Marvel at the beauty of Michael Moore's 10,000 sq ft summer mansion! - Page 9

**Jiro** · 11-16-2011, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

Yeah, I know. They are just trying to play semantics games. Not very good at it though.

no wonder Obama is not even bothering to campaign for 2nd term.

jillio · 11-16-2011, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeafCaroline

You clearly have no idea what the 1% is.

Not going to bother responding to you anymore. It's pointless.

It's like banging your head against a brick wall. Feels really good when you stop.

My suggestion: Just let the conservatives here ramble on and on and they end up making as big of idiots out of themselves as the Repub candidates have done in their pathethic attempts to debate.

We just need to sit back and smile.

jillio · 11-16-2011, 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

no wonder Obama is not even bothering campaigning for 2nd term.

In a recent interview with a group of journalists, President Barack Obama revealed his secret weapon for winning the election in 2012.

“I don’t think it requires us to go negative in the sense of us running a bunch of ads that are false or character assassinations,” he said. “We may just run clips of the Republican debates verbatim. We won’t even comment on them; we’ll just run those in a loop.”

Read more: Republican 2012 candidates debate and Barack Obama just smiles - Roger Simon - POLITICO.com

DeafCaroline · 11-16-2011, 03:22 PM

One can have a business and run a nonprofit - the business and the non profit would be two separate entities. There are many wealthy people who have created and set up nonprofit charities to help others while profitting from their own business enterprises not assocaited with their charities or nonprofits.

One can also set up a foundation for a nonprofit . Foundations are typically bank accounts/investment portfolios. that is allowed as well - it earns interest hence generating income for the nonprofit. so his investments would be earning income for himself and/or for his nonprofit orgs. One could give 10,000 to a student to go to school or they could invest 100,000 into a foundation earning interest that would enable more students to go to school, not just one.

There is no golden rule that one has to be impoverished in order to donate. In fact, impoverishment would make it very difficult for one to donate. If wealth gives one the ability to give more or set up a way for others to do more (feed a man a fish, he eats for one day, teach the man to fish, he'll eat for a lifetime).

There are hundreds of very wealthy people out there who donate very generously, Michael Moore is one of them. Is it his fault that people bought tickets to see his films or buy his dvds or that people paid to see him give talks? did he put a gun to their heads and make them give him money?

no.

this attempt at portraying him as some evil capitalist 1 percenter is ridiculous. He worked very hard and benefited. Good on him.

**TXgolfer** · 11-16-2011, 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

yea? let's see...

Charity Fat Cats

Lester has a problem with CEO of nonprofit organization earning $200,000 salary.

A reply -

not directly related to your post but it's part of thought process in understanding that "non-profit" is not a misnomer

The term "non-profit" as posted already, refers to the owner and shareholders being unable to make a profit personally. Not the business. At issue is whether a non-profit business can legally show a profit or earnings at the end of the year. Clearly they can.

**saywhatkid** · 11-16-2011, 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

no wonder Obama is not even bothering to campaign for 2nd term.

We could begin to refer to the Republican campaign efforts as the "Un-campaign" just for yucks. I am actually sad that the whole thing is going down this way. I really prefer going to the booth with a difficult choice.

**saywhatkid** · 11-16-2011, 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TXgolfer

The term "non-profit" as posted already, refers to the owner and shareholders being unable to make a profit personally. Not the business. At issue is whether a non-profit business can legally show a profit or earnings at the end of the year. Clearly they can.

Is profit the same as salary? Does this mean all CEOs of non profits must work for basically free?

jillio · 11-16-2011, 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saywhatkid

We could begin to refer to the Republican campaign efforts as the "Un-campaign" just for yucks. I am actually sad that the whole thing is going down this way. I really prefer going to the booth with a difficult choice.

The Un-campaign. I like that. I was going to suggest "parade of fools."

**TXgolfer** · 11-16-2011, 03:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

it's puzzling that one thinks "non-profit" is a misnomer.

if the organization is "non-profit"... then how does one expect it to finance itself? of course they are allowed to raise money such as selling tshirts, books, tickets, etc. as long as it's related to organization.

they are not allowed to make profits from activities unrelated to organization.

"raising money"
"making a profit"

The bold is incorrect. See line 30 of IRS form 990 T

**Jiro** · 11-16-2011, 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TXgolfer

The term "non-profit" as posted already, refers to the owner and shareholders being unable to make a profit personally. Not the business. At issue is whether a non-profit business can legally show a profit or earnings at the end of the year. Clearly they can.

it's clear - non-profit business does not and cannot make profit the same way that for-profit business does.

was one expecting non-profit business to offer its service and merchandises for free or something?

**TXgolfer** · 11-16-2011, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saywhatkid

Is profit the same as salary? Does this mean all CEOs of non profits must work for basically free?

Depends on how they set it up. Generally, Non-profits can have paid employees but the Board can not be paid.

**Jiro** · 11-16-2011, 03:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TXgolfer

The bold is incorrect. See line 30 of IRS form 990 T

it's taxed.

and they are not really allowed to generate profits from unrelated activities per se although it is very limited or they'll risk losing its non-profit status.... just like Mozilla in the past.

