The Pope Endorses Tax Choice

[Xerographica]

No. He's helping conservatives, because liberals, I feel, in the United States at least, can still be goaded or convinced into buying into the war craze. Conservatives cannot, or rarely can, be made into accepting the reality of civil rights.

If conservatives would truly be the far greater beneficiaries of tax choice...then why didn't Romney or any of the other conservatives endorse it? Maybe they didn't get the memo from the pope?

[Threlizdun]

Yet another reason to disregard anything the pope says.

[Ceannairceach]

No. He's helping conservatives, because liberals, I feel, in the United States at least, can still be goaded or convinced into buying into the war craze. Conservatives cannot, or rarely can, be made into accepting the reality of civil rights.

If conservatives would truly be the far greater beneficiaries of tax choice...then why didn't Romney or any of the other conservatives endorse it? Maybe they didn't get the memo from the pope?

The Pope doesn't rule conservatism in America. Many Republicans, Constitutionalists and other Right factions are led by Protestants. And Romney is a Mormon.

That said, Republicans aren't interested in giving people rights.

[Vetalia]

I would support a modest component of tax choice, e.g. being able to check a box to divert a portion of your tax liability, say up to $100 per 1040 or $1,000 per 1120 to a set of options such as an infrastructure bank, foreign aid, etc. Nothing crazy, just being able to have some focused spending within the context of what you owe.

[Xerographica]

I wouldn't be totally opposed to the idea of "tax choice" if there was an option to say "I want the Government to allocate my taxes for me" for all the people who don't care enough to take the time to determine and allocate their taxes individually.

I foresee the vast majority choosing this option, allowing the Government to offset any imbalances caused by the special-interest taxpayers, thereby practically invalidating the voluntary system.

You could certainly just give 100% of your taxes to congress (aka your "personal shoppers"). But would you want the option to give your taxes to a specific congressperson?

[Ceannairceach]

I wouldn't be totally opposed to the idea of "tax choice" if there was an option to say "I want the Government to allocate my taxes for me" for all the people who don't care enough to take the time to determine and allocate their taxes individually.

I foresee the vast majority choosing this option, allowing the Government to offset any imbalances caused by the special-interest taxpayers, thereby practically invalidating the voluntary system.

You could certainly just give 100% of your taxes to congress (aka your "personal shoppers"). But would you want the option to give your taxes to a specific congressperson?

That isn't the way federal budgets work.

[Franklin Delano Bluth]

If conservatives would truly be the far greater beneficiaries of tax choice...then why didn't Romney or any of the other conservatives endorse it? Maybe they didn't get the memo from the pope?

The Pope doesn't rule conservatism in America. Many Republicans, Constitutionalists and other Right factions are led by Protestants. And Romney is a Mormon.

Indeed, outside of sexual matters the RCC is one of the more progressive forces in mainstream Paulinism.

[Ceannairceach]

The Pope doesn't rule conservatism in America. Many Republicans, Constitutionalists and other Right factions are led by Protestants. And Romney is a Mormon.

Indeed, outside of sexual matters the RCC is one of the more progressive forces in mainstream Paulinism.

"More progressive" being relative to the likes of the WBC and evangelical congregations, certainly.

[Oneracon]

Oh goodie, another nugget of wisdom from Emperor Palpatine the Pope.

[Geilinor]

The pope just doesn't want Catholics to give their money to things he doesn't approve of, like abortion or birth control. He would die if a Catholic's tax dollars ended up going to an organization such as The Abomination, in other words known as Planned Parenthood. Why else would the pope care about politics?

[Xerographica]

If conservatives would truly be the far greater beneficiaries of tax choice...then why didn't Romney or any of the other conservatives endorse it? Maybe they didn't get the memo from the pope?

The Pope doesn't rule conservatism in America. Many Republicans, Constitutionalists and other Right factions are led by Protestants. And Romney is a Mormon.

That said, Republicans aren't interested in giving people rights.

Republicans wouldn't endorse tax choice because they aren't interested in giving people rights? So why wouldn't liberals endorse tax choice? For the same reason? That's strange if the the pope is really the only notable person interested in giving people rights. Don't get me wrong...I'm an atheist...and when I was growing up my family told me that the pope was the anti-christ...but I'm just saying...promoting rights is a strange M.O. for the anti-christ.

