|
The "Goracle" (pg. 9)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Q5echo |
| quote: | Originally posted by ResonantDrag
so is cheney moving to Dubai as well in 2008? |
cute. |
|
|
| Shakka |
| quote: | Originally posted by occrider
He's not advocating radical environemntalism whereby people give up their lifestyles and embrace trees... |
You and Opus have been pulling this strawman throughout this thread. Who on the other side of this argument has explicitly called for anyting like radical environmentalism. All I've said about the matter is that if Gore really wanted to make his point then taking more radical steps would greatly enhance his cause. However, I can't recall anyone saying he should take a pogo stick to work. However, Al has CERTAINLY suggested people change their lifestyles (as any well intentioned environmentalist should). That is near the heart of the entire issue. |
|
|
| ResonantDrag |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
regardless of whether he draws an income as chairman (he prolly should and does), he purchases his carbon offsets from himself through a "transaction designed to boost his company's investments" and return a profit to his shareholders, i.e. himself.
= tax scam. |
okay, i think you've spun yourself dizzy.
if the company in question was a for-profit corporation, what you're saying would be true.
in a non-profit there are stakeholders (people who have a moral investment), not shareholders. regardless how the company does, the board of directors do not receive any stock dividends because NON-PROFITS DO NOT HAVE STOCKS!!! you will not find this company on the DOW or NASDAQ.
the tax sheltering you're referring to is what Cheney is doing while he's securing contracts with Haliburton. Though he cannot earn more than X dollars while in the vice-presidency, this is taxable earnings. So what does he do? he donates Y dollars to charity, bringing his income down to X, people like you declare him a humanitarian and he cashes in when he leaves washington.
| quote: | | "transaction designed to boost his company's investments" and return a profit to his shareholders, i.e. himself. |
hence the "is Cheney moving to Dubai" comment, 'o Captain Double Standard |
|
|
| Shakka |
| quote: | Originally posted by ResonantDrag
if the company in question was a for-profit corporation, what you're saying would be true.
in a non-profit there are stakeholders (people who have a moral investment), not shareholders. regardless how the company does, the board of directors do not receive any stock dividends because NON-PROFITS DO NOT HAVE STOCKS!!! you will not find this company on the DOW or NASDAQ. |
Rather it makes no sense for a non-profit company to trade publicly because investors SEEK profit. Nobody would want to buy something that has no way of enhancing shareholder value. Not to mention the costs of being a public company and complying with Sarbox, etc is a cost I'd imagine no sane non-profit would want to deal with. However, that doesn't mean unethical behavior magically becomes ethical by virtue of not having a shareholder base. |
|
|
| ResonantDrag |
| quote: | Originally posted by Shakka
Rather it makes no sense for a non-profit company to trade publicly because investors SEEK profit. |
AHHHH! when will this mad, crazy merry-go-round ever end?!
non-profits cannot trade publicly, because they're non-profits. i just mentioned the DOW to solidify that. i apologize for the confusion.
| quote: | Originally posted by Shakka
Nobody would want to buy something that has no way of enhancing shareholder value. Not to mention the costs of being a public company and complying with Sarbox, etc is a cost I'd imagine no sane non-profit would want to deal with. |
the idea is not to enhance shareholder value, rather to do something that the government considers a good cause, but not good enough to budget for. that is why there is 501(c)(3) designations. it provides individual members of society, corporations, and foundations an opportunity to contribute to causes that they feel are worthy while receiving breaks from their taxes. Because of the tax benefits for said donations, there is a very stringent criteria on how these companies are set up and run.
| quote: | Originally posted by Shakka
However, that doesn't mean unethical behavior magically becomes ethical by virtue of not having a shareholder base. |
there's no magic involved. one just has to acknowledge that there is no unethical behavior to begin with.;) |
|
|
| Shakka |
| Hey--I wasn't refuting you, I was just throwing in another viewpoint on why it wouldn't make sense. I probably should've just said nothing. No craziness here. ;) |
|
|
| ResonantDrag |
it's all good.
i'm just flabbergasted that with all the digging for dirt on Gore there has only been two revelations:
1. Gore uses airplanes to travel
2. Gore has a high electricity bill
in my book, that makes him pretty damn clean.
I just couldn't sit back and listen to creationist arguments on non-existent earnings from a non-existent source of non-existent revenue.
now, if we weren't speaking of 10Ks of dollars to an American based non-profit that gives no dividends and were, per say, speaking of a 16 billion dollar no-bid contract to a now Arab-Emirates based for-profit corporation that gives 10s of millions of dollars in yearly dividends to the giver of said contracts...we could have an ethics discussion.:p |
|
|
| ResonantDrag |
hey, here's a little joke to lighten up the room.
what's the difference between Michael Jackson and Halliburton?
Micheal Jackson only ed a handful of Americans before moving to the middle east. |
|
|
| Shakka |
| quote: | Originally posted by ResonantDrag
it's all good.
i'm just flabbergasted that with all the digging for dirt on Gore there has only been two revelations:
1. Gore uses airplanes to travel
2. Gore has a high electricity bill
in my book, that makes him pretty damn clean. |
I'm not sure I agree with that assessment but it's been addressed ad nauseum already so I'm not going to write anything lengthy.
| quote: | | now, if we weren't speaking of 10Ks of dollars to an American based non-profit that gives no dividends and were, per say, speaking of a 16 billion dollar no-bid contract to a now Arab-Emirates based for-profit corporation that gives 10s of millions of dollars in yearly dividends to the giver of said contracts...we could have an ethics discussion.:p |
This is all a sideshow to the larger discussion. |
|
|
| Shakka |
| quote: | Originally posted by ResonantDrag
hey, here's a little joke to lighten up the room.
what's the difference between Michael Jackson and Halliburton?
Micheal Jackson only ed a handful of Americans before moving to the middle east. |
A variation on a classic. MJ gets no love.
What's the difference between Michael Jackson and Neil Armstrong?
Neil Armstrong was the first person to walk on the moon--Michael Jackson likes to little boys in the ass. |
|
|
| ResonantDrag |
| quote: | Originally posted by Shakka
A variation on a classic. MJ gets no love.
What's the difference between Michael Jackson and Neil Armstrong?
Neil Armstrong was the first person to walk on the moon--Michael Jackson likes to little boys in the ass. |
lol
What's the difference between Michael Jackson and a grocery bag?
One's made of plastic and dangerous for small children--the other's a grocery bag.
Why does MJ love twenty eight year olds?
Jeez, there's twenty of them! |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
| quote: | Originally posted by ResonantDrag
we're still a little confused on the definition of a NON-profit. the board cannot financially gain from contributing to the company. although the boards (in most non-profits) are the main source of revenue for maintaining operating costs for the the companies.
ie. the only people that can profit from non-profits are the staff.
of course, there are tax advantages to contributing to 501 (c) (3)s, but he could get the exact same benefits contributing to his church or the boy scouts. there's nothing shady about that at all. that's why the tax codes are written that way. |
So you think he's sitting on that board getting nothing?
It's tantamount to The United Way top exec getting a 6 figure income; one of the reasons I don't support United Way.
You're right, there are many non-profits out there and if he was honest in his intentions, then he wouldn't need to choose a company he happens to represent.
I don't disagree that it isn't a dubious business move on his end, because it's a great tax write off for him in the end. |
|
|
|
|