Google Makes Up 88 Percent Of Mozilla's Revenues, Threatens Its Non-Profit Status | TechCrunch

**TXgolfer** · 11-16-2011, 03:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

it's clear - non-profit business does not and cannot make profit the same way that for-profit business does.

was one expecting non-profit business to offer its service and merchandises for free or something?

That's incorrect to. They can make a profit the exact same way, but they can not distribute the profit the same way.

**saywhatkid** · 11-16-2011, 03:36 PM

Alright, thanks Tx.

jillio · 11-16-2011, 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TXgolfer

The bold is incorrect. See line 30 of IRS form 990 T

I'll do better than that. Here are the instructions for who must file a 990T and how an organization meets the criteria, along with completing and filing the form.

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/i990t.pdf

**Jiro** · 11-16-2011, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TXgolfer

That's incorrect to. They can make a profit the exact same way, but they can not distribute the profit the same way.

okie dokie

they can but can they largely depend on it?

jillio · 11-16-2011, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

okie dokie

they can but can they largely depend on it?

Get off the merry go round, Jiro. We all know they are just going in circles trying to make what they stated right somehow.

**deafskeptic** · 11-16-2011, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

attention everybody - don't bother replying. there's no reasoning with this buffoon. why bother?

amen.

kokonut · 11-16-2011, 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saywhatkid

Is profit the same as salary? Does this mean all CEOs of non profits must work for basically free?

No.

http://www.nonprofitstaffing.com/get...2010---NY.aspx

**TXgolfer** · 11-16-2011, 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

okie dokie

they can but can they largely depend on it?

Of course not, which I covered many pages ago.

**TXgolfer** · 11-16-2011, 03:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

it's taxed.

and they are not really allowed to generate profits from unrelated activities per se although it is very limited or they'll risk losing its non-profit status.... just like Mozilla in the past.

Google Makes Up 88 Percent Of Mozilla's Revenues, Threatens Its Non-Profit Status | TechCrunch

Yes that portion may be taxed.....as I said in post #135

The first $1,000 is exempt (usually)

**Jiro** · 11-16-2011, 03:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TXgolfer

Of course not, which I covered many pages ago.

ah! there we go.

in short - they do not and cannot make profit the same way that for-profit business does.

**TXgolfer** · 11-16-2011, 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

ah! there we go.

in short - they do not and cannot make profit the same way that for-profit business does.

But they do make profits and can make some of those profits in the exact same way.

At issue was whether or not a non-profit has to "zero out" at the end of the year and clearly they do not.

**Jiro** · 11-16-2011, 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TXgolfer

But they do make profits and can make some of those profits in the exact same way.

but.... they would lose their non-profit status if they do exactly same way

Quote:

Originally Posted by TXgolfer

At issue was whether or not a non-profit has to "zero out" at the end of the year and clearly they do not.

that's your issue with other ADer, not me.

**saywhatkid** · 11-16-2011, 04:07 PM

Lots of non-profits seem to spend 50% of revenue on fund raising. I cannot count the number of offers for free items I get in the mail, if I will contribute a minimal amount. How much goes to the actual cause?

**TXgolfer** · 11-16-2011, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

but.... they would lose their non-profit status if they do exactly same way

.

Not necessarily

Quote:

Unrelated Business Income Defined

For most organizations, an activity is an unrelated business (and subject to unrelated business income tax) if it meets three requirements:

It is a trade or business,
It is regularly carried on, and
It is not substantially related to furthering the exempt purpose of the organization.

There are, however, a number of modifications, exclusions, and exceptions to the general definition of unrelated business income.

Unrelated Business Income Defined

Quote:

Unrelated Business Income Tax Exceptions and Exclusions

The Internal Revenue Code contains a number of modifications, exclusions, and exceptions to unrelated business income. For example, dividends, interest, certain other investment income, royalties, certain rental income, certain income from research activities, and gains or losses from the disposition of property are excluded when computing unrelated business income. In addition, the following activities are specifically excluded from the definition of unrelated trade or business:

Volunteer Labor: Any trade or business is excluded in which substantially all the work is performed for the organization without compensation. Some fundraising activities, such as volunteer operated bake sales, may meet this exception.

Convenience of Members: Any trade or business is excluded that is carried on by an organization described in section 501(c)(3) or by a governmental college or university primarily for the convenience of its members, students, patients, officers, or employees. A typical example of this is a school cafeteria.

Selling Donated Merchandise: Any trade or business is excluded that consists of selling merchandise, substantially all of which the organization received as gifts or contributions. Many thrift shop operations of exempt organizations would meet this exception.

Bingo: Certain bingo games are not unrelated trade or business.

Unrelated Business Income Tax Exceptions and Exclusions

**TWA** · 11-16-2011, 04:26 PM

Once again, the conservatives have turned an inherently ridiculous thread into a rhetorical bastard child of Karl Rove and Frank Lutz.

