[OMEGA]

People are Starving in India.

SEND MONEY !!
--------------------

Jer 1:11 Moreover the word of the LORD came unto me, saying, Jeremiah, what seest thou? And I said, I see a rod of an almond tree.
Jer 1:13 And the word of the LORD came unto me the second time, saying, What seest thou? And I said, I see a seething pot; and the face thereof is toward the north.
Jer 24:3 Then said the LORD unto me, What seest thou, Jeremiah? And I said, Figs; the good figs, very good; and the evil, very evil, that cannot be eaten, they are so evil.
Am 7:8 And the LORD said unto me, Amos, what seest thou? And I said, A plumbline. Then said the Lord, Behold, I will set a plumbline in the midst of my people Israel: I will not again pass by them any more:
Am 8:2 And he said, Amos, what seest thou? And I said, A basket of summer fruit. Then said the LORD unto me, The end is come upon my people of Israel; I will not again pass by them any more.
Zec 4:2 And said unto me, What seest thou? And I said, I have looked, and behold a candlestick all of gold, with a bowl upon the top of it, and his seven lamps thereon, and seven pipes to the seven lamps, which are upon the top thereof:
Zec 5:2 And he said unto me, What seest thou? And I answered, I see a flying roll; the length thereof is twenty cubits, and the breadth thereof ten cubits.

[Lighthouse]

Originally Posted by Alexandros

God's laws are repealable now? When did this happen, did the pope pray to God, "Oh Lord, I beg you retract this law, for we have discovered polyester."

Some of the laws were applicable only to Israel, even Jews today admit to this. The Bible made it clear, for instance, that the Sabbath was a covenant between God and Israel, and no one else. As were many of the laws in the Levitical code.

And the Bible is replete with God changing the rules, all the time. The dietary laws seem to change the most. What God commanded could and could not be eaten changed most often, with the last one being that anything can now be eaten; seen in Acts 10 with Peter's vision and in Paul's writings wherein he stated that it doesn't matter if you eat things sacrificed to idols and such.

Also, I'm not Catholic; the Pope does not have the authority they think he does.

Mankind has raped the earth enough. There should be little to no more development of undeveloped regions.

We are all responsible, if indirectly for most of us. I didn't say I was exempt.

Not what I asked.

Originally Posted by Gerald

Those "greedy hoarders" are just holding on to what they themselves have earned, and pay others what they think their "keep" is worth.

If you think you aren't earning your keep, you need to either work harder or keep less; saying the other guy is "greedy and hoarding" is just plain disingenuous.

I didn't say everyone was like this, only that some are. I'm of the opinion that I earn more than I make, but I don't lay that at the feet of my employer.

[Gerald]

Originally Posted by Lighthouse

I didn't say everyone was like this, only that some are.

It would be more accurate if you had said that most are.

I'm of the opinion that I earn more than I make, but I don't lay that at the feet of my employer.

Why not?

[Lighthouse]

Originally Posted by Gerald

Why not?

Because they aren't the ones responsible for taking out almost fifteen percent from my paycheck.

[TruthSetsFree]

Originally Posted by Gerald

So, what does the Church think of a married couple who leave sex completely out of their marriage, who are basically two friends who share a house, and who got married to take advantage of the legal and financial benefits?

i don know what the Church says

but i say COOL

[Gerald]

Originally Posted by Lighthouse

Because they aren't the ones responsible for taking out almost fifteen percent from my paycheck.

If your paycheck wasn't taxed would you turn the surplus over to your employer?

[Gerald]

Originally Posted by TruthSetsFree

i don know what the Church says

Then call up your local priest and find out.

but i say COOL

I'm surprised, because such a couple is taking advantage of the legal and financial benefits while contributing nothing to the social capital of the community, that is, they are not helping the community grow by contributing offspring.

I find it odd that you would support such an arrangement. However, what you've posted reveals much about which aspects of human interaction you have the most trouble with.

Would you, by any chance, be planning to become a nun?

[Lighthouse]

Originally Posted by Gerald

If your paycheck wasn't taxed would you turn the surplus over to your employer?

No. What kind of stupid question is that?

[Gerald]

Originally Posted by Lighthouse

No. What kind of stupid question is that?

I took your statement "I'm of the opinion that I earn more than I make..." to mean that your employer pays you in excess of the amount of actual revenue you generate for your employer.

If I misinterpreted that statement, sorry.

[Lighthouse]

Originally Posted by Gerald

I took your statement "I'm of the opinion that I earn more than I make..." to mean that your employer pays you in excess of the amount of actual revenue you generate for your employer.

If I misinterpreted that statement, sorry.

That is a major misinterpretation of that sentence. What I make is what I receive, what I earn is the amount I should make based on the amount of work I do.

[Gerald]

Originally Posted by Lighthouse

That is a major misinterpretation of that sentence. What I make is what I receive, what I earn is the amount I should make based on the amount of work I do.

Thanks for the clarification.

So, assuming that your paycheck is completely untaxed (removing government from this equation), and you are making less than you earn, then that means one of two things:

(1.) Your employer is holding out on you, or

(2.) You overvalue the work you do.

[Lighthouse]

Originally Posted by Gerald

Thanks for the clarification.

So, assuming that your paycheck is completely untaxed (removing government from this equation), and you are making less than you earn, then that means one of two things:

(1.) Your employer is holding out on you, or

(2.) You overvalue the work you do.

That would be true, but I think I would live perfectly fine if I were not taxed, or at least taxed at 7% rather than almost 15%.

Of course, I also blame the government for the idea of hourly wage, and minimum wage. Both are impediments to people who are actually worth something in the work force being paid for what they do, rather than simply for how many hours they are on the clock; and minimum wage dictates that the lazier people receive the same payment. Neither of these are actually the employer's choice.

[Gerald]

Originally Posted by Lighthouse

...people who are actually worth something in the work force...

That has always been a very small percentage of the total number of workers: 10 percent of the people get 90 percent of the work done.

Basically, most people suck at whatever they put a hand to, and they will always suck at it, no matter how long and how hard they work; these people used to form a large unskilled labor pool, people with strong backs and small brains.

Unfortunately, with the advent of modern technology, there's not much call for unskilled labor these days outside of agriculture, and there are only so many job openings for fruit and vegetable pickers.

Now, what used to happen is the surplus population either wound up in prisons, workhouses, the military on foreign campaign, or they simply died off from starvation or disease.

[Angel4Truth]

10 percent of the people DO 90 percent of the work done...

[Gerald]

Originally Posted by Angel4Truth

10 percent of the people DO 90 percent of the work done...

And you're one of the bottom 90 percent.

Welcome to the club.