Charitable giving in America

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: amok

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Thank you DMA.

You realize those figures clearly show the numbers going up and the reason the numbers going up is because the rich do this to skirt paying TAXES for crying out loud.

Don't forget after they make these "contributions" out of the goodness of their heart they cry that they are "Hurting" from paying too much tax still after lowering their Tax bill.

Thank you again DMA, should change the thread Title to:

"DMA shows how clearly the Rich Fleece America through the guise of charitable contributions"

Dave, please at least look into the tax code and benefits of charitable giving before spewing this kind of stuff. Demonizing the wealthy is your right, but doing so based on false pretenses is slanderous. As an exercise for you, sit down and figure out the "savings" in taxes of someone with $6M in earned income giving $1M to charity. How much money do they give up to save that $350K? The situation is even more exaggerated for those with a big percentage of their yearly earnings coming in the form of dividends and gains, as only a small portion of their earnings are taxed at the 35% rate. The only time charitable giving makes sense tax-wise is if you are hugging a tax bracket and want to slip under it for the lower rate. Since most "wealthy" people are nowhere near the cutoff point in the top bracket, and derive a substantial amount of earnings through the lower rate dividends/gains anyway, there is no real "savings" by giving to charities. They are still giving away money.

You can call it Slanderous or whatever you want, when I hear a "Rich" person whining and complaining and saying they are "hurting" from paying too much taxes yet have more money than a reasonable person (not spending like Micheal Jackson) could ever spend in their lifetime is pure crap and "Fleecing" the Country.

 

[dmcowen674]

Here's where the Rich give their "Contributions' you love so much, TO THEMSELVES under the guise of a Non-Profit Corporation another Rich boy buddy set up.

12-30-2003 Nasdaq grants raise questions of conflict

Hardwick Simmons, who was chairman of both the Nasdaq stock market and its educational foundation in 2002, said Nasdaq directors may have recommended that groups with which they're affiliated seek donations from the foundation, which finances financial-markets education initiatives.

But he said that directors' positions do not influence the awarding of grants.

Among the amounts paid by the Nasdaq foundation last year was $107,000 to the National Academy Foundation, where Simmons is a director.

It also made a $100,000 donation to the University of Southern California, including the Marshall School of Business. Nasdaq director Frank Baxter sits on a Marshall advisory committee.

In addition to last year's payments, the Nasdaq foundation paid out $70,000 in awards in 2001, with $50,000 of it going to the Wharton School, the business school at the University of Pennsylvania. Wharton alumnus and university trustee David Pottruck, CEO of Charles Schwab Corp., served on the stock market's board from 2000 until earlier this year.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
All the while taking these deductions on their Taxes while playing Poker with one anothers money and probably complaining about paying too much in Taxes and that they are "Hurting".

 

[amok]

You can call it Slanderous or whatever you want, when I hear a "Rich" person whining and complaining and saying they are "hurting" from paying too much taxes yet have more money than a reasonable person (not spending like Micheal Jackson) could ever spend in their lifetime is pure crap and "Fleecing" the Country.

Not all rich people whine about it. Some of those who do whine more about the principle than the amount of money involved. Some simply wish the government would trim a lot of fat, making it unnecessary to take so much out of the pockets of themselves and everyone else. And some of us would rather donate to things we believe are important as opposed to having others pick where the money goes. I already explained that charitable donations really are donations, and not tax evasion for the majority of the more affluent among us. Demonizing that aspect of the wealthy is an altogether different thing than focusing on those unwilling to see a penny slip through their fingers. Demonize that type all you want, but don't belittle the generosity of those willing to give something freely.

Here's where the Rich give their "Contributions' you love so much, TO THEMSELVES under the guise of a Non-Profit Corporation another Rich boy buddy set up.

Lol, you can do better than this. I guess people who donate money to the churches they attend to build new facilities, rec centers, etc. are fleecing the country as well. Some people believe strongly in the importance of education and research (myself included), so they concentrate their funds there. That they do so with schools/RIs they are involved with should be no surprise. By sitting on their boards/committees, these people are acknowledging they believe in/care about what's being done there. What better place to give to than somewhere you have knowledge of and believe in?

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: amok

You can call it Slanderous or whatever you want, when I hear a "Rich" person whining and complaining and saying they are "hurting" from paying too much taxes yet have more money than a reasonable person (not spending like Micheal Jackson) could ever spend in their lifetime is pure crap and "Fleecing" the Country.

