| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 5/29 |
| 2008/5/15 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:49957 Activity:high 66%like:49954 |
5/15 When will this windfall be taxed?
http://csua.org/u/ljk
\_ My favorite quote:
"You'd be taxing success here," Kevin Casey, Harvard's associate
vice president for government, community and public affairs
complained in a quote that will soon be framed and hung in my
office. "Over time, this would put us at a real competitive
disadvantage, which would drastically hurt the Commonwealth."
\_ Amusingly, everyone else seems to have missed this. -op
\_ Missed what? Glenn Beck is still a tool. and a troll.
I hate you for making me think about him today. You win.
\_ Missed the quote from Kevin Casey you moron.
\_ why didnt you point it out, furryboy?
\_ I figured "everyone else seems to have missed THIS"
pointing to the quote was sufficient.
\_ Yes, this is quite ironic.
\_ my brain is hurting from trying to parse this article.
Harvard == GIANT UNREGULATED HEDGE FUND!!!!!!!!!!
you know there are real live unregulated giant hedge funds
out there who do actual shady documented crap, they probably
don't concern themselves with giving out degrees.
\_ The fact that this is from Glenn Beck explains it all.
GO IRAQ WAR IT IS THE RIGHT THING!
\_ But Glenn Beck apologized for misleading America and being
a cheerleader for an incompetent and corrupt Administration.
Right?
\_ "But while their financial statements may look similar, their
missions aren't. The Gates Foundation is working to cure malaria,
develop new tuberculosis vaccines, and stop the spread of AIDS.
Most of our colleges and universities are only working to spread
the radical political views of some of their professors." Oh
that's right Glen Beck. Harvard (which he had just been writing
about a sentance earlier.) just exists to spread radical politics!
THOSE DAMN FIFTH COLUMNISTS AT HARVARD. You read this shit and
take it seriously? Do you have more braincells than God gave a
chihuahua? This dude makes the chewbacca defense seem reasonable.
\_ toy poodles are even stupider
\_ url?
\_ Yeah. Never mind the universities spend far more money on useful
research and training in engineering, fundamental sciences, life
sciences, and yes, also in medicine. Neither the views of
humanities faculties are necessarily politically radical.
I have taken 3-4 humanities courses and never felt that
the instructors were necessarily biased, much less spread
radical views (although I know such people exist). This man
discredited himself after that paragraph.
\_ yeah, whoever posted the url... glen beck is not a noted
economist. people pay attention to him. im not sure why.
he's not as mean spirited as Rush. that might be it.
\_ This windfall is even more disgusting:
http://csua.org/u/ljp (Times Online)
\_ Why is ExxonMobil's profit disgusting?
\_ It's disgusting in terms of the massive subsidies they still
get despite these sorts of profits.
\_ You're an idiot. Do you know how much they paid in taxes?
\_ Probably 35 percent on earned income, minus the
gajillion deductions any giant company with an army
of tax lawyers at their command should be claiming.
if you're talking about that recent email floating around
about how Exxon already pays 40 percent in taxes...
oh dont get me started.
if you're talking about that recent email floating
around about how Exxon already pays 40 percent in
taxes... oh dont get me started.
