5 thoughts on “Bereans VLOG (11/10/2017)”

  1. As a starting point, I am always a bit confused when you post these because, in our fast-paced media environment, your opinions 4 days ago are very likely to have been affected by developments after the vlog was recorded. So, specifically with Roy Moore, have any of you (who care to comment) changed or refined your view since then?

    You bring up the change in culture with regard to how we view age and consent. What do you think the root moral principle is here, then? Are Moore’s alleged actions merely icky and culturally settling? How would you parse the difference between something unconventional and something immoral? Could a society’s norms have moral weight on their own?

    On the adoption tax credit, isn’t it dangerous to be lumping tax incentives and pro-life policies? By effectively subsidizing the adoption process we are encouraging people to break up families, and making the process something that is mostly accessible only to middle/upper class groups. That strikes me as a problem.

    If free trade is not an issue the GOP will butt heads with the administration over, what would you consider the core issues that would get that kind of response if Trump was trying to meddle with them? Also, China has demonstrated a unique ability to police their state even as they participate more fully in the global market. Do you think the idea that we can ‘convert’ states to our ideals economically is dated or inaccurate?

    Thanks for the effort and conversation, as always.

    1. I think your point about adoption incentives is part of the reason why Dr. Haymond does not want any subsidies or extra tax deductions because they are distortionary. Even then, though, if you had to choose one tax credit to hold onto, the adoption credit isn’t really a bad choice. You’re right to look for the unintended consequences, but the tax credit doesn’t reward families for giving up their children, so I’m just a little confused by your concerns.

      1. I should clarify. It’s not an intentional side effect. But we have created an adoption ‘market.’ The reality that wealthier families are lining up to take children makes it more likely that a mother will give her child up when she might otherwise keep him. The rule of margins, as it were.

        In effect, the solution that the tax credit endorses is adoption. Prioritizing this (as our government has) while limiting the resources available to someone who is faced with the difficulty of raising a child in a difficult low income situation sends the message that it is more important to us that a responsible (wealthier) person take custody of children than keeping families together. And given that adoption is mostly encouraged for wealthier classes we are in essence conceding that a better material situation is priority. Which is, as I see it, troubling.

  2. Realistically, we will not see tax credits and other “carve outs” removed entirely any time soon. That being said, what are some of the most harmful carve outs that are not being discussed right now that you all believe need to be on the table? Certainly something exists that both parties do not want to touch that is very harmful to the American taxpayers.

  3. Judge Moore in the news is not surprising with all that has come forward in the media. I agree that there is a difference between being morally and culturally wrong. I see why the cultural difference (like between Mary and Jesus) is important but it is illegal here so it does become a moral issue. I know many people including Donald Trump are giving him the benefit of the doubt because it is so old and he is denying it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.