Communism vs. Christianity

[don has a plan]

Fourth, churches in the area were allowed to meet with the board and ask questions and the board clarified that other groups like AA, MAD, etc. were allowed to use the classrooms. It was churches who would not be allowed to do so. So your uninformed statement saying it applied to all lessees of WCS property is inaccurate.

That's not what the meeting minutes navyvet posted say at all.  The minutes show that churches are grouped with charitable and civic-type groups.  Perhaps the board's secretary erred in the minutes.  I hope they get it corrected.

My son goes to a school that is housed in the education building of a large Presbyterian church.  The church kids go through that building on Sunday mornings and make a mess of the classroom.  So it's sort of the same thing, just in reverse.

[CSloan]

Communism is the vehicle for the Globalists and the New World Order.

Actually, capitalism has been the driving force behind globalization.

Very true, but in order for there to be a successful one-world government the guidelines of the communist manifesto would have to be followed.

I don't know anything about that.  Sounds interesting, though.

I've seen a great deal of material on this, and there seems to be a volume to evidence supporting this theory. This also ties into evolution, hence most of our rejection to this teaching.

http://server.firefighters.org/catalog/2001/13031.mp3
http://server.firefighters.org/catalog/2001/13032.mp3

[don has a plan]

I'm blocked from opening mp3 files at work (virus concern).  I'll have to check those out when I'm on a different pc.  Thanks for the links.

[navyvet]

Navyvet,

I don't know what your problem is, but if you lived here you'd know that everyone wants into Williamson County schools. So there are no "vacant" rooms...

I apologize to you for sounding hostile; I didn't mean to. I guess that's a problem with posting with words only, without any other input (tone of voice, facial expressions, etc.).

Looks like your congregation's meeting in one of the schools. Someone may have already asked you about this, but would you tell us more about yourselves. Are you trying to plant a congregation in Williamson Co.? How much success are you having? With all the challenges, it still much be very exciting. Is there a website for the congregation?

[marc]

I think the problem with the church in Europe is that they're in Europe, and every society has it's own problems and tempations.  I don't thnk ours and theirs are the same.  Their old society, old structures, old churches aren't duplicated here.

istm that the greatest enemy of the church in America is materialism.  Too many churches are willing to compromise and appease the affluent.

There are a number, however, who do go among the poor and show the face of Christ to those in their community.  I thank God for these churches and pray for more of us to become like them.  When I look at the church I'm a part of I see some of this, but I see more self-centeredness.

I would probably say it is American Individualism, of which materialism is a manifestation.

That's probably worth another thread. 

[Jimbob]

On Christianity in Europe, that trend may be changing.  There was an article in the Christian Chronicle about an increase in interest in Christianity, and the emergent church groups have been pretty active in Europe as well.  It's probably most accurate to say that the stodgy and liturgical groups and the liberal and darn-near agnostic "churches" are the ones dying, not Christianity as whole.

[kanham]

Admin,

What kind of legal action are churches looking into? It sounds like a clear case of religious discrimination.

Now from what I have read the action says all lessees so maybe there was some problem with communication but if churches are the ones being singled out I think you would have a pretty strong case there.

The Board of Education leases buildings and property or the portions of buildings and
property it determines are not being used or are not needed at present by Williamson
County Schools. Lessees may not have access to any classroom which is in use as a
classroom.

[don has a plan]

The only thing that would concern me about any organization meeting in a school is the privacy issue.  Education records (including graded papers, progress reports, behavior notes, etc.) are to be maintained in confidence.  If such records are floating around in classrooms (in the teacher's unlocked desk, for example), and the organization using the school has access, then there's been a violation of trust...and federal law.

Admin -- Is your church going to have access to the gym or the cafeteria?  Those areas shouldn't be off-limits, especially if you're paying rent.  School systems are always begging for money; I would think this would be an easy way to generate funds.

BTW, if your church ends up having to leave the school, you might try renting an auditorium at a local movie theater.  I know of a couple of churches in Little Rock that did that some years ago.

[admin]

The only thing that would concern me about any organization meeting in a school is the privacy issue.  Education records (including graded papers, progress reports, behavior notes, etc.) are to be maintained in confidence.  If such records are floating around in classrooms (in the teacher's unlocked desk, for example), and the organization using the school has access, then there's been a violation of trust...and federal law.

