tax the rich (in islam)

Sure, it's great, but humans have proven time and again that religion causes more abuses over time than not. Yes, tax the rich. Using a religious text to justify it is weird. I do actually appreciate the info as I didn't know this about Islam, but in the same vein it's still religion which inherently leads to systems of abuse and shitting on people in the name of a deity. Not that humans aren't good enough at doing that without religion, but I feel religion just gives them more of a reason when believing they're serving some higher power.
- Religion has proven time and time again, man hates happiness of others more than themselves.
  Organized religion proves to decay by wantingly creating a structure that can be exploited rather than simply derivative. Islam is an abrahamic religion but it really should just be Christian, and honestly more orthodox than western christians. They love the virgin Mary. So tithing isn't a surprise, as that is a jewish tradition.
  Religion should be used because that believing that you serve a higher power is important. However, often times folks believe the higher power is foreign. Rather than within, you are capable, you are lord, you can enact your will. It is only truly religion that explains that this power must be limited, tempered, and weathered to be revealed. It is there for when death grasp's your heart, strangling it until you weep your soul into every action.
  Humans are just selfish and forget that if they are sent by god, so were they. That we no longer live in untamed wilds, but manufactured instability. Privileged kids grow up experiencing little death, and live their life time with eyes closed. Yet they think they see with eyes unclouded, but their hearts so empty of meaning.
  Sharingan in Naruto is inspired by this very fact.
  Good men have no mortal bindings and so they can ascend to serve God's will truly. God's will? Protect the weak, the exploitable, and indefensible. The system is built around moving the lower classes for profit, for labor, or just as polifical pawns in a chess game. That is the only right act man can do, anything else will blur the lines.
  As an atheist, I have written god as dead. However I believe we carry fragmentary hopes, and together we can form a god. Sadly, through exclusion, division, and persecution - god cannot exist truly, but incomplete and corrupted. Not everyone is voicing their version of god, gods, etc. Except anime because Japan is massively ahead in the urban hellscape of progress. (And a lot of east asia, Kowloon is an extreme example, sadly it's gone.)
  FMA literally was a reforming of the bible's beliefs with antifascist ideology, with reverence for islamic continuation of belief. Attack on Titan is mainly these parasocial fears in a post-nuclear world as collectively cities grow but social development wanes. Isekais literally romanticizes death because life is leaving these natural wonders behind.
  I took this journey when my brother was murdered. I believed in no god, and yet I have found a lot of reflections in each manuscript I process, each literature I discover. By his phantom, I became enlightened. I wish I could just have him instead, but all I can be is thankful I am alive.

Our sister company is Zakat approved and runs water trucks in Gaza using the funds that people donate
- What company is that?? Sounds amazing.
  
  Dont want the name out here, but PMd it to you.

We would be better off disallowing organized religion in public and forcefully redistributing all excess wealth perpetually.
- No, we should built impenetrable wall between the state and religion, but right to believe and exercise religion is a very fundamental and basic human right.
  
  There's no free speech issue here.
  You can practice religion.
  That's not what I said.
  You are not a victim.
  You don't get to have a tax exempt public building where you get to contort the minds of your neighbors into killing minorities.
  No more organized religion.
  Do it in your house, keep your cult shit out of our public spaces and don't indoctrinate children.
  You are not a victim
- redistributing all excess wealth perpetually.
  what would keep it from re-flowing into the hands of a few?
  
  The perpetual part.
  We should also add a clause where anyone trying to unbalance wealth again dies.
- Religious persecution and withdrawing of the first amendment.
  Some folks would rather destroy unequivocally, if you can shut down one group - all can be shutdown. That's literally what most right wing governments do and exploit, by separating certain people and wantingly ending their ability.
  Once it is done, it can be done again and again, each time the lines blur and each times more will suffer.
  You talk as a we, parroting the same talking points everyone else already says and believes. So what can you do in your day?
  I made a homeless man be honest with me through words alone, I have defended another from himself. He was going to attack a white man with a bikelock for being verbally attacked for his race. When was the last time you traveled as man? To see your rotten upon the streets and acted in care for those truly suffering the wealth gap? Or is it just for you?
  What have you done constructive for mankind if you so want them to endure? Is it just to impede?
  
  Nah if they want to run a little cult where everyone thinks what a leader tells them they can do it in their own homes or make their own Jonestown.
  They can't do it publicly and they don't get tax breaks for it.
  Nobody is stopping you from practicing religion, just your victim complex.

