(December 13, 2014 at 8:26 am)Tonus Wrote: They tax the media companies that form the press-- does that obstruct the press?

(December 13, 2014 at 11:42 am)Heywood Wrote: Yes

(December 13, 2014 at 11:51 am)Parkers Tan Wrote: [Citation needed]

(December 13, 2014 at 12:53 pm)Heywood Wrote: You keep asking for citations for conclusions of arguments made. Citations are for facts supporting an argument....not conclusions of said argument.

The request is for a qualification of your unsubstantiated "Yes".

How does taxing the media companies that form the press obstruct the press?

(December 13, 2014 at 1:41 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Subsidizing his charitable organization. All for it, personally.

If it's a charitable organization, then let them file with the IRS as a charitable organization and submit the necessary forms every year. But they don't want to do that.

(December 13, 2014 at 1:34 pm)Thor Wrote: One point that hasn't been addressed is the fact that I subsidize your church through taxation. If churches were required to pay taxes, my tax burden would be lessened. The government must collect x amount of dollars to provide essential services. By exempting churches, those dollars must be made up by increasing the tax burden on everybody else. Ergo, I am subsidizing your church!

Individual members of the church pay taxes too. If they own property they pay property tax. If they buy stuff they pay sales tax. You want them to pay taxes again when they pool their resources to exercise their right to freedom or religion. You want Church going folk to subsidize your tax burden.

(December 13, 2014 at 1:55 pm)Heywood Wrote:

(December 13, 2014 at 1:34 pm)Thor Wrote: One point that hasn't been addressed is the fact that I subsidize your church through taxation. If churches were required to pay taxes, my tax burden would be lessened. The government must collect x amount of dollars to provide essential services. By exempting churches, those dollars must be made up by increasing the tax burden on everybody else. Ergo, I am subsidizing your church!

Individual members of the church pay taxes too. If they own property they pay property tax. If they buy stuff they pay sales tax. You want them to pay taxes again when they pool their resources to exercise their right to freedom or religion. You want Church going folk to subsidize your tax burden.

You are missing three important points:

1) The individual church members get to deduct their contributions to their church from their taxable income, thus they are not paying taxes on those pooled resources.

2) Other kinds of groups who pull their resources to buy things such as social clubs, babysitting cooperatives, and gardening clubs do have to pay taxes on those pooled resources.

3) Churches are government resource users. They expect police and fire protection and they use neighborhood streets heavily. For zoning purposes they very heavy users like schools and recreation centers (which is pretty much what they are).

So yes they should be taxed like everyone else unless they otherwise meet the definition of a charitable institution. Providing church services and proselytizing should not be a subsidized activity. Subsidizing is establishment. Taxing at the same rate everyone else is taxed is not prohibiting.

If they can't meet the requirements of exemption - yep...just like everyone else. Which is exactly what happens in our current system.

But churches are magic!

(December 13, 2014 at 12:53 pm)Heywood Wrote:

(December 13, 2014 at 11:51 am)Parkers Tan Wrote: [Citation needed]

You keep asking for citations for conclusions of arguments made. Citations are for facts supporting an argument....not conclusions of said argument.

When your argument is unsupported, you need to support it ... y'know, with facts.

In the case above, you claimed that taxes obstruct the press. You need to demonstrate that claim with supporting evidence. This is how reasoned discussion works. Otherwise, readers are perfectly entitled to dismiss your claim out of hand.

When you advance a claim, you need to advance evidence.

Let me know if you need more help with this concept.

---

(December 13, 2014 at 1:55 pm)Heywood Wrote: Individual members of the church pay taxes too. If they own property they pay property tax. If they buy stuff they pay sales tax. You want them to pay taxes again when they pool their resources to exercise their right to freedom or religion. You want Church going folk to subsidize your tax burden.

Investors pay income tax -- or a capital-gains tax, if the income is a dividend -- and then they pay taxes again when they invest that money.

Why should believers get a free ride when investors, who actually provide a valuable service to our country, do not?

Tax them at a special 1000% rate. God can afford it.

Either we tax churches, or babies get their heads smashed in with hammers. Is that what you want to see?

No citation needed.

(December 13, 2014 at 1:43 pm)IATIA Wrote:

(December 13, 2014 at 8:26 am)Tonus Wrote: They tax the media companies that form the press-- does that obstruct the press?

(December 13, 2014 at 11:42 am)Heywood Wrote: Yes

(December 13, 2014 at 11:51 am)Parkers Tan Wrote: [Citation needed]

(December 13, 2014 at 12:53 pm)Heywood Wrote: You keep asking for citations for conclusions of arguments made. Citations are for facts supporting an argument....not conclusions of said argument.

The request is for a qualification of your unsubstantiated "Yes".

How does taxing the media companies that form the press obstruct the press?

The qualification he is seeking can be found in posts 1-280 of this thread.

Proving this thread is true, using this thread?

That sounds familiar...