Admin -- Is your church going to have access to the gym or the cafeteria?  Those areas shouldn't be off-limits, especially if you're paying rent.  School systems are always begging for money; I would think this would be an easy way to generate funds.

BTW, if your church ends up having to leave the school, you might try renting an auditorium at a local movie theater.  I know of a couple of churches in Little Rock that did that some years ago.

The law will not affect us because we are moving into our first building just before the law begins. It will affect other start-up churches.

Our church is an independent Christian church and we are very focused on evangelism and reaching the lost instead of just playing church on Sunday mornings. I'm not sure the exact percentage, but if I remember correctly about 60 percent of our members are adult converts who had no church contact as children.

We're trying to support other start-up churches of all denominations who are being hurt by this law. Because churches are one of the top users of school buildings, they will be most hurt and the law, based on the actual words from the board, were made in an effort to keep churches out of schools.

There are all kinds of lawyers working with local churches, but with the claims of "separation of church and state" and the board making it sound like this is not just aimed at churches--even though none of the other groups have need for classrooms because they don't break up into smaller groups--fighting this is nearly impossible. You hear talk of how much schools need money, but apparently they don't need it so bad that they'd allow churches to use their facilities. We might actually cast the demons out of the buildings!

And by the way, we have no access to any rooms where private records are stored. Certain rooms are locked when we use the building. Eventually, the school buildings will be completely locked to churches.

[don has a plan]

Well, that's definitely an injustice.  However, it sounds like your church is moving on to bigger and better.  You and the church have my prayers for an easy transition into your new building; may it be a vehicle for bringing more people to know Jesus.

In the meantime, though, I hope that you and others in Williamson County will write and call the school board members and tell them that what they have done is wrong.  They can always vote again and change the policy.  Heck, if that doesn't work, run for school board yourself.

[navyvet]

Well, that's definitely an injustice.  However, it sounds like your church is moving on to bigger and better.  You and the church have my prayers for an easy transition into your new building; may it be a vehicle for bringing more people to know Jesus.

In the meantime, though, I hope that you and others in Williamson County will write and call the school board members and tell them that what they have done is wrong.  They can always vote again and change the policy.  Heck, if that doesn't work, run for school board yourself.

I'm not sure I've seen anything that shows that any church has been done wrong by the WCS board from the plain reading of the language of the policy in question.  I appreciate Admin's frustration, however. That being said, I'm not sure I would rely on governmental entities for religious support. Certainly the first century church did not, and look what they accomplished in the Lord.  House churches have always been an option. Relying on governmental support, even through leased facilities, seems to be a short wide road to Constantinianism; after all, under him and the Roman emperors after him, the Church received all the tax exemptions the pagan temples had enjoyed for centuries. Not a pattern I would necessarily care to follow.

[admin]

We have written many letters. We made it a point to write letters instead of sending emails because we were told that handwritten letters were more likely to be read.

Navyvet, we're not counting on government support, but we shouldn't have to put up with government discrimination.

[navyvet]

Navyvet, we're not counting on government support, but we shouldn't have to put up with government discrimination.

I certainly agree with that. Do you have a website (or any other kind of cyber-outreach) up and going? You know with all the stuff oldtimers like us look for: sunday services times and stuff?

[Jimbob]

Admin, good for you for looking beyond your own congregation's needs and working to keep/reopen the doors for others.

[navyvet]

Admin, good for you for looking beyond your own congregation's needs and working to keep/reopen the doors for others.

Thankful for the Lord's work through you and your congregation.

[don has a plan]

Admin, good for you for looking beyond your own congregation's needs and working to keep/reopen the doors for others.

Hear, hear.

[admin]

Communism / Socialism - No Such Thing As a Free Lunch

There was a chemistry professor in a large college that had some exchange students in the class. One day while the class was in the lab the professor noticed one young man (exchange student) who kept rubbing his back and stretching as if his back hurt.
 
The professor asked the young man what was the matter. The student told him he had a bullet lodged in his back.  He had been shot while fighting communists in his native country who were trying to overthrow his country's government and install a new communist government.
 
In the midst of his story he looked at the professor and asked a strange question. He asked, ' Do you know how to catch wild pigs?'
 
