Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How the Rich Reap Huge Tax Breaks From Private Nonprofits

propublica.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 284 posts

Re: How the Rich Reap Huge Tax Breaks From Private Nonprofits

#241

Post by AlbertCory »

tacticalturtle wrote: post #234
AlbertCory wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've done my research here. Now it's your turn. These people's names are all on the Charity Navigator pages I referenced. Try them on LinkedIn & other online sites. Tell us what their qualifications are, what other jobs they've held, and where they live. For bonus points: what political causes do they contribute to? Civil Service laws prohibit forcing employees to make political contributions, but those laws don't ap…

Of those 5 for Tenderloin, I see two attorneys, a general director and founder who created the clinic in the 80’s, a director of finance with 10 years of experience as an auditor prior to holding the position for 20 years. I don’t live anywhere near San Francisco, and those salaries seem entirely reasonable for being at the top of an organization that’s responsible for 1900 housing units, in tax year 2022.

Not much research there.

So: one person who might have private sector experience. And you didn't look at the biggest nonprofit. Or the potential for kickbacks from their salaries in the form of campaign contributions.

Recall that the claim was that they could make multiples of those salaries in the private sector. You're not showing much evidence for that.

And of course, the overall question is, is the City getting any value for that money?

Re: How the Rich Reap Huge Tax Breaks From Private Nonprofits

#242

Post by markdown »

t43562 wrote: post #34
markdown wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is it reasonable for society, through taxes, to take more than half of what you earn? So long as you have more than enough to live on, absolutely. If you make a billion dollars, then the govt taking 501 million is the absolute minimum that should be expected. Better they take 999 million and leave you the million dollars, as you don't need more than that to survive. Further, the only reason you made a billion was f…

The point of people being wealthy is that they get to take risks based on their judgement and we hope that benefits everyone. Without a reward nobody will take risks. Governments don't take political risks so you cannot expect them to be the sole chance takers in the economy. What we obviously don't want is people who find a way to dump risk on everyone else so that they cannot fail. Not paying a living wage is a way…

Yup. $1M/yr (the example I provided above) is a massive reward, so taxation in this way (leaving the risk taker huge rewards) is a great way to encourage entrepreneurship while ensuring a better society by using the extra money (taxed) to give him better streets, lower crime, and a better educated workforce/neighbours.

Re: How the Rich Reap Huge Tax Breaks From Private Nonprofits

#243

Post by dredmorbius »

tourmalinetaco wrote: post #4

The Hated One also did a rather informative video covering this topic: https://inv.tux.pizza/watch?v=OH4uh8cHuto

Video title "Billionaire Foundation - The Most Immoral Charity In The World "

(inv.tux.pizza is failing to work for me)

Re: How the Rich Reap Huge Tax Breaks From Private Nonprofits

#244

Post by mistermann »

PrimeMcFly wrote: post #231
mistermann wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FFS, change the intent . What is it about this topic that renders people unable to think rationally? Imagine if software was written with this quality of thinking.

> Imagine if software was written with this quality of thinking. Windows 95 startup music plays

One difference: Windows improved.

Re: How the Rich Reap Huge Tax Breaks From Private Nonprofits

#245

Post by johnnyanmac »

makeitdouble wrote: post #87
tommiegannert wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The big difference is that I can choose not to pay a company I don't like, and that's fine. Governments will happily make my life crap if I don't pay taxes. I dislike greed as much as the next person, but the monopolized incarceration powers of governments are not to be forgotten. For some services, collective funding makes sense, like having hospitals that can stop the spread of diseases, or forcing pooling of money…

> The big difference is that I can choose not to pay a company I don't like, and that's fine. Which phone company do you positively like ? Which internet operator are you paying because you want them to thrive ? How do you feel about Qualcomm and feeding them money ?

well you got 3 choices in each of those industries. Leaving a country is much harder than leaving a crappy cable company.

Re: How the Rich Reap Huge Tax Breaks From Private Nonprofits

#246

Post by johnnyanmac »

mschuster91 wrote: post #208
tommiegannert wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The big difference is that I can choose not to pay a company I don't like, and that's fine. Governments will happily make my life crap if I don't pay taxes. I dislike greed as much as the next person, but the monopolized incarceration powers of governments are not to be forgotten. For some services, collective funding makes sense, like having hospitals that can stop the spread of diseases, or forcing pooling of money…

> The big difference is that I can choose not to pay a company I don't like, and that's fine. Were capitalism regulated, I'd agree with you - however the reality is that capitalism these days has devolved into monopoly and rent seeking: Unhappy with your phone and especially internet provider? Good luck finding a new one, in most cases there is no competition at all or it's just as bad. Unhappy with your social netwo…

>Unhappy with your social network, say because there are too many Nazis and conspiracy theorists running rampant? Bad luck, no federation requirement means you'll lose all your followers and they'll lose you.

