Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Masonic Perspectives Wanted: Meritocracy

page: 1
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 09:58 AM
link   
This is just a thread for any interested Freemasons, willing to discuss some of their beliefs and values with a non-Mason.

I'm just wondering, how do Freemasons feel about Meritocratic rule, where a person is advanced in life based on his/her achievements. I'm also curious to know what Freemasons think about a 100% inheritance tax, in order to ensure that the privileged in the world, don't get to hand down their tremendous wealth to their children, and hopefully, allow every person to start at the same point, have the same opportunity, and prove themselves through their actions.

I understand(from what i've read mind you) that the Freemasons are involved in charitable activities, and i'm curious to know what some of those activities are. I mean personal examples, not what I can find by googling "Freemasons Charitable Work".

The Queen of England is the Grand Patroness of Freemasonry, but from where I sit, the Queen of England is no friend to *free~men*. This suggests to me that Freemasonry and the Queen of England, are more about preserving the status quo(the Old World Order), rather than truly trying to change the world for the better.

Lastly, i'm curious to know how Freemasons would reacte upon finding out that Freemasonry itself, is a product of Illuminism(birthed by the Illuminati), and that the organization went awry, due to circumstances i'm not privy to, so whether or not it's true doesn't matter, i'm just curious to know how Freemasons would reacte to these types of ponderings.

Freemasonry refers initiates to the LIGHT, God said "Let there be Light", and Lucifer is the *Light-Bringer* which makes God Lucifer, no?, and Freemasons, followers of Lucifer{*the intellect*}. Comments?

~Peace~




posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 01:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by ELectricalApprentice
I'm just wondering, how do Freemasons feel about Meritocratic rule, where a person is advanced in life based on his/her achievements.


I prefer the Representative Repulic system that the United States has but I do feel that entitlement programs are out of control and more people need to be productive members of society.


I'm also curious to know what Freemasons think about a 100% inheritance tax, in order to ensure that the privileged in the world, don't get to hand down their tremendous wealth to their children, and hopefully, allow every person to start at the same point, have the same opportunity, and prove themselves through their actions.


I am totally against this. What I earn in my life is my choice to distrbute upon my death, whether I opt to give this to my children or to a charity or throw it out the _


I mean personal examples, not what I can find by googling "Freemasons Charitable Work".


I volunteer at the local soup kitchen and my wife and I have both our dogs trained as hospice therapy dogs and they also go with us to the children's burn and cancer center at the local hospital.


The Queen of England is the Grand Patroness of Freemasonry...


I live in the United States, the Queen of England is completely and totally irrelevant.


Lastly, i'm curious to know how Freemasons would reacte upon finding out that Freemasonry itself, is a product of Illuminism(birthed by the Illuminati)...


I have no reaction as Masonry predates the Bavarian Illuminati by close to a millenia.


Freemasonry refers initiates to the LIGHT, God said "Let there be Light", and Lucifer is the *Light-Bringer* which makes God Lucifer, no?, and Freemasons, followers of Lucifer{*the intellect*}. Comments?


Please see this thread for erroneous beliefs on Lucifer in regards Masonry.



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by ELectricalApprentice

I'm just wondering, how do Freemasons feel about Meritocratic rule, where a person is advanced in life based on his/her achievements.


I am a meritocracist. But that has nothing to do with Freemasonry, nor do I know any other Freemasons who are great advocates of meritocracy. They might be or might not be, but we dont talk politics in the lodge.



I'm also curious to know what Freemasons think about a 100% inheritance tax, in order to ensure that the privileged in the world, don't get to hand down their tremendous wealth to their children, and hopefully, allow every person to start at the same point, have the same opportunity, and prove themselves through their actions.


Freemasonry, as an organization, has no "official positions" on political issues because they are not a political party. Personally, I dont think there should be a 100% taxation on the rich, even though I do prefer wealth by merit rather than inheritance.