The professor thought it was a joke and asked for the punch line. The young man said this was no joke. 'You catch wild pigs by finding a suitable place in the woods and putting corn on the ground. The pigs find it and begin to come everyday to eat the free corn. When they are used to coming every day, you put a fence down one side of the place where they are used to coming.
 
When they get used to the fence, they begin to eat the corn again and you put up another side of the fence. They get used to that and start to eat again. You continue until you have all four sides of the fence up with a gate in The last side.
 
The pigs, who are used to the free corn, start to come through the gate to eat, you slam the gate on them and catch the whole herd.
 
Suddenly the wild pigs have lost their freedom. They run around and around inside the fence, but they are
caught.  Soon they go back to eating the free corn.  They are so used to it that they have forgotten how to forage in the woods for themselves, so they accept their captivity.
 
The young man then told the professor '... that is exactly what he sees happening to America.  The government keeps pushing us toward Communism/Socialism and keeps spreading the free corn out in the form of government programs such as supplemental income, tax credit for unearned income, tobacco subsidies, dairy subsidies, payments not to plant crops (CRP), welfare, medicine, drugs, etc. while we continually lose our freedoms--just a little at a time as more and more comes out of our income to pay...for the fences.
 
One should always remember 'There is no such thing as a free Lunch!  Also, 'You can never hire someone to provide a service for you cheaper than you can do it yourself.
 
Also, if you see that all of this wonderful government 'help' is a problem confronting the future of democracy in America,  you might want to send this on to your friends....there's some 'Communists' running for political offices all across this land......they are called 'Liberal Democrats' by some......and have 'taken the Socialistic side' of the Democratic party away from the traditional Democrats.....just think: '...what would Harry Truman,  FDR be doing now if either of them were in the White House?

[Jaime]

Very good illustration Admin. Also what's funny about pigs is that if you suddenly remove the fence, they will not venture out beyond where the fence was. (I used to raise pigs when I was a kid on a farm). Kinda sobering for the application to us as a people.

I still like what Dave Ramsey says:

"It's up to each of us to leave the cave, go out and kill something ourselves, and drag it home to eat. No one owes us anything."

BTW, after my dad went broke farming, he opened a restaurant in a small farming community. He was appalled at the CRP program that paid farmers not to grow crops. His lament was always, "If the government would pay me not to cook hamburgers, I could not cook as many as they saw fit!"

I have an uncle that bought up 1/2 of Bailey County in the panhandle of Texas (county seat Muleshoe) playing the CRP system and letting the government make his land payments.

[Brian Kelley]

Wow, I just found this thread and it seems there's a huge bias against the word 'Communism'.  I think it's a great idea that has never been applied correctly because selfish people have run it, except in one application.  One application I've read about seemed to work very well.

[Bon Voyage]

Wow, I just found this thread and it seems there's a huge bias against the word 'Communism'.  I think it's a great idea that has never been applied correctly because selfish people have run it, except in one application.  One application I've read about seemed to work very well.

"Communism" is a great theory and idea.  However, communism as a political system will NEVER work out.  The theory of communism is flawed to begin with, as man's sinfulness will not allow it to function.

[Brian Kelley]

It seemed to work pretty well in the book of Acts.  That's pretty much what they had.  Everyone gave up all they had, laid the wealth at the feet of the apostles, and NOBODY was in need.  Sounds like that's the kind of system that God wills us to have.

[Bon Voyage]

It seemed to work pretty well in the book of Acts.  That's pretty much what they had.  Everyone gave up all they had, laid the wealth at the feet of the apostles, and NOBODY was in need.  Sounds like that's the kind of system that God wills us to have.

That wasn't government mandated Communism.  That was people sharing freely.  Two very, very different things.

[admin]

It seemed to work pretty well in the book of Acts.  That's pretty much what they had.  Everyone gave up all they had, laid the wealth at the feet of the apostles, and NOBODY was in need.  Sounds like that's the kind of system that God wills us to have.

Difference is that everyone CHOSE to give up what they had. It was their right and not some secular government forcing them to.

Secondly, it was a church community--not a government. Shocker--The church and the government are NOT the same.

Third, the church was deciding what was being done with the money, not a worldly government.

If you want to give everything you own to your church, be my guest. That's your right because of the fact that we aren't a communist nation. If we were, the government would decide how your money would be spent and I can pretty much guarantee you it wouldn't go to the church. But suggesting that giving all your money to church work is somehow equal to a wasteful government forcing us to give it all to them so that they can control our lives is NOT the same thing. You're comparing apples to blisters!

