Taking Down The Libruls

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
60,446
9,587
113
Washington DC
The Republicans take aim at academic excellence

By George F. Will Opinion writer November 8 at 7:31 PM

Such is the federal government’s sprawl, and its power to establish new governing precedents, mere Washington twitches can jeopardize venerable principles and institutions. This is illustrated by a seemingly small but actually momentous provision of the Republicans’ tax bill — a 1.4 percent excise tax on the endowment earnings of approximately 70 colleges and universities with the largest per-student endowments. To raise less than $3 billion in a decade — less than 0.005 percent of projected federal spending of $53 trillion — Republicans would blur important distinctions and abandon their defining mission.
Private foundations, which are generally run by small coteries, pay a “supervisory tax” on investment income to defray the cost of Internal Revenue Service oversight to guarantee that their resources are used for charitable purposes. In 1984, however, Congress created a new entity, an “operating foundation.” Such organizations — often museums or libraries — are exempt from the tax on investment earnings because they apply their assets directly to their charitable activities rather than making grants to other organizations, as do foundations that therefore must pay the supervisory tax.
Most university endowments are compounds of thousands of individual funds that often are restricted to particular uses, all of which further the institutions’ educational purposes. Hence these endowments are akin to the untaxed “operating foundations.” Yet the Republicans, without public deliberations, and without offering reasons, would arbitrarily make university endowments uniquely subject to a tax not applied to similar entities.

Are Republicans aware, for example, that Princeton University’s endowment earnings fund more than half its annual budget and will support expansion of the student body? They also enable “need-blind” admissions: More than 60 percent of undergraduates receive financial assistance; those from families with incomes below $65,000 pay no tuition, room or board; those from families with incomes below $160,000 pay no tuition. No loans are required. PhD candidates receive tuition and a stipend for living costs. Furthermore, the endowment has funded a significant increase in students from low-income families: Princeton has recently tripled to 22 percent the portion of freshmen from families with the most substantial financial needs. The idea that Princeton is largely populated by children of alumni is a canard slain by this fact: Such “legacies” are only 13 percent of this year’s freshman class.
For eight centuries, surviving thickets of ecclesiastical and political interferences, the world’s great research universities have enabled the liberal arts to flourish, the sciences to advance and innovation to propel economic betterment. Increasingly, they foster upward mobility that fulfils democratic aspirations and combats the stagnation of elites. It is astonishingly shortsighted to jeopardize all of this, and it is unseemly to do so in a scramble for resources to make a tax bill conform to the transitory arithmetic of a budget process that is a labyrinth of trickery.
Great universities are great because philanthropic generations have borne the cost of sustaining private institutions that seed the nation with excellence. Donors have done this in the expectation that earnings accruing from their investments will be devoted solely to educational purposes, in perpetuity. This expectation will disappear, and the generosity that it has sustained will diminish, if Republicans siphon away a portion of endowments’ earnings in order to fund the federal government’s general operations.
Its appetite whetted by 1.4 percent, the political class will not stop there. Once the understanding that until now has protected endowments is shredded, there will be no limiting principle to constrain governments — those of the states, too — in their unsleeping search for revenue to expand their power. Public appetites are limitless, as is the political class’s desire to satisfy them. Hence there is a perennial danger that democracy will degenerate into looting — scrounging for resources, such as universities’ endowments, that are part of society’s seed corn for prosperous tomorrows.
Government having long ago slipped the leash of restraint, the public sector’s sprawl threatens to enfeeble the private institutions of civil society that mediate between the individual and the state and that leaven society with energy and creativity that government cannot supply. Time was, conservatism’s central argument for limiting government was to defend these institutions from being starved of resources and functions by government. Abandonment of this argument is apparent in the vandalism that Republicans are mounting against universities’ endowments.
This raid against little platoons of independent excellence would be unsurprising were it proposed by progressives, who are ever eager to extend government’s reach and to break private institutions to the state’s saddle. Coming from Republicans, it is acutely discouraging.



https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...-card-c:homepage/story&utm_term=.6bcd4b7339eb


This is what you get when you have no platform, no principles, no guiding philosophy except pandering to the worst instincts of dullards to obtain and retain power.

