Nope, I’m a proud grad of Joint Carls Jr and Pizza Hut high and corporations should write the regulations because they know all the ins and outs burgers.
You joke, but Carnegie built thousands of libraries across the country in the early 1900s, many of which are still in use today. Over 100 years later, the government never bothered building their own library.
Political contributions are textbook examples of nondeductible expenses. Charity contributions are deductible for all taxpayers to an extent. Private schools can be for-profit businesses and have been for quite some time and sometimes they teach controversial subjects. Not sure what relevance that is though. Seems like you should be angry about education policy, not tax policy.
That thing we’ve been talking about, you’re doing it here.
Generally speaking I don’t find charity contributions a controversial subject, no. I do have a problem with you putting words in my mouth. You’re clearly pissed off about a bunch of things and there’s plenty to be pissed off about. But your ire is misdirected here, as badly as this comic is mistitled.
Seems like you’re just lashing out because you’ve read a bunch of malarkey saying rich people don’t pay taxes and now you’ve formed a political ideology around that misunderstanding.
🎵 Sounds like somebody doesn’t understand the logical consequences of the positions they hold 🎵
We’ve established that tax cuts incentivize a behavior.
We’ve established that corporate charitable donations can be and are used for lobbying.
Lobbying can be and is used in the educational space.
You don’t see any issue with tax deductions in this exact circumstance
Therefore, you don’t see any issue with incentivizing lobbying in the educational space.
Seems like you’re just lashing out because you’ve read a bunch of malarkey saying rich people don’t pay taxes and now you’ve formed a political ideology around that misunderstanding.
Of all the Redditors who’ve tried to armchair psycho-analyze me, I think your attempt actually might be the worst.
“wow you’re against world poverty? give me actionable policy that solves world poverty or your stance isn’t valid”
We’re (somehow) still deciding between ourselves whether or not propagandizing children is a good thing or not. Why would we discuss solutions to a problem you inexplicably can’t even admit is a bad thing?
You don’t think corporations having a hand in what children/teenagers/adults learn because of lobbying and donations is a bad thing?
Nope, I’m a proud grad of Joint Carls Jr and Pizza Hut high and corporations should write the regulations because they know all the ins and outs burgers.
You joke, but Carnegie built thousands of libraries across the country in the early 1900s, many of which are still in use today. Over 100 years later, the government never bothered building their own library.
Let that sink in.
The Library of Congress?
Political contributions are textbook examples of nondeductible expenses. Charity contributions are deductible for all taxpayers to an extent. Private schools can be for-profit businesses and have been for quite some time and sometimes they teach controversial subjects. Not sure what relevance that is though. Seems like you should be angry about education policy, not tax policy.
That thing we’ve been talking about, you’re doing it here.
Do you not understand that giving charitable donations in order to sway public opinion to your side is lobbying?
So again: you don’t have any problem with corporate influence over what children learn in schools?
Generally speaking I don’t find charity contributions a controversial subject, no. I do have a problem with you putting words in my mouth. You’re clearly pissed off about a bunch of things and there’s plenty to be pissed off about. But your ire is misdirected here, as badly as this comic is mistitled.
Seems like you’re just lashing out because you’ve read a bunch of malarkey saying rich people don’t pay taxes and now you’ve formed a political ideology around that misunderstanding.
Words in your mouth? Oh dear.
🎵 Sounds like somebody doesn’t understand the logical consequences of the positions they hold 🎵
Of all the Redditors who’ve tried to armchair psycho-analyze me, I think your attempt actually might be the worst.
What do you propose? Codify your position.
Hold your horses, buckaroo. We’re still apparently yet to decide if incentivizing lobbying in the educational space is a good thing or not.
Or does this mean that you’re retracting the assertion that there aren’t any problems whatsoever with allowing tax deductions on corporate charity?
I’m not retracting anything. I want to know what you want in your own words. Actionable policy.
“wow you’re against world poverty? give me actionable policy that solves world poverty or your stance isn’t valid”
We’re (somehow) still deciding between ourselves whether or not propagandizing children is a good thing or not. Why would we discuss solutions to a problem you inexplicably can’t even admit is a bad thing?