• TrickDacy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    7 个月前

    I don’t follow what’s silly here. These motherfuckers are not taxed and also not obligated to give back and that should matter. Tax them, would be the obvious solution

    • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      7 个月前

      Yeah the moral bit is we know people who hold housing for profit are douches. Churches are worse because they think they’re doing the Lord’s work and love talking about caring for people, but very few actually do any good.

    • spujb@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      7 个月前

      If all churches were to be taxed, the estimated new income would be a paltry $2.4 billion yearly. source

      While there is no consensus on the cost to end homelessness, estimates suggest the cost to be more than $300 billion.

      So yeah. A bit silly, or at least not an “obvious solution.”

      Edit: Meanwhile, taxing the rich and mega corporations is quite effective at retrieving this kind of cash, into the trillions. My personal position, if asked (though I want to be clear taxes were not the original topic at hand), is that taxing owners of multiple residential properties into unafordability is an important step toward ending homelessness.

      tldr, The users downvoting this comment are letting their anti-religious sentiment cloud the noxious nature of late stage capitalism. In a world where human lives are less important than profit, for fucks sake the nonprofits are not the primary blame.

      • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        7 个月前

        When I said “solution”, the problem I was talking about was how unfair it is that religious groups get tax exempt status despite doing nothing to earn that, and a lot to prove they should be taxed. I never said that suddenly we could feed and house all the homeless with those tax dollars

        • spujb@lemmy.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          7 个月前

          Post and my comment are about homelessness. Categorically, neither the post nor my comment were about taxes. So you changed the subject without even indicating you were doing so. 🙄

          Awesome cool thank you for your contribution. But yeah glad to see we agree on an entirely tangentially related topic.

          Edit: You are free to discuss taxes. But stop trying to frame it as a disagreement with my position which had nothing to do with taxes. Do it elsewhere where relevant.

          • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            7 个月前

            The post is about the contradiction between homeless people getting the shaft while churches get handouts. There was no change of subject, you just set your focus narrowly and apparently decided anyone outside that would be wrong in multiple ways.

            • spujb@lemmy.cafe
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              7 个月前

              Misinformation. Churches do not get handouts.

              Corporations do.

              You are free to discuss taxes. But stop trying to frame it as a disagreement with my position which had nothing to do with taxes. Do it elsewhere where relevant.

              • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                7 个月前

                Not getting taxed while taking in revenue is a handout. Not sure why you’re so insistent on arguing.

                You’re adamant that your random subjective reading if the post is the only valid one and it’s not. It’s weird you want to insist it is