Welfare for the wealthy.

[MrFun]

I thought this video was insightful and informative.

[Sava]

TLDW

[Al B. Sure!]

I skimmed through the video on mute. Nice graphic design. It will impress people into thinking whatever is being said is that much more meaningful and well-sourced. Creative graphics are like a British accent for intellectual window-dressing.

We need this sort of creativity to popularize the conservative agenda.

[loinburger]

[100% Wolf]

The only concrete examples of "welfare for the wealthy" that the video provided were the fact that Wal-Mart's employees receive public assistance, and the fact that mortgages are tax deductible. In other words, welfare for the poor and not taxing the rich has been redefined as welfare for the rich.

[Hauldren Collider]

Actual examples of "welfare" for the wealthy:

Health insurance tax deduction
Home mortgage tax deduction
College education tax deduction

These aren't actually welfare per se but they have a similar (though not identical) effect as redistributing from the poor to the rich.

Borderline case is the tax deduction for charitable donations, largely because of the expansive definition of "charity" which includes things patronized only by rich people such as orchestras or art museums.

[Kidlicious]

These aren't actually welfare per se but they have a similar (though not identical) effect as redistributing from the poor to the rich.

Must resist urge to help stupid people I don't agree with.
Resisting urge to help stupid conservatives.

[100% Wolf]

What evidence is there that the tax deductions for charitable donations cause a significant increase in donations?

[Al B. Sure!]

What evidence is there that the tax deductions for charitable donations cause a significant increase in donations?

Depends what you mean by significant but basic rationality indicates tax deductions incentivize charitable giving.

[100% Wolf]

Depends what you mean by significant but basic rationality indicates tax deductions incentivize charitable giving.

Al, "basic rationality" only indicates that tax deductions don't lead to less charitable giving. If for every dollar in tax deductions you gave out, you only got ten cents of additional charitable giving, would this really be considered efficient? If you think the government should promote the non-profit sector why don't you just offer every taxpayer a voucher that they can donate to the non-profit(s) of their choice?

[Ben Kenobi]

The problem is that it's easy enough for the IRS to deny charitable status for organizations that they don't like. This makes it a subsidy for organizations that wouldn't be able to operate on their own. I don't think I've donated to any organization that the IRS or canadian equivalent, provides charitable tax status, (although I have worked for some in the past).

[100% Wolf]

Wow, Ben actually made a good point for once.

[Al B. Sure!]

Al, "basic rationality" only indicates that tax deductions don't lead to less charitable giving. If for every dollar in tax deductions you gave out, you only got ten cents of additional charitable giving, would this really be considered efficient? If you think the government should promote the non-profit sector why don't you just offer every taxpayer a voucher that they can donate to the non-profit(s) of their choice?

I'm not saying it's the best way of doing it. I'm only saying et ceteris paribus there will be more charitable giving with a tax code that incentivizes it than in one that doesn't at all.

[MrFun]

The only concrete examples of "welfare for the wealthy" that the video provided were the fact that Wal-Mart's employees receive public assistance, and the fact that mortgages are tax deductible. In other words, welfare for the poor and not taxing the rich has been redefined as welfare for the rich.

True. The video could have provided at least a couple more examples of welfare for the wealthy.

[100% Wolf]

Yes, they certainly cold have provided a few more than zero examples.