41–50 of 74 posts
You mean hes reallocating 36M of his taxes usually paid, as write offs to the Houston Relief
> You mean hes reallocating 36M of his taxes usually paid It sounds like you've never made a charitable donation under the American tax code. A dollar donated isn't a dollar saved. A dollar donated is (1-marginal tax rate) dollars saved.
Sincere props to Michael Dell and other very wealthy individuals who are donating generously, but it raises the question of why this sort of gesture is even necessary in our society. Making people financially whole and getting them back on their feet in the aftermath of a disaster of these proportions should be handled by insurance, and when that falls short, the government. The problem is not that the money is priva…
I'm not sure what to think of that attitude. I understand the motivation, but I find this statement particularly odd: > donation relies on the compassion of individuals, not on laws. It would be odd to expect laws to be more compassionate on average than all the individuals under the laws, particularly in an ostensibly democratic society. Yet I can think of several plausible reasons to expect laws to be less compassi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Farenthold's reporting covers it quite extensively
Link?
But there are others as well.. he won the pulitzer for his reporting on this
Sincere props to Michael Dell and other very wealthy individuals who are donating generously, but it raises the question of why this sort of gesture is even necessary in our society. Making people financially whole and getting them back on their feet in the aftermath of a disaster of these proportions should be handled by insurance, and when that falls short, the government. The problem is not that the money is priva…
Congress tried reforming it back in '12, but unreformed it after they reformed it because "premiums were getting too dear" (and congress always seeking re-election, got cold feet and again undercharges). Now flood insurance is $25B under (before calculating Harvey in to the mix).
If the government were to do the right thing, they would ease up on subsidizing these homes over 50 years (so people don't suffer catastrophic asset loss) but at the same time discourage new development (in the floodplain) from enjoying the same perks.
Encourage new development to take place in non flood plains.
Sincere props to Michael Dell and other very wealthy individuals who are donating generously, but it raises the question of why this sort of gesture is even necessary in our society. Making people financially whole and getting them back on their feet in the aftermath of a disaster of these proportions should be handled by insurance, and when that falls short, the government. The problem is not that the money is priva…
The problem is not that the money is private, but that it's donation relies on the compassion of individuals, not on laws. As it should be. Generosity should not be forced on people via fear of the law (i.e the consequences for not paying your taxes). Even further, a private citizen is often far more in control of the effective distribution of their resources as compared to government.
Want to help victims in Texas floodplains? Disadvantaged youth? AIDS in Africa?
It's your choice.
A nonprofit uses its money like crap? Or uses it in ways you don't agree with? Give to a more effective one.
It's your choice.
It's very hard to choose what the government will do with your assets. It's much easier to choose what a charity will do.
Sincere props to Michael Dell and other very wealthy individuals who are donating generously, but it raises the question of why this sort of gesture is even necessary in our society. Making people financially whole and getting them back on their feet in the aftermath of a disaster of these proportions should be handled by insurance, and when that falls short, the government. The problem is not that the money is priva…
The problem caused by flooding is exacerbated or at least continued by government subsidies in the first place. Flood insurance it too cheap, especially in flood plains (Houston being one such). Moreover, the floodplain prairie is paved over diminishing the capacity of the floodplain itself to absorb water. Congress tried reforming it back in '12, but unreformed it after they reformed it because "premiums were gettin…
Texas says it wants less government. The people there keep joking about independence (I'm talking sincere middle aged wasp men, not some edgy teen). Personally, I think the federal government should be involved in the immediate disaster relief and that's about it. No tax discount for buying a new car, new house, renovation, nothing. No federal money for reconstruction. Let Texas state government ask for the money it needs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where do you think the foundation gets its money? http://philanthropynewsdigest.org/news/michael-and-susan-del...
But Trump allegedly doesn't donate to his own foundation unlike the Dell's or the Gate's foundations.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem caused by flooding is exacerbated or at least continued by government subsidies in the first place. Flood insurance it too cheap, especially in flood plains (Houston being one such). Moreover, the floodplain prairie is paved over diminishing the capacity of the floodplain itself to absorb water. Congress tried reforming it back in '12, but unreformed it after they reformed it because "premiums were gettin…
Wait but if we discourage further development in the flood plains, we just have existing property owners a huge gift because their property values soar. Texas says it wants less government. The people there keep joking about independence (I'm talking sincere middle aged wasp men, not some edgy teen). Personally, I think the federal government should be involved in the immediate disaster relief and that's about it. No…
But the proposed insurance would become less affordable over time (tapering off the subsidy), off-setting the increased value due to scarcity.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wait but if we discourage further development in the flood plains, we just have existing property owners a huge gift because their property values soar. Texas says it wants less government. The people there keep joking about independence (I'm talking sincere middle aged wasp men, not some edgy teen). Personally, I think the federal government should be involved in the immediate disaster relief and that's about it. No…
>Wait but if we discourage further development in the flood plains, we just have existing property owners a huge gift because their property values soar. But the proposed insurance would become less affordable over time (tapering off the subsidy), off-setting the increased value due to scarcity.