Is Giving to Your Favored Religion Charity?

[Wezil]

How is preaching not giving to needy people?

JM

That's what I was talking about.

If it can't be separated out then tax it all.

[Ben Kenobi]

The church would account for it as income and pay taxes accordingly at the end of the year. It's not difficult.

What income? There's no paper trail to record they ever received the c-note.

[kentonio]

What income? There's no paper trail to record they ever received the c-note.

So you're saying that churches are inherently dishonest institutions that would attempt to conceal donations in their tax returns?

[Felch]

No. Almost none of the money given to most Churches ends up getting used to help actual needy people. Most of the money religious groups extort from the faithful go to pay staff, the mortgage, and things like utilities. If you actually want to help the needy then ditch the pig in the middle which sucks up the vast majority of the funds (without helping the needy) and donate directly to real charities.

Make religious groups pay taxes just like everyone else and end their free riding.

Do you think "real" charities don't have overhead?

[Ben Kenobi]

So you're saying that churches are inherently dishonest institutions that would attempt to conceal donations in their tax returns?

What's dishonest about receiving a donation and then using that money to help needy people? Isn't that how charity should work - zero overhead?

[DinoDoc]

What is a real charity anyway?

[kentonio]

What's dishonest about receiving a donation and then using that money to help needy people? Isn't that how charity should work - zero overhead?

What exactly would a Catholic know about zero overheads? Have you seen that humble little place the Pope lives?

[Ben Kenobi]

What exactly would a Catholic know about zero overheads? Have you seen that humble little place the Pope lives?

I'm going to take this as a yes to my previous question.

See, you don't really believe in zero overheads, since you would require charities that you don't like to have an accountant and you want to tax them. That's significant overhead.

Also, still no list of Kentonio approved charities. Gosh, maybe he doesn't actually donate to any charities at all. Quel surprise.

[kentonio]

I'm going to take this as a yes to my previous question.

Running a charity with zero overheads would be lovely if it wasn't completely impractical and inefficient.

See, you don't really believe in zero overheads, since you would require charities that you don't like to have an accountant and you want to tax them. That's significant overhead.

I don't believe in zero overheads, because no-one has zero overheads. The idea is stupid. The difference between us is that my definition of a charity does not include funding your god bothering.

Also, still no list of Kentonio approved charities.

Yes Ben, I'll certainly sit down and list every charity in the world which I approve of, for no real reason and despite it having nothing to do with anything we've talked about. It amuses me that you think repeating something that makes no sense means you're winning.

Gosh, maybe he doesn't actually donate to any charities at all. Quel surprise.

I don't make regular donations to charities, just every now and again. So what? I live in a country where we don't need charity to keep people alive.

[Kidlicious]

Because saying nice things to people shouldn't qualify you for tax deductions?

The question is why tax saying nice things to people. It would be more reasonable if you were suggesting a tax on saying mean things.

[Ben Kenobi]

Running a charity with zero overheads would be lovely if it wasn't completely impractical and inefficient.

Wouldn't charities be more efficient if they weren't paying a portion of their donations to taxes? If it's charity efficiency that you support then it stands to reason that you would support maintaining charitable status for all charities, not taking it away from those you hate.

The difference between us is that my definition of a charity does not include funding your god bothering.

Ah, so you'd rather force the God botherers to fund the things you like. Gotcha. No hypocrisy there.

Yes Ben, I'll certainly sit down and list every charity in the world which I approve of, for no real reason and despite it having nothing to do with anything

You've stated there are 'real' Charities and 'unreal' Charities. Hence the question - which charities ought to qualify? You've dodged the question as to which charities you believe are legitimate.

I live in a country where we don't need charity to keep people alive.

So why then not ban charities outright?

[-Jrabbit]

I believe all churches should be taxed, like any other business.

If churches were taxed, L. Ron Hubbard wound never have started Scientology. The same is likely true for several other cults.

[giblets]

Wouldn't he make more money selling complete crap, even if he has to pay taxes, then he would selling something useful?

[Dinner]

How is preaching not giving to needy people?

JM

For the exact same reason that posting on this forum is not giving to the needy.

[Dinner]

What income? There's no paper trail to record they ever received the c-note.

Al Capone thought that way once. I bet he was sorry when he got convicted for tax fraud. Personally, I think the world could be greatly improved by locking up a few more fraudulent preachers. Do the crime, do the time and all that.

BTW you could make the same claims about any cash business (and there are lots of them) but eventually there always is a tell-tale paper trail going some where. Money doesn't appear out of thin air so if they're only accounting for $X income but are continuously spending $X + $Y then that begs the question of where the Y is coming from and why they're not declaring it on their tax forms. Forensic Accountants do this all the time.