Galt's Gulch

Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

    -
  • Posted by iroseland 12 years, 1 month ago
    another thing that has a perfect quote to explain the mess..

    "Money will not buy intelligence for the fool, or admiration for the coward, or respect for the incompetent. The man who attempts to purchase the brains of his superiors to serve him, with his money replacing his judgment, ends up by becoming the victim of his inferiors. The men of intelligence desert him, but the cheats and the frauds come flocking to him, drawn by a law which he has not discovered: that no man may be smaller than his money."
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by Susannah 12 years, 1 month ago
    Look at Jane Fonda's "charity". Hasn't given away a dime in something like 5 years, but I'm sure she takes the tax deduction for it every year. A lot of these liberal "charities" are nothing more than money laundering facades.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by Snoogoo 12 years, 1 month ago
    Can she use her own charity as a gigantic tax write-off? Also, whether we think she is doing any good or not, is it not her right to do whatever she wants with her money? Perhaps throwing a lot of money at a charity to make her feel good is equally valuable to her. As long as she is not hurting anyone I do not see the problem.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ Susanne 12 years, 1 month ago
      Look at some of the categories - and remember, salaries for people are not included in that - I mean, seriously, how much does a Twit'r account cost? Facebook? Wow...

      So yes, because its a charity it is a write off... and probably a lot of the stuff being claimed won't be audited (unlike what happpens to us if we claim that stapler we use at our home office, because it "may be used outside the business")...

      Must be good to be on the "right" side of the dotgov...
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by Robbie53024 12 years, 1 month ago
      By using this as a tax write off, she is effectively increasing everyone else's tax.
      By claiming questionable expenses, she may be effectively laundering money from a taxable state to a non-taxable state even though it may be paying for the same personally beneficial items.
      By "employing" relatives and others, she is effectively circumventing the gift giving laws.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by Boborobdos 12 years, 1 month ago
      Snoogoo asks: "Can she use her own charity as a gigantic tax write-off?"

      Bud Paxon did exactly that when he established "The Worship Channel."

      He was able to funnel surplus / older equipment to the network from his other huge television enterprises and eventually the Worship Channel became self sustaining.

