The startribune.com has an interesting comparison of views on the role of government as it relates to providing basic services for immigrants.
Here are excerpts of the two perspectives:
PERSPECTIVE 1
I believe that through heavy taxation (30 to 50 percent for most Americans), big and intrusive government actually hinders Christians' ability to give, leaving few available resources to help the poor. Instead, their income supports ever-expanding government bureaucracy and services through which its recipients become increasingly dependent upon the government; many are enslaved to the very system initially designed to liberate them.
PERSPECTIVE 2
Because human needs require it, and other resources are not available to meet those needs, we believe that it is right and proper to raise income taxes justly and equitably ... . We know [Minnesotans] are willing to sacrifice for their poor brothers and sisters facing difficult financial hardships. The taxes we pay today, and those paid by our parents and grandparents before us, have allowed us ... to develop and sustain a high quality of life [and] allow us to meet our moral responsibility toward our fellow citizens, our brothers and sisters in the family of God."
Now let's play match the perspective with the author.
POSSIBLE AUTHORS
A) The chair of the state democratic party
B) The chair of the state republican party
C) The head of a middle class household in Minnesota
D) A retired evangelical pastor
E) The local Catholic archbishop
Match the perspective with the author.
Comments (2)
Let's see...
Perspective II (raise taxes) = E) the local Catholic archbishop.
Which is ridiculous. Therefore, I predict that the identity behind Perspective I must be equally ridiculous:
Perspective II = A) chair of the state democratic party.
Do I get a prize?
Posted by +veritas+ | February 14, 2005 7:45 PM
Posted on February 14, 2005 19:45
I think the first perspective is from the head of a middle-class household. And if not, it so easily could have been. We middle-class Christians have first-hand knowledge of the burden that high taxes pose. The first year we were married and filing jointly, John and I got whopped with such a large amount we had to pay, it took us two years to pay it all off. Aside from giving to the Church we had little left over. And then when our first child was born and we tried living on one income -- fuhgeddaboudit.
Unfortunately, I agree with veritas that the second perspective probably came from a local bishop. It shows a sadly pessimistic view of what lay people can and would like to do, were they to have more of their own money. On the other hand, imagine what decades of hearing confessions does to one's outlook on human generosity. He probably knows better than we think we do what people might do if they took home more of their money instead of having it appropriated by the state.
Posted by sniemann | February 14, 2005 8:55 PM
Posted on February 14, 2005 20:55