The individual must realize that he is no more than the steward of this property, which is fundamentally the possession of society; this must make him accept the restrictions that the system lays upon his liberty, and the bounds that limit his rights of disposal. On the other side, society must realize its fundamental right to such property and must thus become bolder in prescribing the regulations and in laying down the laws which concern it. Thus only may we arrive at principles that will ensure complete social justice in the profitable use of property, which cannot be an end in itself nor a subject of actual ownership. The clearest instance of this is the matter of the tenure of land; thought cannot conceive that any man should be the owner of the land itself; all that he can possess is its irrigation and its crops, which means that the matter is one of the profitable use of a possession rather than one of actual ownership.
Sayyid Qutb spends much of this chapter in Social Justice in Islam insisting that it’s not full on socialism, but it’s definitely not free market capitalism.
In part, he has to write a lot about how not socialist he is because of the popularity of Islamic socialist movements. They were huge players in Egypt and Iran.
One can debate how those inspired by Qutb have kept to his ideas, but the society he describes is very much focused on ensuring everyone has enough to eat. (It’s also a society where I end up stoned to death in a public square, so you win some you lose some.)
Islam at least also forbids interest. There’s a complicated banking system, and I’m pretty sure there still are ways to fuck people over, but getting broke people trapped on the payday loan cycle at least isn’t one.
- interesting. i had heard that Islam does apparently not have private land ownership (?) and a friend told me that 200 years ago, they didn't even have actual borders between countries (and, i assume, villages or administrative districts?) thus it was all a continuous area with names and region designations being rather vague. i wonder whether that has to do with the idea that land cannot be possessed by some kind of monarch or king? do you know more about this?
  
  According to the Islamic theory of landed property, development and fructification of what one possesses binds ownership. Property can be acquired through developing and utilizing arable fertile (farming) land with no previous claim of ownership.* However, the right someone has acquired to a piece of land is not lost merely through non-use; it vanishes only if someone else brings that land under cultivation.* The purpose of such law is to benefit the general public by bringing life to the virgin land and to ensure the continuity of utilization. * No privately owned natural resource is to be left unused. Meanwhile, the concept of sharecropping is acknowledged by most Islamic schools of thought as a justifiable mode of acquiring property rights.
  A couple of other interesting discussions about different types of property rights in that article too. Critical to keep in mind that it’s a religion and that there are multiple traditions/legal schools of thought. (Shia versus Sunni is the biggest rift, but there are others.)
  Fear of Islamic socialism was why the US kept the Shah in power.
  As far land borders - that is seriously a huge and complicated and difficult topic. (Numismatic research - coins - often shows how often we don’t really have documentation of what was happening. Kingdoms that are only known to exist because they put out a few pieces..) That’s the kind of topic that people do post doc work on.

Elmo give 2.5% of his wealth?
Fuck that shit.
At best people like him should get to KEEP 2.5 % of their wealth. More reasonable, likely, will be TJ jail them as few billionaires can claim to gave gotten there without stepping on the back of someone. Elmo personally should be jailed for life.
Also, we don't need religions for tax. Just tax the rich fucking bastards
- Elmo give 2.5% of his wealth?
  You seem to be misreading.
  Give 2.5% of their wealth, each year, not just give 2.5% of their income. There's a huge difference.
  Wealth gets taxed every year, unlike income which gets taxed only once. So in 20 years, the wealth tax is roughly 20*2.5% which is 50%. And in 30 years it's closer to 75%.
  
  But it is not 0.025*50. It is 0.975^20.
  
  That is exactly what I'm saying.
  2.5% of his wealth is nothing, he quite easily gains or loses ten times that in a year
  Set a maximum amount of wealth per person each year. Anything you earn over that automatically goes into a 100% bracket.
  There literally is no reason why one person should be allowed to have a billion dollars in wealth, whilst another person is homeless and needs to waddle into crime to be able to feed themselves
  10 million total wealth. That sounds like a reasonably sane maximum anyone should ever have the power over. Anything above that, taxes.
- I think Bill Gates and the Gates Foundation pledge means keeping only 7% of annual income and it's still too much.
  
  Anything over 10 million should be automatically 100% tax

One of the recipients of Zakat funds are islamic terrorists. Not a horrible idea in principle though, but I think it's much more interesting that Swiss cantons have wealth taxes, because, you know, because Switzerland is a pretty decently working economy. In stark contrast to almost every muslim nation out there.
- One of the recipients of Zakat funds are islamic terrorists
  ???? Source?
  In stark contrast to almost every muslim nation out there.
  Maybe if your countries stopped bombing, invading us and murdering our children, we'll be able to develop.
  
  ??? Source?
  https://islamqa.info/en/answers/46209/categories-of-zakah-recipients -- #7
  Maybe if your countries stopped bombing, invading us and murdering our children, we’ll be able to develop.
  What country do you think I'm from? That may explain it for some countries like Palestine area, but it definitely does not explain why many muslim countries (where "muslim country" = >50% of inhabitants are muslim) have the weakest economies and the highest income inequalities.
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_by_country
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita
- European don't be racist challenge, literally impossible
  
  Please inform me which part of my comment you imagined to be racist.
- i'm between downvoting because it mentions "terrorists" (which are often just people trying to do right) and upvoting because it's interesting information that switzerland has a wealth tax. i didn't know that.
  
