Since when is Mormonism the "strongest religion financially in the world"? Has the writer lost sight of the vast oil wealth of Islam or the incredible wealth of the Catholics?

"Strongest religion financially in the world?"
My dear Mr. Taylor -
You have not the slightest inkling of the Roman Catholic Church's holdings - do you?

If anything the LDS tithe is proof a flat tax is viable.

Tithe for Government?? What ever happened to the happy talk of cutting taxes, spending our brains out, and blaming everyone but ourselves for our dilemma. Balancing the nation's checkbook as we do our own would help more than tithing, but if Mitt wins with a national write in campaign anything could happen.

If the US is to have a flat tax, I propose one where the pain of taxation is equally spread. I person making 600 million to run a company into the ground, if that person were taxed at a 99% rate, it would hurt them less than if a person who has a wife and kids making $24,000 a year were taxed at 1%.

We can have a flat tax were every citizen is charged the same amount of dollars, say $3000 per citizen per year. Or we can have a flat tax where every person is charged the same percentage of their pay, or we can have a flat tax where the pain is spread equally. I vote for the latter.

I'm fine with a consumption tax (fair tax) the writer (or possibly the editors) left out the abolition of the income tax. I would never agree to a consumption tax until the (16th?) amendment allowing taxation of income is abolished otherwise you're just asking for both

"Mitt wins a national write in campaign" - please - Let it rest until 2016.

How does that put us on "equal footing"? I was raised in a big family with one wage earner working an under appreciated government job. I had to work the entire time I was in school. I drove a old crappy car all through college, and I was lucky to have that car. Yet some have it much worse than I did. Jon Huntsman Jr was born a multi-millionaire. He has never had to do a real day of work in his life. There is no such thing as equal footing. Those who enjoy the most privilege in our society should share the most responsibility.

Frank says that those who enjoy the most privilege in our society should share the most responsibility...

Can you explain where this thought process stems and why it is true?

Why should those who make more also be taxed more? Who says? You? What makes your opinion correct in this matter?

Again the liberals for some reason think that everyone should have the same bank account numbers. This line of thinking is delusional. People are never going to be equal in monetary terms; never have, never will be.

The concept to be that way is straight out of communism and we can see how well that works.

Just as closing the border is the first step in stopping illegal immigration, the first issue that needs to be resolved in monetary terms is the overspending of Congress.

Stop this an many of our issues will go away. Why? Because there won't be the political pandering for votes through stealing from one person and giving it to another.

And FR1NK has got it right, and self-importance is now the overwhelming norm in our society.

would be an offense to the "government is god" left. Why would it be an offense? God only requires 10%. The government (in some minds) deserves much, much more.

to sorry frank:
Thank you for making my point. I was referring to the letter writers line of "equal footing" and making the point that there is no such thing as equal footing. No where did I say that we should all have the same checking account, just that those who have more SHOULD pay more. I think the real argument is where that line (have more) should be drawn.
And its fr1nk not frank.

Besides.... Tithing is about more than money, it is about Faith. Everyone feels Faith differently.

If the government decides to look at the LDS church and their practices, I hope they also look at the church Welfare sytem.

If they are going to borrow ideas, they should get all of the good ideas possible.

who are you to say that those who have more should pay more?

It's complete income redistribution that you seek...so tell us all, who are you to say that those who have more should pay more?

I say, let those who have more keep theirs. It's not the governments and it's not their neighbors.

The left has this philosophy that the rich are bad people; bad bad people and to make it all right they need to pay more. Foolishness.

Taking from one to give to another is nothing more than government induced stealing....

Without your emotional pleas....please explain the rationale that someone should pay more than someone else based on income or bank account?

When buying a car, house, shoes, tennis racket, flowers, kitchen table, rakes, shovels...do you pay a different price based on ability to pay? No.

I don't make much money, but I sure don't follow your "logic" to steal from someone to give it to another...why don't you just go knock on your neighbor's door and say you are here to collect your $200? They'd laugh you off the porch....

Frank...please explain!

Mixing these ideas or even worse equating mandetory-taxes with voluntary-contributions is not a good direction to go. I see where your going with this one (everyone should be on equal footing instead of rich being taxed more, etc), but I don't like the pretext the idea is based on.

We should all be treated as "equal" by our government but that is irrelevant to our charitable contributions (the 2 concepts shouldn't be mixed). We should contribute as much as we can to charity/church (not one number or percentage fits all) that's why we also have "Fast Offerings" for those who have been blessed with plenty to help the poor who are temporarily struggling to get by on their way back to prosperity.

with a consumption based tax (say 10%)...those who have more...and by extension spend more...will surely pay more. It has nothing to do with equal footing and every thing to do with class warfare...and no, I am not wealthy...I just want to pay my share...and I want others to pay theirs...from every demographic.

Alot of LDS have problems paying their bills part because they are paying their 10% faithfully no matter how streched they are fincecially,rather leave a bill for the next month as long as our 10% are paid to the church.

To "Kim 2:05" so, what is your point. All it says is that you know a lot of people that don't know how to budget.

I live on a budget, and am able to give my 10% faithfully. We aren't talking rocket science, just you can't spend more than you earn, and you should probably spend less than you earn.

Kim@ Really now, the whole country is drowning in debt and foreclosures are at an all time high...I imagine the LDS church wishes they had 10% of all that action!!!

I think most people are taught some variation of the principle that "where much is given, much is required." Many here seem to think that a rich man's money is totally his, to do exactly as he pleases with. (No he DID NOT earn it all on his own--many other people, laws, tax breaks and resources also helped get him what he now has.)

But we in this country also have an obligation to each other as citizens. We enact laws to help those who are most the most needy. We, as a nation, usually step in and help other Americans during natural disasters (lack of help during Hurricane Katrina seemed totally UN-American!) and for other emergencies and essentials.

It only makes sense that those who are more able to help would be called upon before those who are the least able, doesn't it?

Have we forgotten that we're all in this together?

Want to bring the LDS organization to its knees?

Talk everybody into withholding their tithing.
The way the economy and rate of inflation is going, this might be sooner than we all think.

Re: a consumption tax, I think it's an excellent idea. My USC tax prof Ed McCaffrey -- whose politics were very liberal -- wrote a book entitled "Fair Not Flat" defending the consumption-tax idea from a left-of-center perspective.

Basically, the liberal argument for a consumption tax is that many rich people have the ability to structure their income so they don't realize any income. Their wealth comes from the appreciation of assets, against which the rich borrow to get cash flow. Borrowing generally isn't taxed, so the rich can consume huge amounts of wealth without ever paying taxes on it.

A good consumption tax system would include a large personal exemption, based on the belief that the government has no business taking away from the bare minimum consumption needed to get by. That would also make the tax progressive, because for every dollar above the exemption the taxpayer makes, a greater percentage of his income is subject to taxation, resulting in a greater percentage of his income being taxed.

I didn't know that was the goal... but thanks for telling us your goal...to bring the LDS Church to its knees...

Now that is a noble and honorable goal...continue on

The author is simply indicating that each member pays 10% of their income. No loop holes and no deductions for this and that (except those who cheat the church as equally as they cheat the government [read "us"}).

I'm not mormon anymore, but I'd LOVE to have a 10% value added tax instead of volumns and volumns of tax code that only benefit the richest among us.

10% value added on everything one purchases except groceries. Everyone pays. No loop holes.

If you want to bring the whole LDS Church to its knees, just get all the membership in the same time zone on Monday night.