[Brian Kelley]

Like I said, just one application has ever worked.

I agree a worldly government won't be able to do this right.  It doesn't do what it's doing now right, since obviously not everyone's needs are being met.

As for me giving all my money to the church, I don't see why I shouldn't do that if I was confident that all my needs were going to be met by the church, but the churches today are not at all the way they were in the book of Acts...  We have church buildings worth over 40 million dollars while the people down the street aren't able to eat...

[admin]

Right. But trusting the government for all your needs is not the answer. That's not the government's job. That attitude is childish and leads to communism, socialism and a world of other hurts.

We are to be adults and provide for ourselves and do our best to help others. We should trust the government to very little because I can't really think of anything that I'd say they do exceptionally well. Anything the government can do, private citizens working together can do better. Remember that the next time Democrats (or Republicans) promise you more government programs if they can just stick their hands deeper into your pocket.

[Brian Kelley]

I understand your position, but the problem is that private citizens DON'T work together to meet the needs of the poor.  The attitude of the "government should do nothing" people seems like that the poor should either be taken care of by philanthropic groups or should die of starvation, but under NO circumstances should the receive help from their leaders.  That sounds more childish to me...

[admin]

I understand your position, but the problem is that private citizens DON'T work together to meet the needs of the poor.  The attitude of the "government should do nothing" people seems like that the poor should either be taken care of by philanthropic groups or should die of starvation, but under NO circumstances should the receive help from their leaders.  That sounds more childish to me...

Whoa there tiger. We went from you saying that communism was how the Bible wanted it to you accusing me of saying that the poor should starve. Interesting how people jump to extreme accusations when they debate.

My point is that robbing from Peter to pay Paul is wrong. Period. Peter should help Paul because he wants to and not because some government forces him. Most of that money that supposedly goes to the poor doesn't and is only used to make more government programs that take more of our money and disable us from being able to help the poor.

Besides, how much do you really help someone by giving them a permanent handout? I don't know how we got on this. The bottom line is that communism is MOST CERTAINLY not the answer. I like my freedom and will fight to the death to keep it!

If we were in a communist government...discussing other government possibilities would be illegal and we'd go to jail. So be glad you live in a free country.

[Brian Kelley]

I understand your position, but the problem is that private citizens DON'T work together to meet the needs of the poor.  The attitude of the "government should do nothing" people seems like that the poor should either be taken care of by philanthropic groups or should die of starvation, but under NO circumstances should the receive help from their leaders.  That sounds more childish to me...

Whoa there tiger. We went from you saying that communism was how the Bible wanted it to you accusing me of saying that the poor should starve. Interesting how people jump to extreme accusations when they debate.

My point is that robbing from Peter to pay Paul is wrong. Period. Peter should help Paul because he wants to and not because some government forces him. Most of that money that supposedly goes to the poor doesn't and is only used to make more government programs that take more of our money and disable us from being able to help the poor.

Besides, how much do you really help someone by giving them a permanent handout? I don't know how we got on this. The bottom line is that communism is MOST CERTAINLY not the answer. I like my freedom and will fight to the death to keep it!

If we were in a communist government...discussing other government possibilities would be illegal and we'd go to jail. So be glad you live in a free country.

I didn't accuse you of this!  I said that's the way the attitude (or position) seems sometimes.

My question is what if Peter doesn't help Paul.  Does Paul get to die so Peter can be more well off?

As for communism as a government, it's not necessarily that way.  Communism isn't even a governing system; it's an economic system.  We have communism vs capitalism.  In the past, communist societies have been ruled by autocrats, but that's not necessary, is it?  Why not have a democracy for a government and a communism for an economic system?  I'm not saying that's the best idea in the world, but the word "communism" doesn't need to carry the weight people have tried to allow it to carry.

Communism has nothing to do with personal freedoms.  People who have applied communisms to their societies have taken personal freedoms too, but they are from the same cause, not cause and effect.  Here's an analogy.  Each year, whenever the sale of ice cream goes up, the number of drownings also go up.  Does that mean ice cream causes people to drown?  Of course not.  It means it's summertime and more people go swimming and more people buy ice cream.

[don has a plan]

What if there were two parties and they really were the same? Does democracy really exist? What if the candidates were pre-selected before you even got to vote? Would it still be democracy?

