Introduction:
Some years ago, a well known political type made an across-the-board “FLAT TAX” call the centerpiece of his campaign and the idea went down to a “watery grave” as it did NOT take root. While this is not the same concept as proposed by that individual, it has as its basis, tax-payment from the wealthiest of not-for-profit institutions that sit on funds in excess of billions squirreled away in endowments and other foundational type trusts doing nothing meaningful but collecting cobwebs (adding interest), while avoiding tax payments of any type that could go to assist the blight in the neighborhoods of some of the communities in the cities where they operate from that could certainly benefit from the additional resources taxes from such institutions would bring to uplift the neediest of those in their “backyards”. This post is about tax payment from all who can afford it because unless such types also pay their “fair” share of taxes, how can problems such as the non tax-paying “free loaders” as discussed on the pages if this Blog in posts such as THE METHODS OF“FREE LOADERS” - UPDATED, be seriously addressed, please follow.
Here are Some details of Interest:
One of the main venues via, which the wealthiest of those in our societies avoid tax payments is via such vehicles as foundations, in, which huge amount are piled up untaxed, while only paying “lip service” on paper to the causes they are purporting to be in existence to address. The only purpose such foundations really serve is to promote the names of those in whose names they have been established, such as for example, the fictional “Hill And Drucinda Bates Foundation”, which sits on a treasure chest of funds in excess of $30 billion that everyone knows is owned by the extra ordinarily wealthy type mogul Hilliard Bates who hides his huge fortune in this vehicle to avoid tax payment, via the smoke and mirrors tactic of saying “at least on paper” that he intends to “give away” his fortune “in his lifetime”. The ONLY cause such foundations really serve is to promote the names of those for whom they are established, WHILE PAYING NO TAXES. The other example of such a foundation is that of a family with a “famous” name, the Hoard Foundation with its approximately $11 billion in assets and only really promoting the name of those who identify with this famous name period. The other example of this type of “legal” tax dodging is practiced by some not for profit institutions of higher learning, which have endowments worth many billions yet pay no taxes in the communities in, which they operate even if seriously “blighted” conditions exists in some of the neighborhoods of cities in, which they operate from. Take for example the case of that fictional “darling” of the ivy league institutions, Hale University of Novel Haven, CT with its in excess of $25 billion endowment and profit centers owned by this entity such as its well known hospital that bears its name, yet because of a complicated tax avoidance scheme worked out with its base city Novel Haven that is centuries old, this institution avoids tax payments that could certainly go to alleviating some of the disgraceful conditions existing in the inner city neighborhoods of its base city that is in reality an outgrowth of this ivy league institution with its pricey tuition. Such scenarios are a travesty to the cities they operate from many with unacceptable conditions existing in their neighborhoods not too distant from the operations of these notable institutions, which close their eyes (or wear blinders) to avoid seeing the many problems these inner city face not to mention the notoriously high crime rates faced by those who live by “combating” such serious conditions on a daily basis to work at menial jobs that are available to the most courageous who dare to deal with such situations in order to enter the service entrances of such institutions.
The Conclusion:
Who can say for certain that if these entities, which could afford to pay taxes on those “profit making” parts of these institutions in part or generally on all parts of their operations in case of those in excess of “X” billions that some of the “blighted” conditions faced by those who “dare” to live in the inner city neighborhoods by reason of heritage only of some of the cities in, which these institutions exists that these resources could not be devoted towards the eliminating of some of the decay found not too far from the doors of these notable institutions. Therefore, rather than an across the board “FLAT TAX” let it be in the form of a taxation of these so called philanthropic institutions that only serve to publicize the names of those whom such institutions brandish while conveying the image of alleviating “hunger” in third world countries that never appears to be improving in spite of the “best” efforts of such types. If instead, taxes could be raised from these entities with in excess of, for example $1 billion in assets, far more beneficial effects could be realized to reduce decay in the most urgently needed neighborhoods, which foster conditions most would not dare live in yet they are “tolerated” in the communities not too far from these institutions.
In my opinion, the benefits of such added resources would outweigh the impact of having resources taken away from such entities just collecting interest and devoted to improving conditions in their host city neighborhoods. Such improving conditions would in turn draw more investment that would then be adding jobs instead of such neighborhoods facing lack of opportunities for their youth and exploding crime and pregnancy rates that all but scare away such resources. Those types associated with such entities would no longer have to “fear” walking in the very neighborhoods surrounding their institutions’ locations even in daylight not too far from their operations doors. This in my opinion would be real “fresh” "innovativeness" and “going further” to assist those whom is in their abilities to assist through tax payment rather than going half way round the globe with a microscope looking for causes to “help” alleviate that never go away in spite of the Funds “spent” in the aid of such efforts by these institutions.
Then with the problem of tax payment of these types of tax avoiders “fixed” by those who can afford to do better, THE SCOURGE OF THE NON TAX PAYERS, THOSE “FREE LOADERS” ALONG WITH THE ASSOCIATED SOCIETAL PROBLEMS THEY BRING as discussed and referenced on the Pages of this Blog in item # 11 of the listing in post THE“FREE LOADERS CAUSE” CREDIBILITY”, THIS STORY IS NOW TOLD - UPDATED, could be addressed, because its not possible to fix one scenario without addressing the other, after all only "fairness".