Not all rich people whine about it. Some of those who do whine more about the principle than the amount of money involved. Some simply wish the government would trim a lot of fat, making it unnecessary to take so much out of the pockets of themselves and everyone else. And some of us would rather donate to things we believe are important as opposed to having others pick where the money goes. I already explained that charitable donations really are donations, and not tax evasion for the majority of the more affluent among us. Demonizing that aspect of the wealthy is an altogether different thing than focusing on those unwilling to see a penny slip through their fingers. Demonize that type all you want, but don't belittle the generosity of those willing to give something freely.

Here's where the Rich give their "Contributions' you love so much, TO THEMSELVES under the guise of a Non-Profit Corporation another Rich boy buddy set up.

Lol, you can do better than this. I guess people who donate money to the churches they attend to build new facilities, rec centers, etc. are fleecing the country as well. Some people believe strongly in the importance of education and research (myself included), so they concentrate their funds there. That they do so with schools/RIs they are involved with should be no surprise. By sitting on their boards/committees, these people are acknowledging they believe in/care about what's being done there. What better place to give to than somewhere you have knowledge of and believe in?

Granted there are some good apples on the tree but in this case the entire tree is most definitely soured. Nice to know you are not a sour apple. The sour apples are trying desperately now to stop all the apples from falling off the tree by frantically watering it (pumping money back into the stock market), hopefully the tree survives but there is still not enough sweet apples to prove it yet. I would like nothing better than to re-name the Depression Thread. Sadly it will not be this year. One can only hope for 2004.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
I would like nothing better than to re-name the Depression Thread. Sadly it will not be this year. One can only hope for 2004.

Right...

Here's an idea dave - why not make your New Years Resolution this:

I will actually read the links I post and make sure I understand what it is saying before creating a thread title. I will also make sure my commentary corresponds to the article and isn't refuted by the contents of said article.

*************

But you are right....one can only hope for 2004

CkG

 

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
I would like nothing better than to re-name the Depression Thread. Sadly it will not be this year. One can only hope for 2004.

Right...

Here's an idea dave - why not make your New Years Resolution this:

I will actually read the links I post and make sure I understand what it is saying before creating a thread title. I will also make sure my commentary corresponds to the article and isn't refuted by the contents of said article.

CkG

Here,here! Let's see how long Dave can make it without posting lies.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
I would like nothing better than to re-name the Depression Thread. Sadly it will not be this year. One can only hope for 2004.

Right...

Here's an idea dave - why not make your New Years Resolution this:

I will actually read the links I post and make sure I understand what it is saying before creating a thread title. I will also make sure my commentary corresponds to the article and isn't refuted by the contents of said article.

*************

But you are right....one can only hope for 2004

CkG

Sounds more like should be your Resolution but more importantly any commentary that actually has any meat and not spun drivel.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
I would like nothing better than to re-name the Depression Thread. Sadly it will not be this year. One can only hope for 2004.

Right...

Here's an idea dave - why not make your New Years Resolution this:

I will actually read the links I post and make sure I understand what it is saying before creating a thread title. I will also make sure my commentary corresponds to the article and isn't refuted by the contents of said article.

*************

But you are right....one can only hope for 2004

CkG

Sounds more like should be your Resolution but more importantly any commentary that actually has any meat and not spun drivel.

Sorry, it seems as though I have the Almighty Gaard agreeing with me. Your argument it toast when gaard agrees with a "neo-fascist" like me.

CkG

 

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
I would like nothing better than to re-name the Depression Thread. Sadly it will not be this year. One can only hope for 2004.

Right...

Here's an idea dave - why not make your New Years Resolution this:

I will actually read the links I post and make sure I understand what it is saying before creating a thread title. I will also make sure my commentary corresponds to the article and isn't refuted by the contents of said article.

*************

But you are right....one can only hope for 2004

CkG

Sounds more like should be your Resolution but more importantly any commentary that actually has any meat and not spun drivel.

Sorry, it seems as though I have the Almighty Gaard agreeing with me. Your argument it toast when gaard agrees with a "neo-fascist" like me.

CkG

So let it be written. So let it be done.

 

[alchemize]

Gaard is generally a reasonable guy (I say that cause he has stuff in the vault)

Dave is not ever a reasonable guy.

So how much did you give in 2003 Dave, Mr caring and sharing? How much? Percentage of your income is fine, I don't care about the $ amount. I'll show you mine if you show me yours?

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: alchemize
Gaard is generally a reasonable guy (I say that cause he has stuff in the vault)

Dave is not ever a reasonable guy.

So how much did you give in 2003 Dave, Mr caring and sharing? How much? Percentage of your income is fine, I don't care about the $ amount. I'll show you mine if you show me yours?

As mentioned many times, barely surviving here, remember I was an early casualty of the dot com bust.