  What's wrong with the word "terrorist" in this context?
- Is terrorist what you call all brown people?
  Sapa - Who is Eligible for Zakat [8 Recipients]
  The Poor (Al-Fuqara):
  Those who do not possess enough wealth to meet their basic needs.
  The Needy (Al-Masakin):
  Individuals face financial hardship but have some resources that are insufficient to cover their necessities.
  Those Employed to Administer Zakat (Al-Aamileen):
  Individuals employed to collect, manage, and distribute Zakat.
  Those Whose Hearts are to be Reconciled (Al-Mu’allafat al-Quloob):
  Individuals who are inclined towards Islam or those whose hearts need to be softened towards the Muslim community.
  Those in Bondage (slaves and captives) (Fir-Riqab):
  To help free individuals from slavery or captivity.
  Debtors (Al-Gharimeen):
  Those in debt who cannot settle their debts with their current resources.
  In the Cause of Allah (Fi Sabilillah):
  Individuals engaged in activities that benefit the broader Muslim community, such as scholars, educators, and those defending the Muslim community.
  The Wayfarer (Ibn Sabil):
  Travelers or strangers who are in need while away from their homes.
  
  Seems bribery.

Despite all our faults in Islam, Zakat is such a good/common sense idea.
Anyways, despite living in an Islamic country i doubt our billionaires pay zakat anyway. If they're fine with butchering, prostitution drinking and drugs i think they're going to sleep just fine at night not paying their tax.
- Don't worry, zakat is another Islamic concept the clergy (I think that's the right English word) abuse and twist to line their pockets. Zakat and khons are both about donating to the needy, but both ideas have been twisted so many times. Khons details are different but the word is related to the number 5. The first version I remember being told is that you pay one fifth of your yearly earnings' leftovers.
  
  Why do our leaders ruin everything lol
- Is zakat collected by the state in Saudia or is it like in other countries where people choose who to give it to?
  
  It is

This must be why the UAE is such an egalitarian country... 😅
- i mean, leaders of theocracies blatantly ignoring the parts of their religion that they don’t like is nothing new lol
  
  Hence why all religions should be abolished.
  We don't need religions to do basic taxes. Just keep upping those brackets until you reach 100% of income and 50% of ownership per year. See how fast the rich become normal people

Back in the day Christians took care for the sick and the homeless, they built orphanages and hospitals for the mentally ill. The amount of Christians didn't decrease but the way these vulnerable people were cared for changed greatly. The more we have a society were we pay the government to solve these issues, the less we need charity.
I don't know if Zakat-evasion is a problem in islamic countries, but I guess if we change the rules to get the billionaires to pay the ones evading taxes now will just change their tactics and continue to give a shit about the rest of society.
- I mean, they did but abuse was also rampant in those orphanages and mental hospitals.

Zekat is often seen as giving money to others, but it's just any act of love towards another person.
It's become muddled with money too much in these modern times.
That being said, yes please, tax the rich.

Let's see MBS give away money.
- Higher chance he dies from a lightning strike inside his palace lmao

"Obligatory charity." Is that what the kids are calling it these days?
- It's just how Zakat is structured in Islam. "Tax" would also work, but Zakat is specifically earmarked for social welfare (and military uses) so obligatory charity captures the nuance better I think.
  
  Military uses? How's that charity?

That's a tax.
But are you sure really rich people should have to pay it? /s
- Did you read the title?

In 2023, Elon Musk paid $11 billion in income taxes, which was one of the largest individual tax bills in history.
Which is more than 2,5% of his total wealth.
In 2021, Elon Musk paid a significant amount in taxes, with estimates ranging from $8.3 billion to $12 billion, making it one of the largest individual tax payments in U.S. history. This substantial tax bill was primarily due to Musk exercising stock options that were set to expire, which triggered a large taxable income event.
Blablabla. Basically, believe it or not. 2,5% isn't that big of a deal
- I also read there was a year he paid $0, but even if he payed on average 2.5% yoy, that might relatively be a lot less than what someone working minimum pays on wealth (or in their case just income) tax.
  
  In the US, people making minimum wage pay $0 in income tax in almost all states.
  
  Am just saying the islamic stuff is peanuts. 2,5% isn't much. That's already more than happening.
  Elon musk is paying that much on his yearly income. I'm just comparing it to his total wealth.
  A lot of his wealth are unrealised capital gains. His total wealth crippled this year with his shenanigans.
  If this happened in USA. Then they'd relocate their wealth to other places while only keeping the bare minimum in order to generate an income there.
  USA's average wealth is insanely high because it's a government that protects their wealth. Once it stops doing that, they will re-locate.
  Your 1% holding the most of your country's wealth isn't actually holding your country's wealth. But that of the whole world. Your country is just a safe place to keep it.

- Yes, i do believe that poor people's lives become better if you provide them with extra resources.
- The fuck does that have to do with anything?