Disqus - Latest Comments for bethharte

Re: Conversation Agent: 3 Problems with the "Be Human" to Connect Advice

bethharte — Fri, 26 Jul 2013 13:41:47 -0000

Brava! Perhaps this is why we are seeing a parallel: Repetitive messages in the social media world and organizations no further along in being "social."

The other problem with the "be human" advice is that most humans have an agenda. It's near impossible to make valuable connections (or advancements) when a person's agenda is him or herself. ;-)

Re: SXSW PanelPicker

bethharte — Mon, 20 Aug 2012 09:50:00 -0000

....

Re: Weiss: Is Paul Ryan for or against Ayn Rand?

bethharte — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 12:12:44 -0000

‎My original comment (w/o the link):
"The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function." F. Scott Fitzgerald

"Paul Ryan can either be an objectivist or a Christian. He can't have it both ways."

If the journalist had studied Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions, he would realize that America is not a "collectivist" society, but an "individualistic" society (and Rand's "objectivism" fits right in).

How Christianity is practiced is reflected by the cultural dimension of said country/society.As well, lumping all Christians together is a mistake. Christians have many doctrines (Calvinism, Arminianism , Wesley Arminianism, Catholicism, Pentecostalism, Orthodox, etc.) and while they all agree on Jesus Christ as Savior, they disagree with each other on many aspects of theology. That said... Paul Ryan can indeed be both.

Re: Weiss: Is Paul Ryan for or against Ayn Rand?

bethharte — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 12:02:59 -0000

So, I was correct. CNN is moderating my comment, which is fine if they release it in a timely manner. I did include a link.

Gee, it's just so interesting that "anonymous" commenters are so quick to insult versus understand the technology and social media behind a platform.

Thanks @Kyrus for the comment.

Re: Weiss: Is Paul Ryan for or against Ayn Rand?

bethharte — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 11:27:37 -0000

So anthropology and theology are considered "hate speech" to CNN readers? Well, it's a sad time in America when ignorance trumps intelligence.

Re: Weiss: Is Paul Ryan for or against Ayn Rand?

bethharte — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 11:07:19 -0000

Stubby, actually there are news sites that have readers... the are typically called Social Media Managers. I didn't say anything inappropriate, so that leads me to believe that CNN's readers are numbskulls who aren't able to participate in civil discourse based in theory (that they probably have no concept of).

Re: Weiss: Is Paul Ryan for or against Ayn Rand?

bethharte — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 10:16:13 -0000

bardfast, it's not "my opinion" per se. I am an odd combination of international marketer (business) and theology student. I am just combining the two to make a point based in theory.

There are tons of studies on why people leave Christianity and certain denominations.
Just like there is a ton of anthropological study on culture, including collectivism and individualism.

As Americans, Christians are individualists (anthropologically). But Christianity calls for the welfare of all, which is based in collectivism (like you said, "do good" because it's the right thing to do).

But being a Catholic and an Rand fan doesn't make someone a hypocrite. If it does, then Christians who support abortion and same-sex marriage are no different.

So, do we either fully support anthropology or do we fully support Christian doctrine? Or... do we pick and choose as our "individuality" drives us to? I think in America, the trends speak for themselves. ;-) And that is what makes this article invalid.

Re: Weiss: Is Paul Ryan for or against Ayn Rand?

bethharte — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 09:52:46 -0000

Bardfast, agree. The Bible was written in a "collectivist" setting (not a known term at the time, of course). Today's cultures vary and America is solidly "individualistic." This is basic anthropology and theology.

(I am sure this comment will stay...) The reason why Christianity is in trouble in the US [and Europe] is because people in this culture are individualistic. It is VERY difficult to give up self and to forgive. So people leave churches, denominations, etc.

Re: Weiss: Is Paul Ryan for or against Ayn Rand?

bethharte — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 09:34:57 -0000

Therefore, Paul Ryan can be a Catholic and an individualist.

Re: Weiss: Is Paul Ryan for or against Ayn Rand?

bethharte — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 09:34:23 -0000

I can't comment on your comments, so I am commenting here. I didn't say anything "offensive." I merely stated that the journalist does not understand Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions. If he did, he would know that America is not a collectivist society. As well, there are many Christian doctrines and they do not all agree.

Re: Weiss: Is Paul Ryan for or against Ayn Rand?

bethharte — Wed, 15 Aug 2012 09:28:05 -0000

Dear CNN, why are you flagging my comments? Is it because I made a valid point? Please release my comments.

Re: Rachel Held Evans | 10 Election Year Reality Checks

bethharte — Thu, 19 Jul 2012 18:05:01 -0000

While I appreciate your seemingly helpful response, here's what you don't know, but my accountant does...