Some years ago, a well known political type made an across-the-board “FLAT TAX” call the centerpiece of his campaign and the idea went down to a “watery grave” as it did NOT take root. While this is not the same concept as proposed by that individual, it has as its basis, tax-payment from the wealthiest of not-for-profit institutions that sit on funds in excess of billions squirreled away in endowments and other foundational type trusts doing nothing meaningful but collecting cobwebs (adding interest), while avoiding tax payments of any type that could go to assist the blight in the neighborhoods of some of the communities in the cities where they operate from that could certainly benefit from the additional resources taxes from such institutions would bring to uplift the neediest of those in their “backyards”. This post is about tax payment from all who can afford it because unless such types also pay their “fair” share of taxes, how can problems such as the non tax-paying “free loaders” as discussed on the pages if this Blog in posts such as THE METHODS OF“FREE LOADERS” - UPDATED, be seriously addressed, please follow.
Here are Some details of Interest:
One of the main venues via, which the wealthiest of those in our societies avoid tax payments is via such vehicles as foundations, in, which huge amount are piled up untaxed, while only paying “lip service” on paper to the causes they are purporting to be in existence to address. The only purpose such foundations really serve is to promote the names of those in whose names they have been established, such as for example, the fictional “Hill And Drucinda Bates Foundation”, which sits on a treasure chest of funds in excess of $30 billion that everyone knows is owned by the extra ordinarily wealthy type mogul Hilliard Bates who hides his huge fortune in this vehicle to avoid tax payment, via the smoke and mirrors tactic of saying “at least on paper” that he intends to “give away” his fortune “in his lifetime”. The ONLY cause such foundations really serve is to promote the names of those for whom they are established, WHILE PAYING NO TAXES. The other example of such a foundation is that of a family with a “famous” name, the Hoard Foundation with its approximately $11 billion in assets and only really promoting the name of those who identify with this famous name period. The other example of this type of “legal” tax dodging is practiced by some not for profit institutions of higher learning, which have endowments worth many billions yet pay no taxes in the communities in, which they operate even if seriously “blighted” conditions exists in some of the neighborhoods of cities in, which they operate from. Take for example the case of that fictional “darling” of the ivy league institutions, Hale University of Novel Haven, CT with its in excess of $25 billion endowment and profit centers owned by this entity such as its well known hospital that bears its name, yet because of a complicated tax avoidance scheme worked out with its base city Novel Haven that is centuries old, this institution avoids tax payments that could certainly go to alleviating some of the disgraceful conditions existing in the inner city neighborhoods of its base city that is in reality an outgrowth of this ivy league institution with its pricey tuition. Such scenarios are a travesty to the cities they operate from many with unacceptable conditions existing in their neighborhoods not too distant from the operations of these notable institutions, which close their eyes (or wear blinders) to avoid seeing the many problems these inner city face not to mention the notoriously high crime rates faced by those who live by “combating” such serious conditions on a daily basis to work at menial jobs that are available to the most courageous who dare to deal with such situations in order to enter the service entrances of such institutions.
The Conclusion:
Who can say for certain that if these entities, which could afford to pay taxes on those “profit making” parts of these institutions in part or generally on all parts of their operations in case of those in excess of “X” billions that some of the “blighted” conditions faced by those who “dare” to live in the inner city neighborhoods by reason of heritage only of some of the cities in, which these institutions exists that these resources could not be devoted towards the eliminating of some of the decay found not too far from the doors of these notable institutions. Therefore, rather than an across the board “FLAT TAX” let it be in the form of a taxation of these so called philanthropic institutions that only serve to publicize the names of those whom such institutions brandish while conveying the image of alleviating “hunger” in third world countries that never appears to be improving in spite of the “best” efforts of such types. If instead, taxes could be raised from these entities with in excess of, for example $1 billion in assets, far more beneficial effects could be realized to reduce decay in the most urgently needed neighborhoods, which foster conditions most would not dare live in yet they are “tolerated” in the communities not too far from these institutions.
In my opinion, the benefits of such added resources would outweigh the impact of having resources taken away from such entities just collecting interest and devoted to improving conditions in their host city neighborhoods. Such improving conditions would in turn draw more investment that would then be adding jobs instead of such neighborhoods facing lack of opportunities for their youth and exploding crime and pregnancy rates that all but scare away such resources. Those types associated with such entities would no longer have to “fear” walking in the very neighborhoods surrounding their institutions’ locations even in daylight not too far from their operations doors. This in my opinion would be real “fresh” "innovativeness" and “going further” to assist those whom is in their abilities to assist through tax payment rather than going half way round the globe with a microscope looking for causes to “help” alleviate that never go away in spite of the Funds “spent” in the aid of such efforts by these institutions.
Then with the problem of tax payment of these types of tax avoiders “fixed” by those who can afford to do better, THE SCOURGE OF THE NON TAX PAYERS, THOSE “FREE LOADERS” ALONG WITH THE ASSOCIATED SOCIETAL PROBLEMS THEY BRING as discussed and referenced on the Pages of this Blog in item # 11 of the listing in post THE“FREE LOADERS CAUSE” CREDIBILITY”, THIS STORY IS NOW TOLD - UPDATED, could be addressed, because its not possible to fix one scenario without addressing the other, after all only "fairness".
No comments:
Post a Comment