I understand(from what i've read mind you) that the Freemasons are involved in charitable activities, and i'm curious to know what some of those activities are. I mean personal examples, not what I can find by googling "Freemasons Charitable Work".


My lodge does not disclose where charity goes. Charity should not be means to brag imo, but given discreetly.



The Queen of England is the Grand Patroness of Freemasonry, but from where I sit, the Queen of England is no friend to *free~men*. This suggests to me that Freemasonry and the Queen of England, are more about preserving the status quo(the Old World Order), rather than truly trying to change the world for the better.


Freemasonry is neither about changing the world nor about preserving the status quo. Its purpose is to take good men and make them better, regardless of their political or religious views.



Lastly, i'm curious to know how Freemasons would reacte upon finding out that Freemasonry itself, is a product of Illuminism(birthed by the Illuminati), and that the organization went awry, due to circumstances i'm not privy to, so whether or not it's true doesn't matter, i'm just curious to know how Freemasons would reacte to these types of ponderings.


There are thousands of threads on this site where you can see for yourself how they react to these ponderings.




Freemasonry refers initiates to the LIGHT, God said "Let there be Light", and Lucifer is the *Light-Bringer* which makes God Lucifer, no?, and Freemasons, followers of Lucifer{*the intellect*}. Comments?


Many different entities, deities, gods, angels and men have been associated with light, including the God/Supreme Creator of all. In Freemasonry we refer to the Most High / most Supreme Being / Creator. This has been discussed in another few thousand threads on ATS already, most recently in a thread by AugustusMasonicus entitled "Why Freemasons do not worship Lucifer"



posted on Nov, 30 2012 @ 11:59 PM
link   
Hey thanks for the reply guys, I will wade through some threads here before I attempt to continue my train of thought here.



posted on Dec, 1 2012 @ 07:55 AM
link   
Freemasons may allow any government that benefits them... as no matter what type, they just collect good men make them better and then overthrow the government and settle in freelands...



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 10:24 AM
link   

I prefer the Representative Repulic system that the United States has but I do feel that entitlement programs are out of control and more people need to be productive members of society.

I'm no expert in politics mind you, but America may be a Representative Republic in name and history, but in *practice* is closer to a plutocratic democracy. Do you disagree?


I am totally against this. What I earn in my life is my choice to distrbute upon my death, whether I opt to give this to my children or to a charity or throw it out the _

So you that that you think it's ok for the privileged to have a better chance at success in life because of who their parents are, as opposed to everyone having an equal chance to succeed in life, AND find happiness? That doesn't seem like an especially charitable mindset tho does it? The *elite* are opposed to a 100 percent Inheritance Tax because it threatens the Establishment's powers of control through dynastic bloodlines. You may not be wealthy enough to pass on this unfair advantage to your children tho, which might explain why you feel you need to pass your earnings on{because I highly doubt you'd ever throw it out the window!} Maybe a part of you thinks they need that extra bit of help in the ol dog-eat-dog world, because they aren't going to be able to do it on their own, and it serves your interests to help them, in that way? Being a charitable Brother of the Light? I'm not judging in any way so please don't think that. Just discoursing..


I volunteer at the local soup kitchen and my wife and I have both our dogs trained as hospice therapy dogs and they also go with us to the children's burn and cancer center at the local hospital.

That's awesome, good on you! I personally know how difficult it can be to be faced with such poverty, or injury, and it's truly a measure of a man who can do it again and again without becoming disillusioned with the goings on of the world. Good answer for sure!


I live in the United States, the Queen of England is completely and totally irrelevant.

Right, is that because you are what is known as a "Continental Freemason", as opposed to Scottish or York Rite Freemason? But you are implying there to be a separation, yes? A *division* of some kind. Kind of like how Pepsi and Coke are both soft drinks, but have different *logos*? Or are you able to provide some background on that?


I have no reaction as Masonry predates the Bavarian Illuminati by close to a millenia.