1. My income
2. How I file my Federal Taxes (Single vs. Married)
3. If I have dependents... Or not
4. If I have any deductions... Or not
5. How much I pay in State Taxes
6. How much I pay in Property/School Taxes (and whether we are assessed by home sq. footage or acreage)
7. How much I pay in Local/County Taxes
etc., etc.

Let's be realistic about how much we pay in taxes. It's not 25% or 35%... it's much, much more.

Re: Rachel Held Evans | 10 Election Year Reality Checks

bethharte — Wed, 18 Jul 2012 15:57:39 -0000

See above... I didn't say it in the context of single vs. married. I said it in the context of married vs. living with someone who is not a spouse. Again, not sure why a Christian would disagree with marriage being proper. Ultimately, my point is that the government is punishing married people for... being married. There is no benefit to the "marriage tax/penalty." There is nothing one gets in return for paying it.

Re: Rachel Held Evans | 10 Election Year Reality Checks

bethharte — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 16:00:52 -0000

Yep. You nailed it. BTW, I have an accountant that I trust... ;-)

Re: Rachel Held Evans | 10 Election Year Reality Checks

bethharte — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 14:43:41 -0000

Meaghan, yes, single tax payers are taxed more heavily. I can't see either party pushing for LGBT marriages to increase tax revenues (only if the marriage penalty is reinstated, that is). The marriage penalty isn't something that is widely discuss because it's been in hiatus for over 10-12 years. However, if the Bush tax cuts are dissolved, they will come back into play and that will certainly be interesting for everyone looking at marriage. The only thing that will reduce the marriage penalty is having a tax credit for children. If a couple doesn't have children, then the marriage penalty can be a major hit. In the States, inheritance is heavily taxed and not something one should count on, unfortunately.

Re: Rachel Held Evans | 10 Election Year Reality Checks

bethharte — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 14:30:13 -0000

Glad we could straighten that out, Mandy. Absolutely agree that not all people desire to get married. I was one of them... I never thought it would happen and I was totally happy. I was too busy planning my future and never expected to meet my husband. ;-)

Re: Rachel Held Evans | 10 Election Year Reality Checks

bethharte — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 14:15:51 -0000

Yes, there'd be a lot of rich folks around given how much the Bible is thrown around to make a political case or statement.

Re: Rachel Held Evans | 10 Election Year Reality Checks

bethharte — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 14:03:24 -0000

Yes, it's all monopoly money. "...give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s."

Re: Rachel Held Evans | 10 Election Year Reality Checks

bethharte — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 13:54:59 -0000

First and foremost, you have no idea how I use my income to support Godly things. So, you shouldn't assume. Second, I live in reality. I can't give to Godly things if the government is taking my income and wasting it. The national debt level is a disgrace. If any person or Church lived like that, it wouldn't be acceptable.

Re: Rachel Held Evans | 10 Election Year Reality Checks

bethharte — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 13:51:10 -0000

I didn't mean versus being single. (If that's how you understood my comment, apologies.) As a Christian, marrying is the proper thing to do vs. living unmarried with someone under the same roof. I am not sure why that is insulting to folks who may also be Christians. Would love your thoughts there.

Re: Rachel Held Evans | 10 Election Year Reality Checks

bethharte — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 13:30:01 -0000

Doesn't anyone take issue with a "marriage penalty"? I found that to be so insulting... Being taxed for doing the proper thing. Ah, well. Maybe it's just me.

Re: Rachel Held Evans | 10 Election Year Reality Checks

bethharte — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 13:27:46 -0000

It sure does! Folks need to consider all aspects of taxes when considering who to vote for. Heck, I didn't even include property/school, etc. taxes in my percentage.

Re: Rachel Held Evans | 10 Election Year Reality Checks

bethharte — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 13:18:41 -0000

I'll pardon your comment, because A) You have no idea what I earn or how much I pay. B)
Each State/Commonwealth has it's own taxes. And C)
I haven't paid 25% in taxes since I was a middle manager just out of grad school. It would be quite lovely though... :)

We forget that the "rich" aren't the Mitt Romney's or Nancy Pelosi's of the world... Nope, it's the middle class who get the bulk of taxes.
(The truly rich have many tax shelters -- regardless of whether or not they are Democrats or Republicans).

Re: Rachel Held Evans | 10 Election Year Reality Checks

bethharte — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 13:01:16 -0000

Or...
http://www.factcheck.org/

Re: Rachel Held Evans | 10 Election Year Reality Checks

bethharte — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 12:52:26 -0000

"No, repealing the Bush-era tax cuts is not the same as invading Poland."
Yes, that is true...and quite the exaggeration. But, there is an additional $3K "marriage penalty" that would be added to the taxes already paid. (Trust me, I paid the marriage penalty for years before the Bush tax cuts.) That with the additional thousands for healthcare is going to be a killer. My personal taxes are already at 40%. Those additional taxes will put me at around 50%+. Sorry, but I can't fake being happy about losing any more income...