\_ IIRC, they paid more than 2x in taxes than they had
in profit. |
| 5/29 |
|
| csua.org/u/ljk -> www.cnn.com/2008/US/05/14/beck.collegeendowment/index.html Glenn Beck CNN Decrease font Decrease font Enlarge font Enlarge font Editor's note: "Glenn Beck" is on CNN Headline News nightly at 7 and 9 ET and hosts a conservative national radio talk show. NEW YORK (CNN) -- There is an industry in this country that is making billions in profit while average Americans are struggling to fill up their gas tanks. Glenn Beck Glenn Beck says universities should share the wealth from the tax break on their endowments. It's an industry that made an average profit of nearly 17 percent in 2007 while most Americans could barely keep up with inflation. It's an industry whose members paid a grand total of zero dollars in tax on their endowments last year. Are you ready to call on Congress to investigate or demand that a "windfall" tax be placed on these egregious profits? Well put down the phone because the industry I'm talking about is Higher Education. The top five college and university endowments reported a combined value of over $100 billion at the end of 2007. But while their financial statements may look similar, their missions aren't. The Gates Foundation is working to cure malaria, develop new tuberculosis vaccines, and stop the spread of AIDS. Most of our colleges and universities are only working to spread the radical political views of some of their professors. Let me be clear: I have absolutely no problem with Harvard or any other school having billions in cash. I have no problem with Harvard posting an unbelievable 23 percent rate of return on their money last year. I have no problem with the fact that if you project Harvard's endowment out using their historical rate of return they would have over half a TRILLION dollars in 20 years. I don't even have a problem with Harvard not paying one dime of tax on any of that money. What I do have a problem with -- and it's a big one -- is how Harvard spends that money. Or, maybe it would be more accurate to say how Harvard, doesn't spend that money. Beck's new book: 'An Inconvenient Book' Schools with large endowments (at least $500 million) reported spending an average of 44 percent of their stockpiles in 2007. Meanwhile, those same schools made an average of over 19 percent on their money. But I also have another problem, and that is how these sanctimonious institutions who are so good at complaining about the injustices of our government are nothing but really highly educated hypocrites. For what's been estimated to be about $300 million a year (less than 1 percent of their endowment's value) Harvard could completely waive tuition, room and board for every single one of their students. Instead, they announced an increase in those fees of about 35 percent for next year. Being a student at Harvard will now cost a staggering $47,215 a year. Doesn't Harvard know how many millions of Americans are struggling to afford college? Don't they want to pay their fair share and help those who are less fortunate? Some politicians in Massachusetts who can't stand to see so many billions dangling just out of their reach, have proposed a new tax on large university endowments. They don't have a cute name for it yet, so let's call it an "endowment windfall tax." Under their proposal, all endowments over a billion dollars would be taxed at 25 percent, a rate any wealthy individual or corporation would salivate over. So how did Harvard, which is basically the Exxon-Mobil of higher education (minus the accusations of price-gouging), react to that proposal? "You'd be taxing success here," Kevin Casey, Harvard's associate vice president for government, community and public affairs complained in a quote that will soon be framed and hung in my office. "Over time, this would put us at a real competitive disadvantage, which would drastically hurt the Commonwealth." These politicians aren't trying to hurt you, they're just trying to level the playing field. Greater Shrewsbury Liberal Arts Community Technical College for Women down the road is struggling and here you are making billions. If they could just redistribute some of your profits to GSLACTCFW then everybody would be happy. Does anyone else find it ironic that universities overflowing with liberal professors (a 2005 study revealed that 72 percent of professors view themselves that way) embrace conservative values only when it suits them? As a conservative, I don't believe in taxing anyone just because they have a lot of money or are an easy target. That applies to individuals, businesses and universities. I believe that taxing success discourages success, and that's not what America stands for. But I also believe in something else: consistency and accountability. And that's where most of our colleges and universities fail miserably. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the writer. |
| csua.org/u/ljp -> business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/natural_resources/article3856494.ece Profits at its chemicals division fell by 17 per cent, also because the rising oil price hit its margins. At 17 per cent, Exxon's year-on-year first-quarter profit increase was less than for key rivals, Royal Dutch Shell and BP, which this week have recorded gains of 25 per cent and 63 per cent respectively. The disappointing results will put further pressure on Exxon's senior management to address concerns raised by its shareholders about the direction of the group. In the most dramatic intervention, the company's founding Rockefeller family on Tuesday gave warning that Exxon Mobil was falling behind competitors such as BP, Shell, Conoco and Chevron in key areas of renewable energy such as wind and solar power. The family, which still owns a substantial, but undisclosed, stake called for the appointment of a new independent chairman, which it said would be the best way to shake up the senior management team. The family's proposals will be discussed, and in some cases voted on, by investors at the group's annual shareholder meeting on May 28. This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. |