Why in the world is money that's given to charity taxed?
-
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 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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
Christian Graus wrote:
Who, no matter their other failings, are behind the vast bulk of charity work that occurs in our country.
And I'd be happy for them to be exempt from tax for all monies used for charitable works. How much money has the Catholic church accumulated? They own more property in our country than any other group or organisation. There are also people in our country living in third world conditions without access to health care or eduction due to lack of funding. The Franciscan monks from the church opposite my parents place built an 18 room monastery for the two of them.
-
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.josda1000 wrote:
are those here that do believe in wealth transfer
It'd be hard to get paid without wealth transfer so yes I believe in it. As per usual you are attaching meaning to that term that is not there.
josda1000 wrote:
Because that's precisely what socializing anything does
That is not correct.
josda1000 wrote:
Nobody likes taxes, however, it's the only way it works.
I like taxes, I'd rather not pay them but I like a free car too. I think they're a good thing and necessary for the kind of society I like to live in.
-
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.
Christian Graus wrote:
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 ?
See my reply to you below.
-
Christian Graus wrote:
Who, no matter their other failings, are behind the vast bulk of charity work that occurs in our country.
And I'd be happy for them to be exempt from tax for all monies used for charitable works. How much money has the Catholic church accumulated? They own more property in our country than any other group or organisation. There are also people in our country living in third world conditions without access to health care or eduction due to lack of funding. The Franciscan monks from the church opposite my parents place built an 18 room monastery for the two of them.
Well, like I said, I think it's an historical blip that does not reflect the wishes of the majority at this point. I have no problem with it being withdrawn. I think the churches that accurately reflect the wishes of Jesus are not accumulating wealth and certainly I think that if a church builds something, they will own it, and they should build in proportion to the degree to which their members are willing to pay for it, with no tax benefits. So long as the tax exemption continues for charity, because if it doesn't, the poor are the ones who will lose out, imagine in the Salvos had to pay tax on donations ?
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.
-
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.
Hey, you know, sometimes when the shoe fits, you just got to wear it. And proudly. :)
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]
-
josda1000 wrote:
are those here that do believe in wealth transfer
It'd be hard to get paid without wealth transfer so yes I believe in it. As per usual you are attaching meaning to that term that is not there.
josda1000 wrote:
Because that's precisely what socializing anything does
That is not correct.
josda1000 wrote:
Nobody likes taxes, however, it's the only way it works.
I like taxes, I'd rather not pay them but I like a free car too. I think they're a good thing and necessary for the kind of society I like to live in.
Josh Gray wrote:
josda1000 wrote: Because that's precisely what socializing anything does That is not correct.
How is this not correct?
Josh Gray wrote:
josda1000 wrote: Nobody likes taxes, however, it's the only way it works. I like taxes, I'd rather not pay them but I like a free car too. I think they're a good thing and necessary for the kind of society I like to live in.
Ah.
Josh Davis
Always looking for blackjack. Or maybe White Frank. One of the two. -
Well, like I said, I think it's an historical blip that does not reflect the wishes of the majority at this point. I have no problem with it being withdrawn. I think the churches that accurately reflect the wishes of Jesus are not accumulating wealth and certainly I think that if a church builds something, they will own it, and they should build in proportion to the degree to which their members are willing to pay for it, with no tax benefits. So long as the tax exemption continues for charity, because if it doesn't, the poor are the ones who will lose out, imagine in the Salvos had to pay tax on donations ?
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:
So long as the tax exemption continues for charity, because if it doesn't, the poor are the ones who will lose out, imagine in the Salvos had to pay tax on donations ?
I agree completely. I used the Catholic church as an example because the contradictions between their actions and their stated beliefs are so obvious. The Savlos are obviously at the other end of the spectrum but I would imagine most religious charitable organisations fall somewhere between the two. Dont Wesley Mission have a bit of a questionable track record? I think most people would question the motives of an organisation that offers charity with another message that they dont necessarily agree with.
-
Josh Gray wrote:
josda1000 wrote: Because that's precisely what socializing anything does That is not correct.
How is this not correct?
Josh Gray wrote:
josda1000 wrote: Nobody likes taxes, however, it's the only way it works. I like taxes, I'd rather not pay them but I like a free car too. I think they're a good thing and necessary for the kind of society I like to live in.
Ah.
Josh Davis
Always looking for blackjack. Or maybe White Frank. One of the two.josda1000 wrote:
Josh Gray wrote: josda1000 wrote: Because that's precisely what socializing anything does That is not correct. How is this not correct?
I knew you'd say that. You made the claim, I think you have the responsibility to be able to back it up.
josda1000 wrote:
Josh Gray wrote: josda1000 wrote: Nobody likes taxes, however, it's the only way it works. I like taxes, I'd rather not pay them but I like a free car too. I think they're a good thing and necessary for the kind of society I like to live in. Ah.
Yeah common sense over useless rhetoric.
-
Christian Graus wrote:
So long as the tax exemption continues for charity, because if it doesn't, the poor are the ones who will lose out, imagine in the Salvos had to pay tax on donations ?
I agree completely. I used the Catholic church as an example because the contradictions between their actions and their stated beliefs are so obvious. The Savlos are obviously at the other end of the spectrum but I would imagine most religious charitable organisations fall somewhere between the two. Dont Wesley Mission have a bit of a questionable track record? I think most people would question the motives of an organisation that offers charity with another message that they dont necessarily agree with.
Josh Gray wrote:
I used the Catholic church as an example because the contradictions between their actions and their stated beliefs are so obvious. The Savlos are obviously at the other end of the spectrum but I would imagine most religious charitable organisations fall somewhere between the two. Dont Wesley Mission have a bit of a questionable track record?
Yeah, we both chose an obvious extreme to support what we were saying :-) I have no idea, to be honest, wrt the Wesley Mission. I don't church watch. I tend not to give much to local charities, I figure even the worst off here should be able to survive, at least in cities. I give to World Vision and Save the Children, who I do believe do some work in our outback communities.
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:
Josh Gray wrote: josda1000 wrote: Because that's precisely what socializing anything does That is not correct. How is this not correct?
I knew you'd say that. You made the claim, I think you have the responsibility to be able to back it up.
josda1000 wrote:
Josh Gray wrote: josda1000 wrote: Nobody likes taxes, however, it's the only way it works. I like taxes, I'd rather not pay them but I like a free car too. I think they're a good thing and necessary for the kind of society I like to live in. Ah.
Yeah common sense over useless rhetoric.
You made the claim that it's not correct. So I asked it. And I've been backing it up for the last couple days, maybe you're the one that needs to do research. Are you just here to give me a hard time? It really seems that way. If that's the case, I'm not laughing.
Josh Gray wrote:
I think they're a good thing and necessary for the kind of society I like to live in.
Josh Gray wrote:
useless rhetoric.
Damned right.
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.