The REAL issue here is that DaveM made/implied a fallacious claim that MM used the money from his foundation to build his luxury home and that MM somehow generates personal income from his foundation. Unless MM is a criminal or knows some pretty nifty tax loopholes, WE ALL KNOW THAT ISN'T TRUE.

This whole argument that nonprofits make profits is a laughable semantic dance of strawmen. Nobody ever said nonprofits don't make money or raise funds, but there is a reason it's called a "nonprofit." Let's just quit kidding ourselves here.

**Jiro** · 11-16-2011, 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TXgolfer

Not necessarily

Unrelated Business Income Defined

Unrelated Business Income Tax Exceptions and Exclusions

from your link -

Quote:

It is not substantially related to furthering the exempt purpose of the organization.

and that alone basically proved my point as well as debunked DaveM's and pundit's claims that Michael Moore used money from his foundation for his personal gain such as buying this enormous mansion.

kokonut · 11-16-2011, 04:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheWriteAlex

Once again, the conservatives have turned an inherently ridiculous thread into a rhetorical bastard child of Karl Rove and Frank Lutz.

The REAL issue here is that DaveM made/implied a fallacious claim that MM used the money from his foundation to build his luxury home and that MM somehow generates personal income from his foundation. Unless MM is a criminal or knows some pretty nifty tax loopholes, WE ALL KNOW THAT ISN'T TRUE.

This whole argument that nonprofits make profits is a laughable semantic dance of strawmen. Nobody ever said nonprofits don't make money or raise funds, but there is a reason it's called a "nonprofit." Let's just quit kidding ourselves here.

Ok, but is Michael Moore a "1 percenter"?

***naisho*** · 11-16-2011, 04:55 PM

If we can define a minimum it takes to be a 1%, then we can get somewhere with the argument.

Personally, I'd say Moore used to be the 99% until he made cash on his docs and books. That's how he made it into the 1%.

So he's not actually someone who grew up in the 1%, he's someone from the 99% who made it into the 1% from his business venues.

11-16-2011, 03:22 PM	#244 (permalink)
DeafCaroline Registered User Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 4,889	One can have a business and run a nonprofit - the business and the non profit would be two separate entities. There are many wealthy people who have created and set up nonprofit charities to help others while profitting from their own business enterprises not assocaited with their charities or nonprofits. One can also set up a foundation for a nonprofit . Foundations are typically bank accounts/investment portfolios. that is allowed as well - it earns interest hence generating income for the nonprofit. so his investments would be earning income for himself and/or for his nonprofit orgs. One could give 10,000 to a student to go to school or they could invest 100,000 into a foundation earning interest that would enable more students to go to school, not just one. There is no golden rule that one has to be impoverished in order to donate. In fact, impoverishment would make it very difficult for one to donate. If wealth gives one the ability to give more or set up a way for others to do more (feed a man a fish, he eats for one day, teach the man to fish, he'll eat for a lifetime). There are hundreds of very wealthy people out there who donate very generously, Michael Moore is one of them. Is it his fault that people bought tickets to see his films or buy his dvds or that people paid to see him give talks? did he put a gun to their heads and make them give him money? no. this attempt at portraying him as some evil capitalist 1 percenter is ridiculous. He worked very hard and benefited. Good on him. jillio and deafskeptic like this.

11-16-2011, 03:36 PM	#254 (permalink)
saywhatkid Emerging from the sun Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: In space Posts: 7,242 Blog Entries: 2	Alright, thanks Tx. __________________ "Be faithful in small things because it is in them that your strength lies." ~ Mother Teresa

11-16-2011, 04:07 PM	#265 (permalink)
saywhatkid Emerging from the sun Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: In space Posts: 7,242 Blog Entries: 2	Lots of non-profits seem to spend 50% of revenue on fund raising. I cannot count the number of offers for free items I get in the mail, if I will contribute a minimal amount. How much goes to the actual cause? __________________ "Be faithful in small things because it is in them that your strength lies." ~ Mother Teresa

11-16-2011, 04:26 PM	#267 (permalink)
TWA Premium Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 5,374	Once again, the conservatives have turned an inherently ridiculous thread into a rhetorical bastard child of Karl Rove and Frank Lutz. The REAL issue here is that DaveM made/implied a fallacious claim that MM used the money from his foundation to build his luxury home and that MM somehow generates personal income from his foundation. Unless MM is a criminal or knows some pretty nifty tax loopholes, WE ALL KNOW THAT ISN'T TRUE. This whole argument that nonprofits make profits is a laughable semantic dance of strawmen. Nobody ever said nonprofits don't make money or raise funds, but there is a reason it's called a "nonprofit." Let's just quit kidding ourselves here. DeafCaroline likes this.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Today
Deafness	Sponsored Links __________________ This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members. Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com

11-16-2011, 04:55 PM	#270 (permalink)
*naisho* Forum Disorders M.D.,Ph.D Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: 127.0.0.1 Posts: 6,162	If we can define a minimum it takes to be a 1%, then we can get somewhere with the argument. Personally, I'd say Moore used to be the 99% until he made cash on his docs and books. That's how he made it into the 1%. So he's not actually someone who grew up in the 1%, he's someone from the 99% who made it into the 1% from his business venues.