Skip to main content

What if we taxed the churches?

According to a study conducted by University of Tampa professor Ryan Cragun last year, taxing churches across this country could result in as much as $71 billion in added revenue every year. While the math will be imperfect due to the increasing number of churches through the years, if we look back to when churches gained tax exempt status in 1894 (120 years ago), that would have generated as much as $8.5 trillion, which is almost exactly half of this country's debt (a little over $17 trillion).

So, if politicians are really serious about this country's debt problem, how about this?

1) Tax churches ($71 billion a year)

2) Close tax loopholes on corporations ($5 billion per year)

3) Increase taxes on the wealthiest among us ($40-45 billion a year)

4) Decrease defense spending (we spend between $600-700 billion on this, so pick a number... I'll go with $100 billion)

5) Legalize marijuana and tax the heck out of it (approximately $14 billion per year)

Total these numbers and we'd generate/save an extra $230-$235 billion every year. At that rate, we'd pay off our debt in 72 years. No, I doubt there's much chance of #'s 1 or 5 happening in quite some time (especially #1), but even if #'s 2, 3, and 4 got implemented, that would save approximately $145-$150 billion every year, which is at least a start. Okay, greedy politicians - it's your move...

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/religion/story/2012-06-15/religious-tax-exemption-challenged/55629908/1

http://churchesandtaxes.procon.org/

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/closing-tax-loopholes-should-be-part-of-the-budget-conference/2013/11/08/41df32d2-47f8-11e3-b6f8-3782ff6cb769_story.html

http://www.cnbc.com/id/100321181

http://www.businessinsider.com/we-should-cut-military-spending-gradually-2013-2

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/17/economists-marijuana-legalization_n_1431840.html

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun...

Mentioned on Crooks and Liars and Hinterland Gazette!

Due to some tweets of mine, I got mentioned on the following two sites (all my tweets can be viewed here -  https://twitter.com/CraigRozniecki ): https://crooksandliars.com/2019/04/trump-gives-stupid-advice-george https://hinterlandgazette.com/2019/03/istandwithschiff-is-trending-after-donald-trump-led-gop-attack-on-adam-schiff-backfires-spectacularly.html

Face guarding is legal in college football and the NFL

I just wanted to remind fans and announcers especially, that face guarding is legal in both college football and the NFL. It all comes down to contact. So long as a defender doesn't make contact with an intended receiver, he doesn't have to turn around to play the ball. I can't tell you how many times every week I hear announcers talk about face guarding being a penalty. It's not. I even heard one announcer yesterday state, "If the defender doesn't turn around and play the ball, the ref will call pass interference every time." That's simply not true. Courtesy of referee Bill LeMonnier, he says this with regard to the rule at the college level (answered on 8/12/13): "NCAA rules on pass interference require the face guarding to have contact to be a foul. No contact, no foul by NCAA rules." In the NFL rule book, this is written:  "Actions that constitute defensive pass interference include but are not limited to: (a) Contact by a ...