[Mavorpen]

Yet another reason to not support tax choice.

[The Perpetual Light]

A lot of the Church's stances on social justice/economic issues make good sense. Sadly, people are often too anti-Catholic to move past the sexual topics.

[Oneracon]

A lot of the Church's stances on social justice/economic issues make good sense. Sadly, people are often too anti-Catholic to move past the sexual topics.

Oh some of their positions are quite sensible, but those positions are also present in secular humanism. All the social justice, none of the mess.

[Vareiln]

Tax choice is a ridiculous concept. It would ensure that programs that nobody has ever heard of get defunded. Like that subsidy for rural airports in Alaska that the one guy was bitching about 3 weeks ago.

Pretty much this^
The majority would get what they want and then some; everyone else would be fucked over.

[Wikkiwallana]

Turns out that the pope endorsed tax choice 4 years ago...

One possible approach to development aid would be to apply effectively what is known as fiscal subsidiarity, allowing citizens to decide how to allocate a portion of the taxes they pay to the State. Provided it does not degenerate into the promotion of special interests, this can help to stimulate forms of welfare solidarity from below, with obvious benefits in the area of solidarity for development as well. - Pope Benedict XVI, Charity in Truth

As far as I can tell...it's by far the most notable endorsement of the idea of giving taxpayers more control over how their taxes are spent.

Two things:
1. The Pope is not an economist and therefore highly irrelevant to the subject.
2. There is absolutely no way I can think of to prevent the underlined.

[The Nuclear Fist]

So what happens when people start over funding one thing and under funding another? How are things stabilised?

What about situations, such as sudden economic disaster or natural disaster, that need suddenly massive amounts of funds to help mitigate?

[Xathranaar]

He worked to protect child molesters, and is contributing to the suffering and death of millions in Africa, so I pretty much don't care what he thinks.

[Tyramithul]

Seams the rather shady and dubious pope, Vatican and holy see can start by paying some of their wealth in taxes before telling the rest of us to do so.

[Miss Defied]

Xero: I don't get how you seem to think this is some kind of groundbreaking concept that you have invented. I remember discussing this in the eighth grade, which for me was 30 freaking years ago.

The thing is, that most people who think about it at length realize what an utterly horrible idea it is and they abandon the notion before too long. For some reason, you are just stuck on it.

[Xerographica]

Xero: I don't get how you seem to think this is some kind of groundbreaking concept that you have invented. I remember discussing this in the eighth grade, which for me was 30 freaking years ago.

Something tells me that you haven't looked over the references that I added to the tax choice entry on Wikipedia.

The thing is, that most people who think about it at length realize what an utterly horrible idea it is and they abandon the notion before too long. For some reason, you are just stuck on it.

Can you explain why it would be a horrible idea to put the government in charge of the food supply? The government would divine the demand for food and then supply the optimal quantity of food. I completely understand why this would be a horrible idea. But obviously you do not. Because if you did, then you would strongly support the tax choice concept.

Creating a market in the public sector would give taxpayers the opportunity to demonstrate their demand for public goods. There would be absolutely no need for government planners to try and divine the demand for public goods. Therefore, the supply of public goods would match the demand for public goods. Why would we want it any other way?

[Liriena]

Tonight, on Fox News: The Pope declares war on taxes. All Fox News anchors hereby pledge to join the Opus Dei.

[Xerographica]

So what happens when people start over funding one thing and under funding another? How are things stabilised?

What about situations, such as sudden economic disaster or natural disaster, that need suddenly massive amounts of funds to help mitigate?

Logistically speaking, at anytime throughout the year you could go directly to the EPA website and submit a tax payment. They'd give you a receipt and you'd submit all your receipts to the IRS by April 15.

Tax choice would create a market in the public sector. What would you consider to be an overprovision or underprovision of environmental protection? If there's an overprovision of environmental protection...then why would you go to the EPA website to make a payment? If you believed that we had an adequate supply of environmental protection...then why would you demand more?

[AiliailiA]

Fuck the Pope. That is all.

[Lenaria and Ciwciadar]

The Pope was also a member of the Hitler Youth. Just putting it out there.

Yeah, I bet he wanted to join it very much. Nazi German was all about the freedom of an individual, after all.