I'm sure I have been counted as working according to the BLS but I have not had a steady income since Aug 2001.

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: alchemize
Gaard is generally a reasonable guy (I say that cause he has stuff in the vault)

Dave is not ever a reasonable guy.

So how much did you give in 2003 Dave, Mr caring and sharing? How much? Percentage of your income is fine, I don't care about the $ amount. I'll show you mine if you show me yours?

As mentioned many times, barely surviving here, remember I was an early casualty of the dot com bust.

I'm sure I have been counted as working according to the BLS but I have not had a steady income since Aug 2001.

So zip. Zero. Zilch. But yet you can afford to plug away at a computer X hours a day whining in a forum?

Are you saying that there aren't those less fortunate than you? You have no room to give?

OK how many hours per week do you contribute to charitable causes? That's free, doesn't cost you a penny. Might be time better spent than moaning and groaning about the end of the world...

And since I said I'd show you mine, I contribute about 3-4% of my after-tax income to local charities. I still have considerable student loans to pay off, once those are gone I will increase my contributions.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: alchemize
Gaard is generally a reasonable guy (I say that cause he has stuff in the vault)

Dave is not ever a reasonable guy.

So how much did you give in 2003 Dave, Mr caring and sharing? How much? Percentage of your income is fine, I don't care about the $ amount. I'll show you mine if you show me yours?

As mentioned many times, barely surviving here, remember I was an early casualty of the dot com bust.

I'm sure I have been counted as working according to the BLS but I have not had a steady income since Aug 2001.

So zip. Zero. Zilch. But yet you can afford to plug away at a computer X hours a day whining in a forum?

Are you saying that there aren't those less fortunate than you? You have no room to give?

OK how many hours per week do you contribute to charitable causes? That's free, doesn't cost you a penny. Might be time better spent than moaning and groaning about the end of the world...

And since I said I'd show you mine, I contribute about 3-4% of my after-tax income to local charities. I still have considerable student loans to pay off, once those are gone I will increase my contributions.

I do in fact Volunteer my time for many "events" and Fundraisers, look up Telephone Pioneers, have been active since 1990 including a Member of the Quarter for the entire Southeast Region. In fact I also maintain Non Profit websites at no charge to organization such as the Local Parkison's Assoc. So while I do not have any "Extra" money to give whatsoever because we are barely keeping float in this wonderful "Booming and Soaring" Economy I do still my part in helping others with something even more valuable than money alone, my time and personal efforts.

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

You can call it Slanderous or whatever you want, when I hear a "Rich" person whining and complaining and saying they are "hurting" from paying too much taxes yet have more money than a reasonable person (not spending like Micheal Jackson) could ever spend in their lifetime is pure crap and "Fleecing" the Country.

When do you hear rich people complain that they are hurting? I never hear that, *ever*. What I DO hear are envious, angry poor and middle class people who don't want to do something for their own benefit pissing and moaning because some people are better at earning a living than they are.

Among the amounts paid by the Nasdaq foundation last year was $107,000 to the National Academy Foundation, where Simmons is a director.

It also made a $100,000 donation to the University of Southern California, including the Marshall School of Business. Nasdaq director Frank Baxter sits on a Marshall advisory committee.

In addition to last year's payments, the Nasdaq foundation paid out $70,000 in awards in 2001, with $50,000 of it going to the Wharton School, the business school at the University of Pennsylvania. Wharton alumnus and university trustee David Pottruck, CEO of Charles Schwab Corp., served on the stock market's board from 2000 until earlier this year.

I think I would define "giving it to themselves" more as lining the money right back into THEIR pockets. Your example is more about them donating to (GASP!) causes they believe in, such as these financial markets schools. Why is that a problem?

Also, in $$ figure, you just accounted for about $400,000. What about the other $240.6 BILLION?

Not all rich people whine about it. Some of those who do whine more about the principle than the amount of money involved. Some simply wish the government would trim a lot of fat, making it unnecessary to take so much out of the pockets of themselves and everyone else. And some of us would rather donate to things we believe are important as opposed to having others pick where the money goes. I already explained that charitable donations really are donations, and not tax evasion for the majority of the more affluent among us. Demonizing that aspect of the wealthy is an altogether different thing than focusing on those unwilling to see a penny slip through their fingers. Demonize that type all you want, but don't belittle the generosity of those willing to give something freely.

Well said.

Jason

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex

You can call it Slanderous or whatever you want, when I hear a "Rich" person whining and complaining and saying they are "hurting" from paying too much taxes yet have more money than a reasonable person (not spending like Micheal Jackson) could ever spend in their lifetime is pure crap and "Fleecing" the Country.