I mean, how do you know that, really? I'm not up to your *level* of historical Masonic understanding. Out of curiosity, I specifically avoided using the Bavarian Illuminati because I don't believe the Bavarian Illuminati were the beginning OF the Illuminati. Of course, I can only prove it in the same fashion as you because I wasn't there. I just read it in a book, and on websites, watched it in historical propaganda presentations. And these would be the central delivery mechanism of your evidence i'm sure, yes? We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.


Please see this thread for erroneous beliefs on Lucifer in regards Masonry.

So Freemasons don't identify *Lucifer* as merely symbolism for *The Intellect* or *Reason*?

I really appreciate you taking the time to talk about these things. At the very least I look like a nutter, and more comers to this site will want to join Freemasonry!


Edit: Please disregard the question about Lucifer. I have read something I trust to be true, and no longer associate Lucifer to Freemasonry
edit on 2-12-2012 by ELectricalApprentice because: New info has come to heheh *Light*



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 11:15 AM
link   
reply to post by ELectricalApprentice
 


Just out of curiosity, where would this 100% inheritance tax go to?



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by ELectricalApprentice
I'm no expert in politics mind you, but America may be a Representative Republic in name and history, but in *practice* is closer to a plutocratic democracy. Do you disagree?


I do. The recent Presidential election showed that the 'rich(er) guy' lost.


So you that that you think it's ok for the privileged to have a better chance at success in life because of who their parents are, as opposed to everyone having an equal chance to succeed in life, AND find happiness? That doesn't seem like an especially charitable mindset tho does it?


How can someone opting to donate part or all of their accumulated assets not be charitable?


The *elite* are opposed to a 100 percent Inheritance Tax because it threatens the Establishment's powers of control through dynastic bloodlines.


I am not 'elite' but I am completely opposed to ideological, confiscatory tax policy. My money, and what I do with it, is none of anyone else's goddamn business.


You may not be wealthy enough to pass on this unfair advantage to your children tho, which might explain why you feel you need to pass your earnings on{because I highly doubt you'd ever throw it out the window!} Maybe a part of you thinks they need that extra bit of help in the ol dog-eat-dog world, because they aren't going to be able to do it on their own, and it serves your interests to help them, in that way?


I may not be super wealthy but what I have already and will eventually accumulate would make any sturpes lives easier. It is my decision whether I choose to give them these assets.


Right, is that because you are what is known as a "Continental Freemason", as opposed to Scottish or York Rite Freemason? But you are implying there to be a separation, yes? A *division* of some kind. Kind of like how Pepsi and Coke are both soft drinks, but have different *logos*? Or are you able to provide some background on that?


The York and Scottish Rite are both active in the United States and neither has anything to do with the Queen. Again, she is irrelevant to any Mason in the United States.


I mean, how do you know that, really? I'm not up to your *level* of historical Masonic understanding.


The Regius Poem speaks of an Operative Masonic lodge meeting in the 10th Century.


Out of curiosity, I specifically avoided using the Bavarian Illuminati because I don't believe the Bavarian Illuminati were the beginning OF the Illuminati. Of course, I can only prove it in the same fashion as you because I wasn't there. I just read it in a book, and on websites, watched it in historical propaganda presentations. And these would be the central delivery mechanism of your evidence i'm sure, yes?


None of the above. I found Terry Melanson's book, Perfectibilists, to be the definitive authourity on the Bavarian Illuminati. It is copiously footnoted and annotated and contains the actual correspodence between the founders and members of that group. Terry is also a member of this site but has not posted in some time. He has his own website and will repsond to personal queries.


So Freemasons don't identify *Lucifer* as merely symbolism for *The Intellect* or *Reason*?


There is no mention of Lucifer in any Masonic ritual, body or dogma.


edit on 2-12-2012 by AugustusMasonicus because: networkdude has no beer



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by ELectricalApprentice

I live in the United States, the Queen of England is completely and totally irrelevant.