Interesting pov.  I would argue that the two scenarios you posit have already been realized in the US.  IMO, the two political parties are simply two limbs on the same branch, essentially the same.  The candidates are chosen by a select few; by the time the vast majority of the country gets to vote, the candidates are already settled.  (Actually, I would argue that they are settled by party bosses well in advance of the primaries anyway.)

Besides your example of Social Security, btw, we have many forms of socialism in the US that few people contest.  Public utilities--sewers, water, electricity, roads--as well as government-supported police, fire, and ambulance service are examples of socialist principles at work.

[Dunamite]

What if there were two parties and they really were the same? Does democracy really exist? What if the candidates were pre-selected before you even got to vote? Would it still be democracy?

Interesting pov.  I would argue that the two scenarios you posit have already been realized in the US.  IMO, the two political parties are simply two limbs on the same branch, essentially the same.  The candidates are chosen by a select few; by the time the vast majority of the country gets to vote, the candidates are already settled.  (Actually, I would argue that they are settled by party bosses well in advance of the primaries anyway.)

Besides your example of Social Security, btw, we have many forms of socialism in the US that few people contest.  Public utilities--sewers, water, electricity, roads--as well as government-supported police, fire, and ambulance service are examples of socialist principles at work.

I do not wish to pick on the U.S. My own country is much the same. We have more parties in our parliamentary system, but the two mainline parties which have formed the government since it became an independent country are much the same. Both jockey to occupy the center of the political spectrum. The other parties are special interest parties, separatist, socialist and green. At best they can hope to make up the opposition.

U.S. politics is fascinating for many reasons. The main one being its scale: the length of the campaigns, the cost and the obsession of the media.

The litmus test for political parties is the mark that they leave after being in power. Unfortunately, parties that promise change rarely deliver. Once in Ontario the NDP (our "social democratic" party) took power. They promised to make change, but found that once in power the could not deliver. Why? Because economic chaos would have developed as industry threatened to flee should they implement their program. So even when business fails to elect a government favorable to them they still have the economy to use as a hammer.

Companies do not get a vote, but they have far more power than the electorate.

Mussolini once said that corporatism and fascism were the same thing. Decision making is made behind closed doors and what we see is all theater, to give us the illusion that those in power want us to have.

Canadians do not have the weight of the flag that any Americans have. We do not think that it is unpatriotic to condemn our leaders when they deserve it. In fact, it is a national sport to for the media. In contrast, the media in the U.S. is compliant and generally rolls over and apes whatever the White House tells it to say. Israel has boasted that it can kill any story it wants on CNN. Fox tells its correspondents what stories to cover and how to slant the stories to favor the administration. Failing that politicians use the flag to deflect criticism by suggesting that it is unpatriotic to question their policies. Most Americans are easily swayed by this. Canadian media would have a field day with this kind of behavior. Political humor is big here.

Part of the difference in the media is ownership and control over editorial content. In the U.S. it is private, but here we have the CBC which is publicly funded, but insulated from government control. I remember during the last presidential campaign with the Swift Boat incident where various media outlets came up with all kinds of anti-Kerry "information". Canadian media would never be allowed this kind of latitude. Canadians would have insisted on equal time. In fact it is the law. In the U.S. private ownership of the media gives power to media moguls to influence the political process. Again, they get no vote, but they have undue influence over the outcome.

One of the things that we are trying to do here is to control private interest groups from running ads which influence public opinion during elections. They have to walk a fine line. If they endorse anyone then they are considered part of the election campaign finances of the parties and must be reported. We have a long way to go, but we are making progress. The second thing that has happened is a cap on donations. Donations cannot exceed $5000 and financial support must be disclosed. Once it is a matter of public record then it easy to verify if a backer has received favorable treatment.

Finally, lobbying is strictly controlled here. Lobbyists are not given access to the Prime Minister or his Cabinet. Under conflict of interest laws they must report any contact and payments are not allowed. This is not to say it doesn't happen, but the media loves to access things under the freedom of information act and cause a scandal.

Right now there is a public inquiry into the behavior of a former prime minister for money he received after leaving office for contracts rewarded during his tenure. Contrast this with Dick Cheney who still receives salary while in office from Halliburton and the fact that Halliburton has received untendered contracts worth billions and that Cheney undoubtedly influenced the process. Hardly a whimper was heard from the U.S. press. Canadian media would not roll over and play dead in this way.

