Why in the world is money that's given to charity taxed?
-
I have to ask this question to those of you that like taxation and wealth transfer. I realize your reasons for doing it are justifiable to some extent. But this should really throw you off... If you want to help those in need, you say you should be for minimum wages, social security programs and the like. But why is it that if someone wants to donate to a charity, that the money is taxed? Why would that be justifiable? In this case at the very least, if money is being donated to a charity, it's going to help those in need. The government should get out of the way.
Josh Davis
Always looking for blackjack. Or maybe White Frank. One of the two.josda1000 wrote:
that like taxation and wealth transfer.
ROTFL !!!!
josda1000 wrote:
If you want to help those in need, you say you should be for minimum wages
Of course. Duh.
josda1000 wrote:
But why is it that if someone wants to donate to a charity, that the money is taxed? Why would that be justifiable?
Is it ? At home, I get a tax deduction for the donations I make to charities. So, if I give $1000 to World Vision, I get $500 back ( b.c I am in the 50% tax bracket, give or take ).
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
josda1000 wrote:
that like taxation and wealth transfer.
ROTFL !!!!
josda1000 wrote:
If you want to help those in need, you say you should be for minimum wages
Of course. Duh.
josda1000 wrote:
But why is it that if someone wants to donate to a charity, that the money is taxed? Why would that be justifiable?
Is it ? At home, I get a tax deduction for the donations I make to charities. So, if I give $1000 to World Vision, I get $500 back ( b.c I am in the 50% tax bracket, give or take ).
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Christian Graus wrote:
that like taxation and wealth transfer. ROTFL !!!!
What, you don't like the fact that I pointed out the obvious?
Christian Graus wrote:
If you want to help those in need, you say you should be for minimum wages Of course. Duh.
Again, this is a point of view. I'm not getting into that.
Christian Graus wrote:
I get a tax deduction for the donations I make to charities.
Good, as it should be.
Josh Davis
Always looking for blackjack. Or maybe White Frank. One of the two. -
I have to ask this question to those of you that like taxation and wealth transfer. I realize your reasons for doing it are justifiable to some extent. But this should really throw you off... If you want to help those in need, you say you should be for minimum wages, social security programs and the like. But why is it that if someone wants to donate to a charity, that the money is taxed? Why would that be justifiable? In this case at the very least, if money is being donated to a charity, it's going to help those in need. The government should get out of the way.
Josh Davis
Always looking for blackjack. Or maybe White Frank. One of the two.Governments are not in the business of supporting charities. You can here in the UK: either you can claim it back or you can let the charity have the money: How to Claim UK Tax Benefits on Charitable Donations[^]. I thought it was not terribly different in the US.
me, me, me "The dinosaurs became extinct because they didn't have a space program. And if we become extinct because we don't have a space program, it'll serve us right!" Larry Niven nils illegitimus carborundum
-
Christian Graus wrote:
that like taxation and wealth transfer. ROTFL !!!!
What, you don't like the fact that I pointed out the obvious?
Christian Graus wrote:
If you want to help those in need, you say you should be for minimum wages Of course. Duh.
Again, this is a point of view. I'm not getting into that.
Christian Graus wrote:
I get a tax deduction for the donations I make to charities.
Good, as it should be.
Josh Davis
Always looking for blackjack. Or maybe White Frank. One of the two.josda1000 wrote:
What, you don't like the fact that I pointed out the obvious?
It just seemed like your way of wording it was not unbiased.
josda1000 wrote:
Again, this is a point of view. I'm not getting into that.
I'm still reeling from yesterday, sorry. I would love for us to discuss why it doesn't make sense to have a minimum wage for children and another for adults, the second representing a living wage, or why it is that people are expendable to the needs of business, and should work for whatever wage suits someone's business needs.
josda1000 wrote:
Good, as it should be.
I can't believe that it's not, here. It makes so much sense. Government does give to charity, how best to decide what charities to give to, than to do it by matching my contributions ? I mean, in that way, the charities given to represent the will of the people and not just what is trendy to the people in office.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
I have to ask this question to those of you that like taxation and wealth transfer. I realize your reasons for doing it are justifiable to some extent. But this should really throw you off... If you want to help those in need, you say you should be for minimum wages, social security programs and the like. But why is it that if someone wants to donate to a charity, that the money is taxed? Why would that be justifiable? In this case at the very least, if money is being donated to a charity, it's going to help those in need. The government should get out of the way.
Josh Davis
Always looking for blackjack. Or maybe White Frank. One of the two.josda1000 wrote:
those of you that like taxation and wealth transfer
Your true colours are becoming more and more apparent. Thanks for telling us what we think. I love how you just assume either we're all American or the rest of the world works the same way. In Australia a registered charity is not taxed and any contribution over $2 is tax deductible. So if I give the Red Cross $50 they dont pay tax for that income. I also get back from the government the income tax I payed in earning that $50. Unfortunately those rules also apply to religious organisations.
