The Evangelical Universalist Forum

How To Live Under An Unqualified President by John Piper


I’ll be interested to see how far left the Left can possibly go - I suppose communism would be the outer limit. Uncle Bernie (who is in the 1% if I heard correctly) and that latina Socialist who recently won an election, both are proposing programs that will cost about $32Trillion over the next 10 years.
I don’t know why noone is talking about the national debt. It’s more of a threat than any external enemy in many ways.


I find it strange that you’re so concerned about the debt but support the GOP who passed a massive debt-increasing tax cut at a time when there wasn’t much slack in the economy.


I have no respect for the GOP and haven’t for years.
Everyone talks a good game, everyone is preparing for their next election, few of them give a damn about us at all. Both parties. Imho.


I don’t do politics with other Christians and anyone who values their sanity and desire for happy ecumenism should avoid it. Not making a moral judgement, you have Christian freedom, but there is no left or right, libertarian or socialist in Christ Jesus. I went through this on Facebook and I can tell you, it’s soul wrenching and personally I find it useless. If you don’t mind being called all sorts of names and disfellowshipping with other brothers and sisters over a matter that is less important than the Kingdom of God, go right ahead. Personally I would rather not. I would rather keep the unity of the Spirit and the bond of peace.


UH…okay. So I reckon you won’t be commenting further on this thread. :wink:


What does everyone think of the Trump administration move allowing people to buy “skinny” health insurance plans for up to 3 years? If lots of healthy people buy these plans premiums will go up for unhealthy people.


Whoa. :open_mouth: Good luck to you both :rofl:


No political comments, nope.


What would be the purpose in talking about it? The money systems of both U.S.A. and Canada are based on debt rather than credit. Money comes into existence through debt.
If you go to a bank and borrow $5000, they cannot loan the depositors’ money. They simply place $5000 in your account from no source whatever. The money is created on the spot. When you repay the 5 grand, the money goes out of existence again.

It is impossible for either country to pay its national debt. If every cent of money in the country were applied to the national debt, there would be no money at all remaining to purchase goods and services, and the country would STILL be deeply in debt.

The only solution is for the country’s banks to create money whose quantity balances the goods and services available. Then money would truly represent what you buy with it (which is what we mistakenly believe to be the case now).

The economic system that I am espousing here is known as “social credit.” If one takes a course in economics in our universities, social credit is one of the economic theories which is studied. This economic theory was developed by C. H. Douglas (1879–1952) who wrote a book entitled “Social Credit.” Very few people are able to fully understand the theory.

It was applied to the British Isle of Guernsey when the whole country was nearly broke economically. For the next 10 years, the country was prosperous! But unfortunately, it gradually degenerated from the credit system of economics to the debt system that we still have in United States and Canada.

Check out the Guernsey experiment here:
The Guernsey Experiment

Social Credit theory was at least partially applied in the province of Alberta, during the depression years, and brought Alberta out of depression to some extent. But there was too much opposition to Social Credit for it to continue to be practised.

For more information on this economic theory, do an internet search for Social Credit.


Very interesting, I will check it out.


News today that more seniors have been filing for bankruptcy than previous generations. Pensions have sadly become a thing of the past. The government should increase SS benefits.


As an SSI beneficiary through my husband (I’m not old enough yet), I’d tend to agree that benefits should go up… that said, who’s going to pay? Are you okay with another 2% off the top of everybody else’s (esp your own) paycheck? (If that could possibly pay the bill). And by the way, is it just me, or does everyone feel the government has done a WUNNERFUL job “investing” our forcefully taken money in… erm… what DID they do with all that money anyhow? Squander it all on enriching themselves? Surely not…


The cap on SS taxable income should be removed or at least raised significantly.


Sorry. I hope I understand your position correctly. Are you promoting taxing SS income? If so, then as senior citizen and card-carrying AARP member - I strongly disagree. And I will work with any AARP lobby initiatives, as a social media and direct response copywriting, knowable chap - to publicize and promote their lobby efforts.

And here’s a good technique, to get the children to behave.


No. I’m saying that the cap on the amount of income that gets taxed to pay for SS should be raised.


Well, I’m not sure how it works as far as what you receive vs what you put in. If you are knowledgeable, I for one would like to know about it… Sorry I know I am being lazy but you are right, WHAT did they do with the money.

I’m getting there, and fast :wink: I suppose I’ll have to be more vigilant.



As our tax code works now, Jeff Bezos pays the same amount into SS as his dentist (assuming he has one). That’s not right. As pensions have all but disappeared, SS’ funding should evolve so that people can retire with dignity.


“I’m not messy. I’m organizationally challenged!”-- Garfield the Cat



Randy, do you agree that the cap on taxable income to pay for SS should be raised?


Yes. Senior citizens are an endangers species - as it is. I’m all for what can make US senior citizens - more safe, healthy and comfortable. Unless the Trump supports here, have better ideas…on how to accomplish the same goal.