Right, is that because you are what is known as a "Continental Freemason", as opposed to Scottish or York Rite Freemason? But you are implying there to be a separation, yes? A *division* of some kind. Kind of like how Pepsi and Coke are both soft drinks, but have different *logos*? Or are you able to provide some background on that?
You've got the wrong continent. Continental Freemasonry means European, specifically French, actually. French Freemasonry in it's most popular current form allows women and atheists to join. This is a sharp contrast from the older traditions of Freemasonry that were men only and required a belief in a supreme being.

York Rite and Scottish Rite are primarily American groups, ironically. The nominal head of power of the Scottish Rite is Ronald Seale, who is as high as it goes for the Scottish Rite Southern Jurisdiction, which encompasses 35 of the United States and a number of territories and other countries. The Northern Jurisdiction is in amity with the Southern Jurisdiction, but in theory, I believe no new regular Scottish Rite body could be chartered without dispensation from the Scottish Rite Southern Jurisdiction.

It's a bit different for Blue Lodge Masonry—there is no supreme authority because each Grand Lodge is autonomous. There is an annual Conference of Grand Masters where the leaders of each state can get together and discuss what they're doing, but no state is under the sway of any outside force, much less the Queen of England.
edit on 2012.12.2 by JoshNorton because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by ELectricalApprentice
 

I'm a believer in Meritocracy as I was raised with the ethos of working hard to make my way in life and earning my keep. I also believe that what I own I have the right to pass down my property to my kin, or whoever, without the government attempting to fine them beyond reason. Politically I'm libertarian and follow strongly along the thoughts of Locke and Nozick when it comes to private property. I'm against the death tax, it's a tool of the government to take bites at the proverbial apple that it already bit into before. If it is my property why should the government be allowed to put such dictates on private property.

As for my charitable activities, my Lodge operates a Masonic Identification Program. Others in our area run "Bikes-For-Books" and one adopts a family for Thanksgiving and Christmas. The Royal Arch Masons have the Royal Arch Research Assistance program that of lately has been doling out grants to those researching inner ear disorders and its connection with autism. The Cryptic Masons have a Medical Research Foundation that has been doing a great deal in research of cardiovascular system (their research led to the patenting of the Star cluster clamp used in angiograms and angioplasties). The Knights Templar have an Eye Foundation which used to help out with paying for ocular procedures, but with ObamaCare passing we're having to change our mission to strictly research. There are a variety of charities with each of the other Masonic bodies.


The Queen of England is the Grand Patroness of Freemasonry

No she's not. As she is a woman, she has no authority in Freemasonry. The Duke of Kent is the Grand Master of the UGLE, but British Masonry is not the central authority over all Freemasonry. I living in the US have no allegiance to the British Grand Lodge nor the Crown. That's simply not how it works.

Freemasonry predates the Bavarian Illuminati. There has been a lot of propaganda written against them even though what they espoused wouldn't be considered all that radical. Plus how can you say at one hand that we're "about preserving the status quo", but then on the other hand say we're birthed from an organization who stood against tyrannical government and the monarchy?


...so whether or not it's true doesn't matter...

The truth always matters.



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 01:48 PM
link   
reply to post by ELectricalApprentice
 

You need to know that "Continental Freemason" has nothing to do with belonging to the Rites (appendant/concordant bodies), it refers to European Freemasonry as opposed to British Masonry or American Freemasonry. The Scottish Rite can really be said to have come out of France and the York Rite is really the American Rite. How the degrees and bodies are structured in America are structured differently in England and in Europe (with some exceptions).

In America, each State (to include DC) has a Grand Lodge which is sovereign and exercises complete control in their jurisdiction. There is no central, national Grand Lodge in America. The American York Rite is composed of three main bodies that does have a national/international body, but they must have permission from each Grand Lodge to be considered regular and pull from the Grand Lodge for members. The American York Rite bodies do have some authority in Germany, Portugal, Italy, Philippines, Romania, and I think Brazil. In England, they don't call it York Rite nor is it structured the same way. I could go on for days about this, but I don't have the time.

