Obama: Charity begins with government
posted at 8:00 am on February 2, 2010 by Slublog
If you need a chuckle, just imagine the incandescent outrage on the left if George W. Bush had proposed this. Clearly, Obama hates charity:
The White House is expecting to collect an additional $291 billion over the next decade by reducing the write-off for families earning over $250,000 despite the fact Congress roundly rejected such a measure last year. While the administration is portraying this as a populist move, experts have said the end result will be a significant blow to charities and non-profits already reeling in the midst of the recession.“It’s frankly surprising to see this proposal come back this year, it was very controversial last year,” said Tom Riley, vice president for communications at the Philanthropy Roundtable. “This of all times isn’t the time to take actions that would discourage charitable giving. The need for non-profits hasn’t been higher for a generation.”
Roberton Williams, a senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center said the rule change would make it about 10 percent more expensive for individuals affected to donate to charity. He estimated that would correspond to a $10 billion drop in donations out of the $300 billion Americans give annually.
Americans are extremely generous people, and those in higher income brackets tend to make larger donations. Obama’s budget would punish the wealthy for being generous, which would harm not-for-profit organizations dependent upon those dollars.
I once worked for a not-for-profit healthcare organization that relied upon such donations to survive and provide services to clients. Grants provided some of the funds, but members of the community played a very large role in allowing the organization to continue its work. Most who gave did so because they believed in our mission, but I’m sure the ability to write off donations helped. I would go so far as to say without those donations, the organization would not survive.
Obama’s budget proposal balances the budget on the backs of such not-for-profits. As I said above, just imagine the reaction if the GOP had proposed this as a budget-cutting strategy. This should, and will, be shot down by Congress. The fact that Obama included it in his budget shows his preference for “charity” via government. Maybe it’s just me, but that’s not entirely encouraging.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
I’m for cleaning up the tax system and the use of “incentives.”
Not a flat-tax fan, but I think it’s out of control as a method for control out of DC.
AnninCA on February 2, 2010 at 9:45 AM
The Soetoro Foundation?
OldEnglish on February 2, 2010 at 9:46 AM
Those who give to charity now will have to use that money to pay their taxes in the future. Then we will all need some charity and may get some from the govt.
Kissmygrits on February 2, 2010 at 9:47 AM
They won’t say it, but they will start doing things that lower their tax liability. Like spending more time with the family instead of working 80 hours a week, just to have the govt take most of it.
They can and will start moving operations over seas.
They can and will hire expensive accountants to find every loophole.
They can and will hire expensive lobbiests to create more loopholes.
MarkTheGreat on February 2, 2010 at 9:48 AM
Only a true liberal would declare that these are the only two options. Much less declare that such a thing is “obvious”.
MarkTheGreat on February 2, 2010 at 9:49 AM
You really don’t grasp the idea of government living within their means of income, do you Ann?
Since prop 13 passed that froze property taxes, the next greatest thing Californians did was passing the 2/3rds vote—depriving the liberal morons in the statehouse from sucking more income from working middle class taxpayers. This state has been choking small businesses for decades with over-regulation, taxes, and fees that have been driving them out of the state, further reducing the tax base. With close to 60% of the working force now in the public/government sector–UNIONS—yes, their pensions, rediculous retirement plans, and wage scales are eating away revenues the state government simply can not cover, while entitlements, (covering millions of illegals that do not pay into the system), continue to explode with ZERO FUNDING.
Three cheers for Texas and Perry if they pass this recommendation. Great idea!
Rovin on February 2, 2010 at 9:51 AM
Time to knock down this strawman. Wars are indeed expensive but…
In 2009 Military spending was 4.7% of GDP. The 45 year average is 5.3%.
According to OMB as a percentage of budget authority by agency;
1976 Mil 22.7%
2009 Mil 16.4%
Meanwhile
1976 HHS 9.6%
2009 HHS 20.9%
In Obama’s projected budget for 2015
Mil 15.1%
HHS 25.1%
It’s not the military that’s driving this budget out of control.
SoonerMarine on February 2, 2010 at 9:52 AM
Same for parents’ influence over their own children. Replace the parents’ influence with the state.