I don't know how a government would enforce this. Nor if we want them to. Yes, you will and arguably should lose your followers if you move sites, and that's because your followers are passive browsers who don't care about you specifically. None of us are Taylor Swift who will have millions follow wherever she decides to go. That's one offset of anonymity in this case.

Also kind of funny that you mention federation as an implciit solution and then complain about email.

> Unhappy with your phone or PC operating system? Good luck, in the best case you just have to buy all your applications again (if they are even available at the competitor), in the worst you'll have to live with frankly sub-par open source alternatives.

Again, yes that makes sense. you acknoledging that they have better OS's seems to be submitting that there's value in their service. Personally, I can replicate 99% of what I use on Linux and a de-Googled AOSP, but it will vary from user to user (RIP to the artists stuck in the Adobe suite). Having a better service isn't grounds for a monopoly alone, that's just plain ol' competition.

Re: How the Rich Reap Huge Tax Breaks From Private Nonprofits

#247

Post by seattle_spring »

AlbertCory wrote: post #241
tacticalturtle wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of those 5 for Tenderloin, I see two attorneys, a general director and founder who created the clinic in the 80’s, a director of finance with 10 years of experience as an auditor prior to holding the position for 20 years. I don’t live anywhere near San Francisco, and those salaries seem entirely reasonable for being at the top of an organization that’s responsible for 1900 housing units, in tax year 2022.

Not much research there. So: one person who might have private sector experience. And you didn't look at the biggest nonprofit. Or the potential for kickbacks from their salaries in the form of campaign contributions. Recall that the claim was that they could make multiples of those salaries in the private sector. You're not showing much evidence for that. And of course, the overall question is, is the City getting a…

> Recall that the claim was that they could make multiples of those salaries in the private secto

That claim was meant for professionals working for non-profits more broadly, not your hyper-specific example of 5 people.

Re: How the Rich Reap Huge Tax Breaks From Private Nonprofits

#248

Post by johnnyanmac »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #100
zo1 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's all marketing at the end of the day. But tbf, after a decade of a many public sector projects, I have first-hand seen really incompetent and wasteful actions on huge scales. Perhaps there should he a whistle blower program for reporting such things?

> incompetent and wasteful actions on huge scales As others have pointed out, this is independent of whether we're talking about the government or private sector. Regardless, when I see workers on a road crew standing around I don't think "wasted tax dollars", I think "money going back into the economy." Of course in my view of a fair society it would be a preponderance of idle, wealthy money that is going back into…

>As others have pointed out, this is independent of whether we're talking about the government or private sector.

being able to boot people is a huge difference. You could make the company millions in one month and be fired the next month by a private company, simply because it gave them an extra dollar for their quarterly earnings statement. There's an actual process for ejecting an incompetent public sector employee, to a point that it's much easier to reassign them instead. Contractors are a whole other issue as well, especially with the ways government signs contracts.

>Of course in my view of a fair society it would be a preponderance of idle, wealthy money that is going back into the economy.

that should theoretically be a function of the stock market... we all know how that ends.

Re: How the Rich Reap Huge Tax Breaks From Private Nonprofits

#249

Post by almost_usual »

dredmorbius wrote: post #238
almost_usual wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’ve got it backwards, the rich should fear the masses. There’s a reason Leland Stanford moved to Palo Alto.

What's that reason, for those presently unenlightened?

He wasn’t making many friends and his home in Nob Hill was easy to find.

Re: How the Rich Reap Huge Tax Breaks From Private Nonprofits

#250

Post by AlbertCory »

seattle_spring wrote: post #247
AlbertCory wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not much research there. So: one person who might have private sector experience. And you didn't look at the biggest nonprofit. Or the potential for kickbacks from their salaries in the form of campaign contributions. Recall that the claim was that they could make multiples of those salaries in the private sector. You're not showing much evidence for that. And of course, the overall question is, is the City getting a…

> Recall that the claim was that they could make multiples of those salaries in the private secto That claim was meant for professionals working for non-profits more broadly, not your hyper-specific example of 5 people.

Is "hyper specific" supposed to be a bad thing? These are the ones publicly disclosed. Do you know of some others?
Post reply on HN