Summarizing, there is not single central authority over all Freemasonry.

Check out: Freemasonry and King Athelstan



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 02:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by network dude
reply to post by ELectricalApprentice
 


Just out of curiosity, where would this 100% inheritance tax go to?


It would recycle back into the economy where it belongs, with total transparency as to how it is distributed. Hopefully a large portion would go into funding the health and education systems, thereby improving the quality of life for everyone, rather than just a handful of elite powerbrokers.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 02:49 AM
link   

I am a meritocracist. But that has nothing to do with Freemasonry, nor do I know any other Freemasons who are great advocates of meritocracy. They might be or might not be, but we dont talk politics in the lodge.

I see, but given the business of the Lodge is a secret, there's no real way for non-Masons to ever really be sure of that. They say they don't talk business during the lakeside chats at Bohemian Grove either, but somehow, the Manhatten Project was either conceived wholly, or partially during the 2 week elite retreat there. Can you prove somehow that you don't talk politics in the Lodge? How about business, is there any talk or collusion of business in the Lodge?


Freemasonry, as an organization, has no "official positions" on political issues because they are not a political party. Personally, I dont think there should be a 100% taxation on the rich, even though I do prefer wealth by merit rather than inheritance.

Maybe 100% is a little steep. Would you be opposed to 100% Inheritance Tax applied to anyone with an income of say, over a million dollars? A million dollar cap before you have to give the rest of it back? The Inheritance Tax is the primary means to remove the political and economic control of dynastic bloodlines, ensuring that everyone has a fair chance at making a {happy}life for themselves(FREEDOM}.


My lodge does not disclose where charity goes. Charity should not be means to brag imo, but given discreetly.

Again, non-disclosure means I have to take your word for it. Otherwise how would I know? It seems to me, the secrecy surrounding Freemasonry itself, gives rise for the opportunity for people to claim foul, because they don't know what's going on. I think Freemasons relish in this fact. Otherwise, why the need for secrecy? And helping out to show that you care is one thing, but bragging about helping people? You don't have to brag about it, but I think people should know who is charitable, and to what {degree}. Wouldn't being open about it, attract more good men who could be made better?


Freemasonry is neither about changing the world nor about preserving the status quo. Its purpose is to take good men and make them better, regardless of their political or religious views.

Could you elaborate on the concept of taking good men, and making them better? How does Freemasonry achieve this? Through the *degree* work? Why don't they try and make *bad* men better also? Why don't they take this most important of concepts and applying it on a global scale? Why one man{figuratively speaking} at a time? A noble cause to be sure, but then, shrouded in secrecy? Ridiculous!
edit on 3-12-2012 by ELectricalApprentice because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 02:53 AM
link   

There are thousands of threads on this site where you can see for yourself how they react to these ponderings.

Yea, I don't have time to wade through thousands of threads. You have the choice to not reply to my posts if you feel I haven't done enough homework, just as I have the choice not to waste my time reading past threads. I appreciate the helpful nudge, but again, it comes down to time restraints. I do appreciate your reply, of course, and will back read what I can when I do have time. I'd rather have people respond to me tho, than to respond to other peoples outdated threads, call me a control freak!



Many different entities, deities, gods, angels and men have been associated with light, including the God/Supreme Creator of all. In Freemasonry we refer to the Most High / most Supreme Being / Creator. This has been discussed in another few thousand threads on ATS already, most recently in a thread by AugustusMasonicus entitled "Why Freemasons do not worship Lucifer"

I have read that thread, and I have withdrawn my inquiries regarding the Luciferian connection to Freemasonry. I am familiar with the GAOTU. Thank you so much for taking the time to respond to my questions!



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 03:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
I do. The recent Presidential election showed that the 'rich(er) guy' lost.

But you say it yourself, the *RICHER* guy lost. So one rich guy, although not quite AS rich as the other, won the election. And this is a Representative Republic? A Plutocracy is rule by the rich, do you see my confusion? I think it's safe to say American Politics are governed by the Market, not by the desires of its citizens.