All of it, as you know, is designed to force individuals to sacrifice their individualism in favor of becoming collectivist and subservient to government. It’s a design for statism.
petefrt on February 2, 2010 at 9:53 AM
Obviously, Ann believes that rich people are just sitting on loads of money that they have no idea what to do with.
MarkTheGreat on February 2, 2010 at 9:53 AM
Assuming this years proposal is the same as last years, and the article makes it sound that way.
They aren’t eliminating the tax deduction for the over $250K crowd, they are instead limiting the value of it to the amount of the next lower tax rate.
Assume the top two rates are 30% and 40%.
At present, those in the top bracket the value of the tax break is 40%. For every dollar they donate, their taxes go down by 40 cents. Under this proposal they would only be able to deduct 30%.
MarkTheGreat on February 2, 2010 at 9:57 AM
Imagine that, a liberal who thinks that making it harder to raise taxes on other people is a bad idea.
Can you imagine how bad the economy in CA would be by now if their govt was able to raise taxes as much as it wants?
MarkTheGreat on February 2, 2010 at 10:02 AM
It’s lead to government deadlock and nothing good. No, it’s really a bad idea.
AnninCA on February 2, 2010 at 10:05 AM
I’m for a flat tax just for the sake of simplicity. If all that congress can do is raise and lower one single tax rate for everyone at the same time, it would purge a whole lot of corruption right there.
The problem is that you would still have to give congress some say in what is defined as income, which might become a problem (though not as much as we have now).
Count to 10 on February 2, 2010 at 10:05 AM
Deadlock in an improvement.
Count to 10 on February 2, 2010 at 10:06 AM
speaking of charity
Did you see the news reports of the injured Haitians being evacuated from Haiti and dumped at Miami hospitals who are expected to treat the injured (in large numbers) and no one is talking about who is going to pay for the treatment.
Guess Obama thinks that health care is a right, and the hospitals should just eat it.
Skandia Recluse on February 2, 2010 at 10:13 AM
Fair tax anyone? Tax consumption, not income. Oh, but if we had a simple tax code then politicians wouldn’t be able to legislate favors in the form of tax breaks. What was I thinking?
Send_Me on February 2, 2010 at 10:22 AM
Obama’s proposal “balances the budget”?
And a guiding principle of the Left going back eons is to destroy charity, or any competition to government.
rrpjr on February 2, 2010 at 10:22 AM
Yeah, if the government doesn’t live within their means, why should us plebs? Who in their right mind spends more than they make???! (rhetorical question alert)
conservative pilgrim on February 2, 2010 at 10:23 AM
$250k is the magic number for Zero.
conservative pilgrim on February 2, 2010 at 10:23 AM
Big sales tax encourage black markets. Eventually, everyone starts doing minor tax evasion, and it serves as a gateway to more criminal activity. Not a good idea. Just tax personal income, and stop trying to engineer.
Count to 10 on February 2, 2010 at 10:29 AM
No, it isn’t. CA is in constant budget ‘crisis’ mode. It’s absolutely a detriment to functional government.
I’ll vote against Perry based on that position.
AnninCA on February 2, 2010 at 10:33 AM
I just don’t see flat tax proponents getting much traction.
It’s simply unfair to lower-income workers.
AnninCA on February 2, 2010 at 10:34 AM
Is this really just a way to get at conservative think tanks?
rivlax on February 2, 2010 at 10:34 AM
The mafia is trying to eliminate the competition. Why pass Obamacare if you have Good Samaritan Hospitals, why have Obamacare if you have non-profit community health centers?
Ooops! They don’t exist anymore? Well I guess the government mafia will have to take that over too!
LA Conservative on February 2, 2010 at 10:38 AM
You want to be robbed bare? That’s why we’re in “Crisis”– they won’t spend less.
Chris_Balsz on February 2, 2010 at 10:42 AM
If you give money from your own pocket willingly, it’s charity.
If the government does it with your tax money, it’s buying votes.
Sloan Morganstern on February 2, 2010 at 10:45 AM
CA is in deadlock because the elected officials won’t do what needs to be done. They have created two dependent classes….
those who rely on government hand outs and themselves, dependents on the votes of those people.
It is a vicious cycle that has caused CA’s budget crises and will do the same nationally with the federal government.
Jvette on February 2, 2010 at 10:56 AM
It is amazing how you manage to be consistently wrong on so many levels.
Do you think that, in general, lower income people really worry more about tax liability? And plan about it?
Would you and your friends like to volunteer for a new human genome project before this mess gets completely out of hand?
I keep seeing that film Idiocracy as I read your posts and watch the Dems in action.
IlikedAUH2O on February 2, 2010 at 11:00 AM
Sh*t…**she says as she looks at the 4ft-high snowdrift below her window…..
lovingmyUSA on February 2, 2010 at 11:02 AM
Deadlock is a great thing! The socialists cannot steal our money or freedom when they are deadlocked.
I wish they were more like county commissioners, meet once a week and have to have another job to rely on income.
Sporty1946 on February 2, 2010 at 11:03 AM
No it has led to govt not being able to raise taxes. Which is a good thing.
There is of course the fact that they could vote to spend less money. Or perhaps they could have voted to adequately fund the rainy day fund back when the economy was doing well, instead of rushing to find new worthless things to spend the money on.
Instead, according to liberals, the only solution to any problem, is to raise other people’s taxes.
MarkTheGreat on February 2, 2010 at 11:04 AM
That’s what he has been telling Republicans for a year now.
MarkTheGreat on February 2, 2010 at 11:05 AM
That can be solved via the Fair Tax.
MarkTheGreat on February 2, 2010 at 11:06 AM
No donations for those making over 250K?
Obowma, unfortunately, is preaching what he practices. He didn’t donate over a $1,000 to charity on his personal taxes until two years ago. Making the decision to run for the presidency, even though he had two “ghost written” best selling autobiographies..cough, Ayers…cough, cough donated LESS than 1% to charity.
This guy is an absolute scumbag who knows NOTHING about economics…..OR is tanking the economy on purpose.
dthorny on February 2, 2010 at 11:07 AM
How big is the black market in those states with 11 and 12 percent sales taxes?
Do you really believe that doubling the sales tax would provide enough incentive for significant criminal activity?
MarkTheGreat on February 2, 2010 at 11:09 AM
Well sure! Why let individuals make their own donations to their own charities as they see fit, when Obama can do it for everyone, and recieve a nobel prize for it? After all….it is ALL about HIM!!!
capejasmine on February 2, 2010 at 11:09 AM
This so called crisis could be solved in an instant if the legislature would vote to cut spending.
However, since spending other people money is a religious requirement for liberals, they will continue to pretend that this is not an option and instead demand that the citizens allow them to tax more.
MarkTheGreat on February 2, 2010 at 11:10 AM
No it isn’t.
MarkTheGreat on February 2, 2010 at 11:11 AM
No, she wants you to be robbed bare.
MarkTheGreat on February 2, 2010 at 11:11 AM
I am not clear on the Fair Tax. Is it like a flat tax?
I think that the only way to get everyone to wake up and pay attention is to make everyone pay the same percentage of taxes with no loopholes, no exemptions and no deductions.
It is the only way to get the non-producers to stop voting for people who steal from the producers to give to the non-producers.
Sporty1946 on February 2, 2010 at 11:12 AM
Obama: Let’s tax all those rich people giving much-needed aid to those poor suffering black people in Haiti.
Your brother’s keeper, right Barry?
Steve Z on February 2, 2010 at 11:17 AM
It’s not tax policiy.
It’s policy designed to make the government indispensable.
Kind of like it was in the USSR.
notagool on February 2, 2010 at 11:18 AM
It’s a burden that a true liberal chooses to carry with pride.
Yoop on February 2, 2010 at 11:30 AM
Taxation is a necessary evil to support the government, another necessary evil. There are certain responsibilities that only the government can handle, and this costs money.
What we have today however is not taxation, but extortion.
Politicians direct the government to spend money it does not have in order to either buy votes or to forward destructive ideologies. In the end the American people are forced to pay for this, which is a direct violation of the 13th amendment.
When the government demands that I work to pay for things that do not benefit me, that is involuntary servitude.
People complain about their taxes being too high, and this is missing the point entirely. High taxes that subsidize things like the Military or some other public good are necessary sometimes. Such taxes should be low overall, but that is beside the point. As long as the taxes collected serve a public good, the level of taxation is a secondary concern.
“Taxes” to subsidize Marxist social agendas and to perpetuate poverty through hand outs to the useless do not serve a public good. Even a single dollar extracted from the public for these purposes is a violation of the 13th amendment. If someone wants to throw money at people living in slums to ensure that they stay there, then that person is free to do so. The government however, has no right to force me or anyone else to do this.
leereyno on February 2, 2010 at 11:33 AM
Many members of the Ca legislature think it is their job to create a communist government. At this point, the only item standing in their perverted way are the tax increase limitations of prop 13 that require a 2/3rds vote.
Some people, like AnninCA, think we are all destined to become communists whether we like it or not. What I find most stunning, is these peoples steadfast belief in giving absolute authority over their lives to the government for an opportunity to steal a few pieces of silver from their neighbors. Seems that while they need to slam the concept of a god at every turn, their most pressing need is to make the government their new god.
We really need to correct the poor quality of the history books these people never understood.
Obama’s game in re-proposing this charity tax is to simply try to hide just how insanely massive the spending gap in his budget really is. This budget needs to be cut until it balances.
I think next year, with a new congress, this federal government WILL be shut down in a stalemate over the monetary destruction caused by this ideological, and absolutely impractical, president.
Freddy on February 2, 2010 at 11:39 AM
MARXISM at its finest!
The 2nd American Revolution is underway! We must take back congress in 2010 and undo the damage this tyrant is doing!
LonelyMassRepublican on February 2, 2010 at 11:39 AM
I guess the only form of charity that Barry likes is one that he and his gubmint friends can direct to their favorite causes – never mind where the people want to donate their money.
redfoxbluestate on February 2, 2010 at 11:56 AM
ding ding ding ding….tell him what he’s won!
Exactly! If you can only get “assistance” from the gubamint, who will you look to for “help”?
ihasurnominashun on February 2, 2010 at 12:34 PM
It’s a sales tax, that completely replaces the income, business, and payroll taxes.
MarkTheGreat on February 2, 2010 at 12:37 PM
These responsibilities are few and far between.
Defense.
Law enforcement (including punishing those found guilty)
Enforcement of contracts (Many libertarians believe that this can be handled by private mediators)
That’s about it.
MarkTheGreat on February 2, 2010 at 12:39 PM
Fussing over how taxes are collected does nothing to address the problem of how those revenues are spent.
Cut government spending to the bone. Completely eliminate Marxist social programs and congressional pork projects like bridges to nowhere.
Get rid of the bullshit in how taxes are spent. How they are collected is trivial by comparison.
leereyno on February 2, 2010 at 12:45 PM
Enforcement of contracts (Many libertarians believe that this can be handled by private mediators)
I think John Gotti was a pioneer in that area.
leereyno on February 2, 2010 at 12:47 PM
It doesn’t even do THAT!
karl9000 on February 2, 2010 at 1:52 PM
Yep. The Government hates competition.
29Victor on February 2, 2010 at 2:20 PM
False Choice.
There is a third option.
And quite frankly… it’s the only option.
We can’t raise taxes enough to support this level of spending. It would be impossible to get enough revenue to cover this hole.
Chaz706 on February 2, 2010 at 2:39 PM
This comes to mind more and more every day.
Davy Crockett learned it the hard way, but at least he got it.
Chaz706 on February 2, 2010 at 2:40 PM
Idea of the decade right there.
Make our legislators work part time, and give them no salary.
Let’s see them raise taxes and deficit spend now?
Chaz706 on February 2, 2010 at 2:44 PM
I guess I better enjoy the freedom in TX while I can. Too many people ruined states like CA and decided to move here and want to change it to CA. Why come here?
Yes, it appears 0 doesn’t believe in individual charity. Has anyone heard yet where he donated the Peace prize money?
Oleta on February 2, 2010 at 4:11 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2