-
ragnaroknrol wrote:
I am an argumentative jerk
Hey, the first part of recovery is admitting it lol jk Well, one agreeing with me, that's a good thing.
Josh Davis
Always looking for blackjack. Or maybe White Frank. One of the two.I agreed to the taxing charity thing is bad, btw. Rest is probably going to get you skewered around here.
If I have accidentally said something witty, smart, or correct, it is purely by mistake and I apologize for it.
-
josda1000 wrote:
What, you don't like the fact that I pointed out the obvious?
It just seemed like your way of wording it was not unbiased.
josda1000 wrote:
Again, this is a point of view. I'm not getting into that.
I'm still reeling from yesterday, sorry. I would love for us to discuss why it doesn't make sense to have a minimum wage for children and another for adults, the second representing a living wage, or why it is that people are expendable to the needs of business, and should work for whatever wage suits someone's business needs.
josda1000 wrote:
Good, as it should be.
I can't believe that it's not, here. It makes so much sense. Government does give to charity, how best to decide what charities to give to, than to do it by matching my contributions ? I mean, in that way, the charities given to represent the will of the people and not just what is trendy to the people in office.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
josda1000 wrote:
those of you that like taxation and wealth transfer
Your true colours are becoming more and more apparent. Thanks for telling us what we think. I love how you just assume either we're all American or the rest of the world works the same way. In Australia a registered charity is not taxed and any contribution over $2 is tax deductible. So if I give the Red Cross $50 they dont pay tax for that income. I also get back from the government the income tax I payed in earning that $50. Unfortunately those rules also apply to religious organisations.
Josh Gray wrote:
Unfortunately those rules also apply to religious organisations.
Who, no matter their other failings, are behind the vast bulk of charity work that occurs in our country.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
josda1000 wrote:
that like taxation and wealth transfer.
ROTFL !!!!
josda1000 wrote:
If you want to help those in need, you say you should be for minimum wages
Of course. Duh.
josda1000 wrote:
But why is it that if someone wants to donate to a charity, that the money is taxed? Why would that be justifiable?
Is it ? At home, I get a tax deduction for the donations I make to charities. So, if I give $1000 to World Vision, I get $500 back ( b.c I am in the 50% tax bracket, give or take ).
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Christian Graus wrote:
Is it ? At home, I get a tax deduction for the donations I make to charities. So, if I give $1000 to World Vision, I get $500 back ( b.c I am in the 50% tax bracket, give or take ).
I'm guessing your church expect you to pay tithing (is that the correct term?)? Can you claim that as a deduction?
-
Christian Graus wrote:
It just seemed like your way of wording it was not unbiased.
Of course it was biased lol
Josh Davis
Always looking for blackjack. Or maybe White Frank. One of the two.Are you not willing to discuss my objections to your minimum wage comments further, would you like to start another thread to do that ? The minimum wage in the USA varies, but a good median is about $7 an hour. That's $14k a year, IF you can get full time work, many minimum wage jobs are casual with wildly varying hours, which is done to avoid giving benefits and to keep the workers scared and compliant. The poverty level for one person in the US is $10k, for two people is around $14k. Now, I personally think the vast bulk of people who are raising one or many children alone, have made their own mess, and should not be funded to create an incentive for the next wave of morons who get pregnant at 12, but, it's still reasonable to suggest that it's not uncommon for a family with two kids to have both parents working in order to try to maintain a basic poverty level, i.e. to be one mishap away from total wipeout. Australia's minimum wage is $14.25. That's $570 a week. Our poverty line is $270 a week, which is $14k, same as yours. Your median wage is around $22k, I am told. Ours is about double that. So, it doesn't seem to me like having a higher minimum wage (that is, double), is hurting our industry or hurting the wages of higher paid workers.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
josda1000 wrote:
those of you that like taxation and wealth transfer
Your true colours are becoming more and more apparent. Thanks for telling us what we think. I love how you just assume either we're all American or the rest of the world works the same way. In Australia a registered charity is not taxed and any contribution over $2 is tax deductible. So if I give the Red Cross $50 they dont pay tax for that income. I also get back from the government the income tax I payed in earning that $50. Unfortunately those rules also apply to religious organisations.
I'm not trying to label the whole world here. And I am implying that there are those here that do believe in wealth transfer. Because that's precisely what socializing anything does. In order to pay the poor, taxes must be taken. From whom? Everyone else, whether they're rich or middle class. Nobody likes taxes, however, it's the only way it works.