How can someone opting to donate part or all of their accumulated assets not be charitable?

Honestly? Just because you say you intend in the future, to donate part or all of your accumulated assets, doesn't make you more charitable. You actually have to donate it to charity first, before you throw intentions around expecting to be seen in a certain slant of light. I believe you when you say you do charitable things, don't get me wrong, but until you actually do donate your assests, you can't really talk about intention.


I am not 'elite' but I am completely opposed to ideological, confiscatory tax policy. My money, and what I do with it, is none of anyone else's goddamn business.

That's the kind of statement that has me doubting the real measure of your charitable side, do you see what I mean?


I may not be super wealthy but what I have already and will eventually accumulate would make any sturpes lives easier. It is my decision whether I choose to give them these assets.

I don't know what *sturpes* means. A quick google leaves me to assume it's a video game reference? And yes, I agree, under the current system you have the right to do whatever you want with your money. I wouldn't dream of taking that away from you unless the true money powers in the world had it taken from them first. You are but a tiny part in the Grand Scheme of things, and I doubt you have the dynastic bloodline coursing through your veins.


The Regius Poem speaks of an Operative Masonic lodge meeting in the 10th Century.

The Bible speaks of an Omnipotent man in the sky, who had a son who could rise from the dead, but that doesn't make it so. To be fair I will certainly check out The Regius Poem.


None of the above. I found Terry Melanson's book, Perfectibilists, to be the definitive authourity on the Bavarian Illuminati. It is copiously footnoted and annotated and contains the actual correspodence between the founders and members of that group. Terry is also a member of this site but has not posted in some time. He has his own website and will repsond to personal queries.

I haven't read the *Perfectibilists* nor have I ever heard of Terry Melanson{I will definitely look into it}. Out of curiosity, what makes him the authority on the Bavarian Illuminati? And I reiterate, I wasn't referring specifically to the Bavarian Illuminati. If you believe the Illuminati began in 1776 with Weishaupt, that's your choice, I personally don't believe that tho.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 06:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by ELectricalApprentice
I see, but given the business of the Lodge is a secret, there's no real way for non-Masons to ever really be sure of that.


Lodge business is not secret. Our minutes are published at the local University.



Would you be opposed to 100% Inheritance Tax applied to anyone with an income of say, over a million dollars? A million dollar cap before you have to give the rest of it back?


I am for a ZERO percent inheritance tax. To take that further I am for nearly ZERO percent tax on everything with the exception that the Federal Governement is given enough money to fund our national defense, uphold the laws and ensure domestic tranquality. Exactly the tasks enumerated to it in the Constitution.

Government is dangerous, inept and inefficient.


Otherwise, why the need for secrecy? And helping out to show that you care is one thing, but bragging about helping people? You don't have to brag about it, but I think people should know who is charitable, and to what {degree}.


Charity should be as anonymous as possible in deffrence to the recipients who may or may not be completely comfortable in accepting said charity.


Why one man{figuratively speaking} at a time?


Because you must be willing to make a change. No one can force you to be better, you must want to strive for improvement.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 06:31 AM
link   
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus
 


Right on! Awesome replies Augustus, and thanks again for taking the time to respond to these inquiries, it is much appreciated!



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 06:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by ELectricalApprentice
But you say it yourself, the *RICHER* guy lost. So one rich guy, although not quite AS rich as the other, won the election. And this is a Representative Republic?


One is wealthy (Romney), the other is well off, Obama. Despite the fact that I am not a big Romney fan and even less so for Obama, they both earned their money. While it does help if one has financial resources to support a campaign the parameters exist on the Presidential level on down to rise up in the world of plotics by force of will alone.


You actually have to donate it to charity first, before you throw intentions around expecting to be seen in a certain slant of light. I believe you when you say you do charitable things, don't get me wrong, but until you actually do donate your assests, you can't really talk about intention.