Canadian politicians must put all investments into a blind trust and must step down from all boards and companies that they own. Paul Martin, a former PM, had to turn his company over to his son while he was in office and he was prohibited from even giving advice to him.

It is not surprising that Canadians view American politics as a bit of a circus. It is like a reality show with lots of mud slinging and drama. Unfortunately it is all too real and the world bears the scars of the policies of whoever gets elected. Not just Americans suffer if Americans choose poorly.

Blessings,
Dunamite

[admin]

The bottom line is, do you trust the government to take all your money and decide what's done with it or would you rather get to make your own decisions? The church example is hardly justification for communism because the government is not the church.

You can never know who will be in charge next in terms of a government and what they will want to do. Therefore, I think it makes sense to keep the government's hands out of the people's pockets and the power in the hands of the people. America was founded by people who were tired of an England king taking their income and having too much power.

So the United States was founded on people choosing their leaders, being free to live their lives and free to earn as much or as little as they wanted AND to decide how they spend it. I say if you want something different, there are plenty of choices out there. Most of America's internal critics wouldn't dream of leaving. I think that's telling.

I hope we never give up our freedoms. I'll fight for mine. I can't believe we are even discussing this. I bet if government control in terms of our money were forced on us....most of those who are acting like it wouldn't be a big deal would realize just how serious and terrible it would be...and would probably be ready to fight it.

[Brian Kelley]

The bottom line is, do you trust the government to take all your money and decide what's done with it or would you rather get to make your own decisions. The church example is hardly justification for communism because the government is not the church.

You can never know who will be in charge next in terms of a government and what they will want to do. Therefore, I think it makes sense to keep the government's hands out of the people's pockets and the power in the hands of the people. America was founded by people who were tired of an England king taking their income and having too much power.

So the United States was founded on people choosing their leaders, being free to live their lives and free to earn as much or as little as they wanted AND to decide how they spend it. I say if you want something different, there are plenty of choices out there. Most of America's internal critics wouldn't dream of leaving. I think that's telling.

I hope we never give up our freedoms. I'll fight for mine. I can't believe we are even discussing this. I bet it government control in terms of our money were forced on us....most of those who are acting like it wouldn't be a big deal would realize just how serious and terrible it would be...and would probably be ready to fight it.

To me it's not about control, but about making sure people are helped who need it.  I'm willing to give up some of my money to make sure others are taken care of.  The vast majority are too greedy to make that sacrifice, so we must help them make it.  Some people think they're "entitled" to it because they've schemed their way into the money.  I think that all money is God's and that the poor should be given some of the money, regardless of who lied cheated and stole their way into it.  I have zero sympathy for the money of the greedy rich.

[Jaime]

I have zero sympathy for the money of the greedy rich.

Greedy is not a characteristic of only the rich. It spans the entire spectrum of the human condition. The rich are a lot of times more visible with their greed and have perfected it. BTW, I would imagine EVERY American without many exceptions would seem hopelessly greedy to a Darfurian.

[Brian Kelley]

I have zero sympathy for the money of the greedy rich.

Greedy is not a characteristic of only the rich. It spans the entire spectrum of the human condition. The rich are a lot of times more visible with their greed and have perfected it. BTW, I would imagine EVERY American without many exceptions would seem hopelessly greedy to a Darfurian.

So because of that we should not hold ourselves accountable to help the poor?  I'd rather force people to help than to let the poor suffer.

[Jaime]

I have zero sympathy for the money of the greedy rich.

Greedy is not a characteristic of only the rich. It spans the entire spectrum of the human condition. The rich are a lot of times more visible with their greed and have perfected it. BTW, I would imagine EVERY American without many exceptions would seem hopelessly greedy to a Darfurian.

So because of that we should not hold ourselves accountable to help the poor?  I'd rather force people to help than to let the poor suffer.

I didn't say that we shouldn't. My point is that we are all rich in this country. And by that in your definition we are all greedy.

Should we hold ourselves accountable, yes. Are people now being forced to help. Yes, it's called income tax. I have no problem with that. Personally I think the income tax needs to be more fair to everyone. The very rich have too many loop holes, and the middle class carries the load.

That's why I like Mike Huckabee. He is supporting a fair tax solution.