn't necessarily mean it's being kept from them. More likely, it's somewhere down low on their list of importance. As long as people rather be spoonfed, they will eat what the feeders feed them. Can't blame the feeders for that.
Orlus wrote: No it is not "irrelevant" it is specifically pertinent to the very condition which Jesus Himself brings out.
How so?
Orlus wrote: BTW Are you a rich man? is that why you are defending the "wealthy" as a group?
That's none of your business, since it's logically irrelevant, but I'll indulge you anyway since it suggests a good question: I don't know, since rich is a highly relative term. I have no idea what you mean by it. Am I rich in the sense Jesus intended, i.e. 1st Century Palestinian stds? Most likely, & you probably are too. But am I rich in the sense that I'd warrant a Robin Leach interview? Hardly; none of my possessions would turn any heads.
So how then does one define "rich": relative to then, or now? And either way, by which metric? Net worth, gross income, net income, or what? If you cannot arrive at a universally acceptable & precise definition of "rich," then we're wasting our time here, for none of us know what we're talking about, including myself.
Should we not know when the balances are false, is this the essence of a responsible people? Is this the Christian message?
If we cannot know, then let's be on our merry way. "eat, drink, and be merry!"
gum is certified safe for consumption.
it is sweetened with sugar.
a few years later sugared gums contain aspartaim.
M who runs the GMO foods market, being developed throughout multiple continents............
bought the patent for aspt in the mid-eighties.
the same company providing us gm oils and grains are putting aspt in our gum and lots of other products.
M also developed the growth hormone that is used in cows and shows up in milk and formula. Most countries have banned it.
The same company that provides us those GM foods, also provides us the aspt where we used to have sugar, also puts the hormones in our milk that cause high levels of the insulin growth hormone.
Prop 37 is on the ballot for gm labeling. The same company now invests in the people voting "no" and not knowing.
But...
Amish and other raw milk providers are being SWAT teamed.
And Romney provides organic foods for his wife on their plane, because she has MS and he wants her to be healthy.
Someone out there knows, but what of everyone else? They can't know?
Jim Lincoln wrote: --- Why do I use the term slave or slave-holder, it has been pointed out that many Southern soldiers weren't slave-holders, they just held the dream of being slave-holders, so this is why they supported the Confederate cause. How many of these people on here are going to be hugely wealthy (except for the televangelist that stumbles on this site?) if not none nearly none! I think many who support the Plutocracy are also suffering from ---
Historicl revisionism must be one of your favorite hobbies, Jim.
Orlus, many here defend the ultra-wealthy (I was always surprised to hear Paul Harvey defending the monopolist Gates and his company Microsoft!) If you don't see the program, Full Show: Plutocracy Rising, the transcript for it is on the same site, as is a segment of the slave holders making their slaves to publicly support Rommney, When Bosses Push Their Politics an essay by Bill Moyers which can be seen as a video or read the transcript on that too.
Why do I use the term slave or slave-holder, it has been pointed out that many Southern soldiers weren't slave-holders, they just held the dream of being slave-holders, so this is why they supported the Confederate cause. How many of these people on here are going to be hugely wealthy (except for the televangelist that stumbles on this site?) if not none nearly none! I think many who support the Plutocracy are also suffering from Standard of Living.... is going unnoticed by many of them.
James 2:5 Did not God chose the poor of this world to be rich in faith. Rev 3:17 Because you say I am rich and do not know you are wretched and miserable and poor and blind and naked. I Ti 6:7 Instruct those who are rich in this world not to be conceited or to fix their hope on the uncertainty of riches but on God who richly supplies us with all thengs to enjoy. Lu 1:53 He has filled the hungry with good things and sent away the rich empty handed. 2 Cor He was rich but for our sake became poor. Mark 4:19 The deceitfulness of riches Lu 8:14 Choked with worry and riches
Neil wrote: Irrelevant; they were still rich, & Jesus didn't qualify it the way you do, that generousity makes it less impossible to enter the Kingdom. You're adding to Christ's teaching. ... then we still should refrain from censuring modern rich people....
No it is not "irrelevant" it is specifically pertinent to the very condition which Jesus Himself brings out.
BTW Are you a rich man? is that why you are defending the "wealthy" as a group?
locked wrote: God doesn't even take into account whether we are rich or poor...
Maybe you err on this. For eg:
1 Corinthians 1:26-29 KJV 26 For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called: 27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; 28 And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are: 29 That no flesh should glory in his presence.
Neil wrote: If the latter statement is true (and I agree it is), then you contradict yourself when you still say this verse proves the rich are disadvantaged as a class. They are not. The Disciples' reply, “Who then can be saved?” logically implies that poor people can't be, either (possibly because the poor were imagined to be cursed). Yet Jesus ignored any such misapprehension & declared that salvation was solely a matter of God's miraculous power, not human circumstances. That is the point of the passage.
Take it up with the Word of God sir. God doesn't even take into account whether we are rich or poor - it's men who do that. God doesn't recognise mens wealth - it isn't wealth to Him. God is wealthy, so He knows what REAL wealth is.
locked wrote: And I said: JESUS said the rich were disadvantaged, so take it up with Him. Then I explained why quite reasonably and clearly I thought. Because the rich have too much to lose. … Jesus said to his disciples, it is difficult for the rich to enter the Kingdom of Heaven, at which the disciples were shocked. It's about getting into the Kingdom of Heaven sir, not about the rich and the poor. I think that has been stated before as well.