      But lots of folks still live high on the hog from that endeavor.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by strugatsky 12 years, 1 month ago
      First, as long as it's her money, not money donated by other idiots; second, if she is getting a tax write off (which is the reason for the "charitable foundations" in the first place), then she can't just spend it the way she wants to. She can throw her money away, but by getting tax write off, she is effectively having it subsidized by the rest of the country. A typical Hollywood fraud, nothing more.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by gonzo309 12 years, 1 month ago
        She should get a write off for her personal contribution to fund it like anybody else would. I wonder if she is on the payroll, which would allow her to write off many of her personal expenses like a vehicle lease, etc.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by Stormi 12 years, 1 month ago
    Amen! Look at the size of the salaries for those organizations, who promote collectivist causes.. Sadly, the UW get industry involved, who then pressure employees to make their donations 100% of employees giving. What a crock.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by Robbie53024 12 years, 1 month ago
      I used to give a single donation of $1. That way the company chair (who is always under pressure to get 100% participation) has the heat removed.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        -
      • Posted by LetsShrug 12 years, 1 month ago
        Why would you want to remove that heat?
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
        • Posted by Robbie53024 12 years, 1 month ago
          Because a fellow worker who got a tasking that they didn't want but is just going to get grief for until they meet the objective isn't worth making the point. I had to work with those folks on much more important issues and creating ill will would not be productive.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            -
          • Posted by LetsShrug 12 years, 1 month ago
            But you contributed to a farce instead of making the person think about what they were doing. Or rethink their job responsibilities and their principles and morals.....
            I had a UW app in my mail box at work...it had my name printed on it and everything....mandatory to fill it out even you're not contributing (guilt tactic if ever I've seen one). I put the word out to whoever was in charge of collecting these papers that I wanted to talk to them because I had questions as to WHY my name was on it and who gets this information. That person avoided me like the plague and the app is still in my box...since last Oct. Just because someone is tasked with a job does not mean I'm going to make that idiotic and evil job easy for them to complete. That's called 'complying'. Standing up for what you believe in often causes 'ill will' with those who refuse to see your point. So be it. I would have happily explained my stance, instead I was avoided. Weak!
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
            • Posted by Robbie53024 12 years, 1 month ago
              I looked at it as the cost of processing was more than my $1 donation, so I did my part in reducing their impact.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                -
              • Posted by strugatsky 12 years, 1 month ago
                Their costs are irrelevant to them. They are looking for compliance, 100% preferably. Once the guilt trip and subdue everyone, they have the control. I would very much like for someone to start a separate thread on the evils of donations! Too emotional of a subject for me to start it! This is part of the cancer that is eating the country.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            -
          • Posted by khalling 12 years, 1 month ago
            UW is an immoral organization. Thugs
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
            • Posted by Robbie53024 12 years, 1 month ago
              On many levels. Luckily, I no longer am faced with such. I also no longer support national for Boy or Girl Scouts (or most other national organizations). So many of them are so top heavy that what they purport to do is a small portion of what they actually accomplish. Instead, I started a campership program for our local scout troops. It will defer up to 50% of a summer camp week for a scout who otherwise wouldn't be able to attend. For any aged 16 or older (hasn't been any that old yet), I require them to earn the other half of the money from a job, not just money from their parents/grandparents/etc.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by ObjectiveAnalyst 12 years, 1 month ago
    If there is a surprise, it is that things like this no longer surprise. So often it seems if they really wanted to do some good, they would just write a check. It is about optics.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by Robbie53024 12 years, 1 month ago
      That's certainly part of it, but I think laundering money to their family and cohorts has a large part in it as well. Very easy to reduce your taxable income, provide for relatives and friends, and even get kickbacks that aren't traceable (or at least not easily without thorough audit, and how often does that happen to anybody but Rush and the Koch Bros?).
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        -
      • Posted by ObjectiveAnalyst 12 years, 1 month ago
        True. The hypocrisy of those with plenty to advocate taxing those with less while taking every opportunity to reduce their own taxable burden is too common. The celebrity sycophants in media and politics rarely call them on it. Having said that; I applaud any opportunity to keep more of one's money. It is only the hypocrisy and unequal treatment that is deserving of scorn.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
        • Posted by Robbie53024 12 years, 1 month ago
          I don't applaud them at all. Their fraud causes my taxes to go up, so they are directly stealing from me.

          I've railed about this before, but the developer of my subdivision (now also my state representative), is the manager of his business - the actual ownership is in his mother in laws name both for female owned business credits as well as to keep the funds out of his name. He has 7 kids, all of which (at least so far) have received needs based scholarships. He and his family live in an 8 bedroom house on 5 acres with an in ground swimming pool, tennis court, 8 car garage, etc. But he is not the owner, you guessed it, it is owned by his mother in law's business and he pays "rent." He draws a salary from the business that is low enough that they are considered just below the poverty level - yet live a 1%'er lifestyle. A couple of the kids were in the same grades as mine and I have no problem with them, they're actually pretty smart and well behaved. BUT, my kids are paying full tuition for college and they are getting significant scholarship money (read that, I'm paying for his kids). It steams me that the system can be gamed in such a manner, and it is all legal. Nothing in his FAFSA is factually false yet the whole thing is false. If he didn't still control the Home Owners Assoc (I can't wait until the remaining lots are sold) I'd confront him and make a big stink prior to the next election. As it is, he has the sole authority to levy fines on our property for any infraction that he chooses to "find." Yes, I read the covenants prior to buying the lot, just didn't know the background on this individual and how they were gaming the system.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by RevJay4 12 years, 1 month ago
    Nope. The foundation makes them appear "charitable" to the sheeple. I imagine that if a close look was taken at most of the charitable foundations, the results would be surprising, to no one except those who donate.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo