Eliminate limits on giving

With Barack Obama’s tax plan looking like a reality, the wealthy should be prepared to foot a larger percentage of the tax bill. The wealthy aren’t happy because they feel like they already pay more than their fair share and, for some, they would just like to have some control over how their money is spent.

Why not eliminate the limits on tax deductions for charitable contributions? Currently, there are limits on giving based on income. If eliminated, we might see a huge influx of money pouring into charities.

Some might argue the wealthy would support projects like the Performing Arts Center, not directly helping the less fortunate. This is where government could step in and designate a list of acceptable charitable organizations. Certainly there would be much debate on what organizations should be on the approved list.

Others will argue that the wealthy would contribute more just to avoid paying taxes, and that could be the case. But if it helps those less fortunate, isn’t that what Obama’s plan is all about?

This might mean the government has fewer tax dollars, so they would have to do what many of us are already doing: live on less.

Steve Johnson
Shawnee

Comments

[Engineer]

Pub 17
I have read both Adam Smiths, the original and the one you mention, If I remember right, that guy turned out to be something of a flake in his following writings.

[Engineer]

Pub 17
They won't flee, they will just modify their behavior. There undoubtedly are some who fit your description. But almost none of the "money men" I have known do. For most of those that I have known, the reaction will be to hunker down and play them close to the vest.

[Pub 17]

Engineer-
Utter nonsense. The idea that the response of risk-taking behavior to return is a linear function is indefensible. Read Adam Smith (the other one) in The Money Game from years back-risk-takers will play for buttons, for chits, for cigarettes. True risk-takers can't live without the game. And as I've asked elsewhere today, where do you think all the high rollers are going to flee to if we (gasp) revert to pre-Bush tax rates--Europe? Russia? South America?

[Engineer]

solomon
They are not enemies, but they are largely subsidized. A large portion of their share of the costs of government is borne by others. They also get checks from the IRS (EITC) and other concessions, If we increase their subsidy by additional treasury checks we decrease their incentive to progress.

[Engineer]

Pub 17
You will see behavior modification. It will be most pronounced in risk takers. You decrease the possible rewards, you decrease the reasons for risk taking.

[solomon]

thanks 34/2,

Had never heard of it but will tune in. Nov 7 was a riot.

[Pub 17]

solomon-
If you haven't been following the adventures of Lucky Duck in Tom the Dancing Bug, you owe yourself.

[solomon]

We all know that the true enemies of this country are the married couples with two children and a combined income of 35k. The clog our school systems, sell us our burgers, lottery tickets and gasoline while not "paying" any federal income tax.

[Jim]

Yes you heard it here, folks. The only hard working people in America are fat cat millionaires. The people who work their behinds off to clear $50k or $100k or anything like that, well they're just looking for a handout diguised as a tax cut. Cutting taxes on anyone worth less than a few million is welfare and socialism, dontcha know.

It's hilarious watching the very people who have blathered on for years about how huge tax cuts are the answer for everything now oppose cutting taxes. They walk among us.

[Pub 17]

Then those who strive and accomplish can pack up and leave for friendlier climes if they feel all oppressed and depressed and p.o.'d that they won't be able to get into that Bugatti Veyron this year. Where do you think they'll split for, Gary? Europe? Naw, they're all socialists. Russia? Naw, it's no fun being a capitalist when you can't leave the house without an armed guard. Africa? China? South America? Antarctica?

[Gary]

"With Barack Obama’s tax plan looking like a reality, the wealthy should be prepared to foot a larger percentage of the tax bill." Not quite. Obama proposes to tax those with higher incomes. However, "wealth" is a measure of net worth, not income. The tax burden will fall on those who strive and accomplish, while the truly wealthy (Obama funders, by and large) will not be bothered.