I never said what my intentions were and that is the point. It is none of your, or anyone eles's business what I do with my money. Comuplsory donations are not charity, they are confiscatory.


That's the kind of statement that has me doubting the real measure of your charitable side, do you see what I mean?


No, I do not, not in the least. You cannot compel me to be charitable, I must do so willingly.


I don't know what *sturpes* means. A quick google leaves me to assume it's a video game reference?


It is the legal term for your beneficiaries.


You are but a tiny part in the Grand Scheme of things, and I doubt you have the dynastic bloodline coursing through your veins.


Regardless of what you think of my blood it is my perogative to give or not to whoever I choose or not.


The Bible speaks of an Omnipotent man in the sky, who had a son who could rise from the dead, but that doesn't make it so.


There is supporting documentation.


I haven't read the *Perfectibilists* nor have I ever heard of Terry Melanson{I will definitely look into it}. Out of curiosity, what makes him the authority on the Bavarian Illuminati?


The fact that he researched, footnoted and annotated his publication in a methodical way. There is very little left open for interpretation.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 10:06 AM
link   
I am vehemently opposed to any form of inheritance tax. I get taxed when I earn money; I get taxed when I spend money; what happens to it in between is not the government's business.

If I die tomorrow, I'll be leaving behind a wife and two kids, and if all my assets went to the government, she would not be able to provide for my family by herself on just her own income. It will be years before either of my kids can join the workforce to earn money themselves. I absolutely believe that my family should inherit what is rightfully theirs.



All that said, I am also strongly for copyright reform. It's gotten ridiculous. The current length of copyright in this country is the life of the author + 90 years. That means 3 generations of Dan Brown's heirs who can coast off the royalties of "The DaVinci Code" and never have to work. If copyright is defined in the Constitution as "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries", I don't see how it can possibly promote innovation in dead people. If I write a hit novel today and die tomorrow, I think 28 years is adequate for any of my family to receive the benefits of my creativity. If I write a hit novel today and die in 50 years, if I haven't written anything else in that time, then that's too bad for me if the money dried up after 28... I should have written another.

So I'm against inheritance tax but think that creative endeavors should fall into the public domain within a reasonable amount of time. Originally copyright lengths were 14 years with a one time option on a 14 year extension. I think 28 years from the date of creation is reasonable again.
edit on 2012.12.3 by JoshNorton because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 11:13 AM
link   
reply to post by ELectricalApprentice
 

The property, the inheritence does not belong to "the economy where it belongs". It belongs to whom the owner says it belongs to. No offense, but your belief is essentially robbing the dead. If I am successful in life and gain a large sum of property (whether it is money, land, businesses, stocks, etc), then I own it. If I own it, then I should be able to choose who I bequeath it to.

Wealth redistribution via higher percentage Death Tax is a stupid and foolish idea, but that's just me.

reply to post by ELectricalApprentice
 

As we are composed of men of various beliefs and opinions, we do not talk about partisan politics in Lodge as it would cause discord and interrupt the peace of the Lodge.


The Inheritance Tax is the primary means to remove the political and economic control of dynastic bloodlines, ensuring that everyone has a fair chance at making a {happy}life for themselves(FREEDOM}.


So you're saying you're going to promote freedom by restricting economic freedom and prosperity? I'm not sure how that logic follows.


It seems to me, the secrecy surrounding Freemasonry itself, gives rise for the opportunity for people to claim foul, because they don't know what's going on.

Our private nature does make us an easy target for the ignorant, tyrannical, and fanatical.

I've grown up with a belief in privacy and I find many people to have an undo sense of entitlement. Meaning they think they deserve to know what everyone is doing all the time, but yet they truly don't. Far too many are "nosy parkers" or "gossip queens".


I think Freemasons relish in this fact. Otherwise, why the need for secrecy?

Secrecy is not a bad thing and I don't know why we need to justify our privacy.





new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join