Josh Davis
Always looking for blackjack. Or maybe White Frank. One of the two. -
Are you not willing to discuss my objections to your minimum wage comments further, would you like to start another thread to do that ? The minimum wage in the USA varies, but a good median is about $7 an hour. That's $14k a year, IF you can get full time work, many minimum wage jobs are casual with wildly varying hours, which is done to avoid giving benefits and to keep the workers scared and compliant. The poverty level for one person in the US is $10k, for two people is around $14k. Now, I personally think the vast bulk of people who are raising one or many children alone, have made their own mess, and should not be funded to create an incentive for the next wave of morons who get pregnant at 12, but, it's still reasonable to suggest that it's not uncommon for a family with two kids to have both parents working in order to try to maintain a basic poverty level, i.e. to be one mishap away from total wipeout. Australia's minimum wage is $14.25. That's $570 a week. Our poverty line is $270 a week, which is $14k, same as yours. Your median wage is around $22k, I am told. Ours is about double that. So, it doesn't seem to me like having a higher minimum wage (that is, double), is hurting our industry or hurting the wages of higher paid workers.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Christian... we've been at it for two days. Let's move on to other topics. If you really want, I'll talk about it on the show tonight, and maybe I can get both of our points across. You could watch it afterward and comment on it. Agreed?
Josh Davis
Always looking for blackjack. Or maybe White Frank. One of the two. -
josda1000 wrote:
those of you that like taxation and wealth transfer
Your true colours are becoming more and more apparent. Thanks for telling us what we think. I love how you just assume either we're all American or the rest of the world works the same way. In Australia a registered charity is not taxed and any contribution over $2 is tax deductible. So if I give the Red Cross $50 they dont pay tax for that income. I also get back from the government the income tax I payed in earning that $50. Unfortunately those rules also apply to religious organisations.
-
I have to ask this question to those of you that like taxation and wealth transfer. I realize your reasons for doing it are justifiable to some extent. But this should really throw you off... If you want to help those in need, you say you should be for minimum wages, social security programs and the like. But why is it that if someone wants to donate to a charity, that the money is taxed? Why would that be justifiable? In this case at the very least, if money is being donated to a charity, it's going to help those in need. The government should get out of the way.
Josh Davis
Always looking for blackjack. Or maybe White Frank. One of the two.Here in Canada, as long as it is a registered charitable organization, then my donations to them are tax deductable. There are minimum and maximum annual amounts, based upon your income, and unused deductions can be carried forward for several years. You can also group or save up your deductions and claim all of them in one year even though they occurred over several years. But that's just us backwards thinking Canadians and our silly social sytems at work. :)
Chris Meech I am Canadian. [heard in a local bar] In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. [Yogi Berra]
-
I also notice that you only comment when you have something degrading to say to me, and then try to back it up *sometimes* with an argument. I love it.
Josh Davis
Always looking for blackjack. Or maybe White Frank. One of the two. -
Christian... we've been at it for two days. Let's move on to other topics. If you really want, I'll talk about it on the show tonight, and maybe I can get both of our points across. You could watch it afterward and comment on it. Agreed?
Josh Davis
Always looking for blackjack. Or maybe White Frank. One of the two.I'm not sure when I'd get to watch it before late next week, but when I am home, I would gladly watch it and comment. You'll note I did do some research, however.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
Christian Graus wrote:
Is it ? At home, I get a tax deduction for the donations I make to charities. So, if I give $1000 to World Vision, I get $500 back ( b.c I am in the 50% tax bracket, give or take ).
I'm guessing your church expect you to pay tithing (is that the correct term?)? Can you claim that as a deduction?
Expects is the wrong word. We collect tithes, yes. There's no pressure or 'expectation' though. Can I claim it ? No, the fact that it's given anonymously kills that, as much as anything. If I could, I would. Are you blaming the government or the church for this ? I guess the idea is more traditional than anything, there was a time when most people belonged to a church, and the government supported the existing social structure. It would not surprise me if tax exemption for churches would start to fade away, or we'd be required to show what % went to missions and charities, and to just claim that. Given the existence of megachurches like Hillsong, I'm not sure I'd disagree - they've got a huge facility, why should anyone but the people who go there, pay for that ?
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
I'm not sure when I'd get to watch it before late next week, but when I am home, I would gladly watch it and comment. You'll note I did do some research, however.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
Here in Canada, as long as it is a registered charitable organization, then my donations to them are tax deductable. There are minimum and maximum annual amounts, based upon your income, and unused deductions can be carried forward for several years. You can also group or save up your deductions and claim all of them in one year even though they occurred over several years. But that's just us backwards thinking Canadians and our silly social sytems at work. :)
Chris Meech I am Canadian. [heard in a local bar] In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. [Yogi Berra]
Socialist !!! :P
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
I have to ask this question to those of you that like taxation and wealth transfer. I realize your reasons for doing it are justifiable to some extent. But this should really throw you off... If you want to help those in need, you say you should be for minimum wages, social security programs and the like. But why is it that if someone wants to donate to a charity, that the money is taxed? Why would that be justifiable? In this case at the very least, if money is being donated to a charity, it's going to help those in need. The government should get out of the way.
Josh Davis
Always looking for blackjack. Or maybe White Frank. One of the two.Donating to an international charity is bad for the economy. You would be importing "the feeling that you did something good". They get money, you get nothing but a feeling. The country you live in loses the money, because You lose it. It's only natural that they'd try to slow that flow.