When do you hear rich people complain that they are hurting? I never hear that, *ever*. What I DO hear are envious, angry poor and middle class people who don't want to do something for their own benefit pissing and moaning because some people are better at earning a living than they are.

Among the amounts paid by the Nasdaq foundation last year was $107,000 to the National Academy Foundation, where Simmons is a director.

It also made a $100,000 donation to the University of Southern California, including the Marshall School of Business. Nasdaq director Frank Baxter sits on a Marshall advisory committee.

In addition to last year's payments, the Nasdaq foundation paid out $70,000 in awards in 2001, with $50,000 of it going to the Wharton School, the business school at the University of Pennsylvania. Wharton alumnus and university trustee David Pottruck, CEO of Charles Schwab Corp., served on the stock market's board from 2000 until earlier this year.

I think I would define "giving it to themselves" more as lining the money right back into THEIR pockets. Your example is more about them donating to (GASP!) causes they believe in, such as these financial markets schools. Why is that a problem?

Also, in $$ figure, you just accounted for about $400,000. What about the other $240.6 BILLION?

Not all rich people whine about it. Some of those who do whine more about the principle than the amount of money involved. Some simply wish the government would trim a lot of fat, making it unnecessary to take so much out of the pockets of themselves and everyone else. And some of us would rather donate to things we believe are important as opposed to having others pick where the money goes. I already explained that charitable donations really are donations, and not tax evasion for the majority of the more affluent among us. Demonizing that aspect of the wealthy is an altogether different thing than focusing on those unwilling to see a penny slip through their fingers. Demonize that type all you want, but don't belittle the generosity of those willing to give something freely.

Well said.

Jason

You missed it earlier Jason, a couple of AT experts called themselves or classified themselves as "Rich" but whined that they are paying too much in Taxes and said they are "Hurting".

 

[amok]

You missed it earlier Jason, a couple of AT experts called themselves or classified themselves as "Rich" but whined that they are paying too much in Taxes and said they are "Hurting".

Saying they are paying too much in taxes is one thing. Having a 7 or 8 figure tax bill makes your stomach knot up a little no matter how much you make. Saying they are hurting is a different matter. If they are hurting from paying taxes, they are either way overextended (which is their own fault), or don't deserve the classification.

Anyway, my guests are going to start arriving soon, and I need to go check around to make sure all the breakable stuff is put up and that the bartender is sober enough to get through the night. You all have fun wherever you're off to, and be safe. And since I'll probably be passed out in my floor not long after midnight, Happy New Year to all of you. :beer:

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: amok

You missed it earlier Jason, a couple of AT experts called themselves or classified themselves as "Rich" but whined that they are paying too much in Taxes and said they are "Hurting".

Saying they are paying too much in taxes is one thing. Having a 7 or 8 figure tax bill makes your stomach knot up a little no matter how much you make. Saying they are hurting is a different matter. If they are hurting from paying taxes, they are either way overextended (which is their own fault), or don't deserve the classification.

Anyway, my guests are going to start arriving soon, and I need to go check around to make sure all the breakable stuff is put up and that the bartender is sober enough to get through the night. You all have fun wherever you're off to, and be safe. And since I'll probably be passed out in my floor not long after midnight, Happy New Year to all of you. :beer:

You too, Happy New Year

I think I'll swig a fw more beers than I should too, after this year need it.

:beer:

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

We have rich people in the forums at Anandtech? That's cool At least they're smart enough to come here and get good deals on used stuff

Jason

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
You missed it earlier Jason, a couple of AT experts called themselves or classified themselves as "Rich" but whined that they are paying too much in Taxes and said they are "Hurting".

Actually - mr.Iexaggeratealot - only one person said the "hurting" thing. Nice try though dave, but since it was last year I can't hold you to your new years resolutions yet

CkG

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
You missed it earlier Jason, a couple of AT experts called themselves or classified themselves as "Rich" but whined that they are paying too much in Taxes and said they are "Hurting".

Actually - mr.Iexaggeratealot - only one person said the "hurting" thing. Nice try though dave, but since it was last year I can't hold you to your new years resolutions yet

CkG

It was more than "one" a couple of others said very similar thing until yes the one guy said "hurting", I even said that was the icing on the cake at that point, it was the best statement of 2003 by far. I agree with you and him and Bush and Rush, the rich are taxed way too much, they deserve every Tax Cut they can get and every way they can figure out how to dodge paying taxes because they're going to "tricke down" a ton down to the rest of the workers that are making their highest wages ever with the most jobs ever since 1984.