If the latter statement is true (and I agree it is), then you contradict yourself when you still say this verse proves the rich are disadvantaged as a class. They are not. The Disciples' reply, “Who then can be saved?” logically implies that poor people can't be, either (possibly because the poor were imagined to be cursed). Yet Jesus ignored any such misapprehension & declared that salvation was solely a matter of God's miraculous power, not human circumstances. That is the point of the passage.
Neil wrote: I didn't “start this thread about myself.” Back a few pages, I said “many wealthy people,” not ”all,” so that is not a stereotype; at worst, it might be an overstatement. You, on the other hand, said “Wealthy people are disadvantaged." No qualification at all! So which other claim of mine was a blanket generalization, comparable to what you made?
And I said: JESUS said the rich were disadvantaged, so take it up with Him. Then I explained why quite reasonably and clearly I thought. Because the rich have too much to lose. You want to keep focusing on the injustice done to the rich for some reason. Again, take it up with your God.
Jesus said to his disciples, it is difficult for the rich to enter the Kingdom of Heaven, at which the disciples were shocked.
It's about getting into the Kingdom of Heaven sir, not about the rich and the poor. I think that has been stated before as well.
Notlocked wrote: It appears to be you who are stereotyping wealthy and poor people. If you read back a few pages you can even see where you started to make this thread about yourself.
I didn't “start this thread about myself.”
Back a few pages, I said “many wealthy people,” not ”all,” so that is not a stereotype; at worst, it might be an overstatement. You, on the other hand, said “Wealthy people are disadvantaged." No qualification at all!
So which other claim of mine was a blanket generalization, comparable to what you made?
Neil wrote: If I unloaded the question to your satisfaction, would you then be able to list any examples? Or are you just trying to hoist me on my own petard, in place of a substantial reply? If someone said all Christians are hypocrites because they met one or two who were, you all would object strongly. Yet this is exactly what those who stereotype wealthy people are doing, & not even with one example as yet here.
It appears to be you who are stereotyping wealthy and poor people. If you read back a few pages you can even see where you started to make this thread about yourself.
Notlocked wrote: Did you post this Neil? Cos thats a really loaded question you fired at Rhymnrzn. Evil wealthy merchants are obviously not going to be Christian are they? I'm sure there are plenty of wealthy men and women who think they are Chrisitan's.
If I unloaded the question to your satisfaction, would you then be able to list any examples? Or are you just trying to hoist me on my own petard, in place of a substantial reply?
If someone said all Christians are hypocrites because they met one or two who were, you all would object strongly. Yet this is exactly what those here who stereotype wealthy people are doing, & not even with one example as yet. You simply know NOTHING about them, but refuse to admit it.
@Neil - "Hey rhymnrzn, put your cards on the table: can you supply any examples of evil wealthy merchants who are ostensible Christians? And I don't mean convicts like Abramoff or Martha the Inside Trader"
Did you post this Neil? Cos thats a really loaded question you fired at Rhymnrzn.
Evil wealthy merchants are obviously not going to be Christian are they?
I'm sure there are plenty of wealthy men and women who think they are Chrisitan's.
How can I be in jeopardy with the Lord, seeing that I keep that which I received in the beginning of my faith in Jesus, and abide in my calling? The Bible itself says that this present world lieth in evil and unbelief, including those called by the name of the Lord, for their own hardness of heart and slowness to believe all that is written in Scripture.
Apostle Paul condemns unworthiness, and I will do the same.
2 Corinthians 8:12 "For if there be first a willing mind, it is accepted according to that a man hath, and not according to that he hath not. (13) For I mean not that other men be eased, and ye burdened: (14) But by an EQUALITY, that now at this time your abundance may be a supply for their want, that their abundance also may be a supply for your want: that there may be EQUALITY: (15) As it is written, He that had gathered much had nothing over; and he that had gathered little had no lack."
rhymnrzn wrote: @ Neil Right, I asked you one question in the mind of what we are surely commanded of the Lord, and gave my voice in defense of myself as you persisted to blame me for what I do not agree.
And you refuse to hear reproof, in making hasty generalizations about people whose circumstances you do not know (do you KNOW for certain that someone has false scales or opens businesses DESTINED for bankruptcy?), & cannot even give ONE example of. I think you're in more spiritual trouble than they are, for an unsubstantiated report is a false one, & that is a sin, Ex. 23:1. Remove the log from your own eye before complaining about the mote in someone else's.
Right, I asked you one question in the mind of what we are surely commanded of the Lord, and gave my voice in defense of myself as you persisted to blame me for what I do not agree. As I gave you some points which I think you contradict, you passed over them in favor of accusation and a foolish question (compelling me to give you names makes doubt as to what spirit and mind you are of). God does not want men to owe one another, to speak leasing, to take thought for the morrow, strike up massive loans, meddle with the balance, or to open businesses destined for bankruptcy. We cannot stand in their way to stop them, if they refuse to hear reproof. That does not mean for us to say in so many words that they are delivered to do evil, and give them no warning of God, that it is their lawful right, nor will God (forget men) hold it against them: that would not be consistent within the testimony.
Proverbs 20:23 "Divers weights are an abomination unto the LORD; and a false balance is not good."
Hosea 12:7 "He is a merchant, the balances of deceit are in his hand: he loveth to oppress. (8) And Ephraim said, Yet I am become rich, I have found me out substance: in all my labours they shall find none iniquity in me that were sin."
51
There are a total of 110 user comments displayed | add new comment |
COMMENTS | 
udumdum: ""