For those who don't know, Mr. Will has been regarded as a hard-core conservative commenter for decades.
 

Danbones

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 23, 2015
24,505
2,198
113
Yeah, that sure explains the lie of global warming.
:)
and its adherents.

Try getting a job with a liebarrel education...
 

Hoid

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 15, 2017
20,408
4
36
They need a whole bunch of money. If you give a trillion and a half to the wealthiest people in the country you have to get a trillion and a half somewhere else. You have to get it without upsetting the 99% too much. This what the healthcare thing is all about. How do you siphin money out of there?
 

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
60,446
9,587
113
Washington DC
They need a whole bunch of money. If you give a trillion and a half to the wealthiest people in the country you have to get a trillion and a half somewhere else. You have to get it without upsetting the 99% too much. This what the healthcare thing is all about. How do you siphin money out of there?
That's what printing presses are for.
 

captain morgan

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 28, 2009
28,429
148
63
A Mouse Once Bit My Sister
The Republicans take aim at academic excellence

This is what you get when you have no platform, no principles, no guiding philosophy except pandering to the worst instincts of dullards to obtain and retain power.

For those who don't know, Mr. Will has been regarded as a hard-core conservative commenter for decades.

It's short-sighted to believe that this is all about the conservative mind-set targeting academics, let alone the Endowments.

Ultimately, the various Fed administrations just kept on going back to the debt markets to fund the programming needs across various portfolios and now, for some reason, that option is no longer being used as the go-to solution..... The cash needs to be raised and things like Endowments are low hanging fruit
 

captain morgan

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 28, 2009
28,429
148
63
A Mouse Once Bit My Sister
I see.

So this has absolutely nothing, nada, zero to do with raising money into servicing the greater needs of society... It 's exclusively about controlling the academic institutions and populating them with a preferred set of students that will act on the preset whims of the elite (or our reptilian overlords as we'll soon come to know them).

Gotcha.
 

Hoid

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 15, 2017
20,408
4
36
oddly the raising of money will accompany declining servicing of the greater needs of society.

the impetus here is entirely about retaining money in the hands of the wealthy.
 

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
60,446
9,587
113
Washington DC
I see.

So this has absolutely nothing, nada, zero to do with raising money into servicing the greater needs of society... It 's exclusively about controlling the academic institutions and populating them with a preferred set of students that will act on the preset whims of the elite (or our reptilian overlords as we'll soon come to know them).

Gotcha.
 

captain morgan

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 28, 2009
28,429
148
63
A Mouse Once Bit My Sister
Then it's a good job neither Mr. Will nor I said any such thing.

But I can't keep you from making up whatever you like, so carry on.



oddly the raising of money will accompany declining servicing of the greater needs of society.

How so?

the impetus here is entirely about retaining money in the hands of the wealthy.

The financial donors will have not have the tax deduction from this source any longer... The option is to fund another charitable org or pay taxes on that cash
 

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
28,583
8,164
113
B.C.
oddly the raising of money will accompany declining servicing of the greater needs of society.

the impetus here is entirely about retaining money in the hands of the wealthy.
How much money is there ? Is this a static amount ? If I spend some will there be less ?
 

Hoid

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 15, 2017
20,408
4
36
There is a finite amount of wealth. As time goes by more and more of that wealth is in fewer and fewer hands. That is the big trend in economics right now.

All current tax schemes are an attempt to take less wealth from those fewer people and more from the many. They can only do this this by attacking the wealth where it exists outside of the hands of the few ....so

income - this is an unpopular choice because it is immediately resisted by the many

healthcare - this is the giant white elephant where a few simple changes can redirect massive amount of wealth

education - another massive reserve of wealth just waiting to be redirected.

real estate - perhaps the biggest of them all - in America the tax sheltering of mortgage interest is the where they will focus their efforts. There will be changes here that the average American does not quite understand or care about.
 

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
60,446
9,587
113
Washington DC
There is a finite amount of wealth. As time goes by more and more of that wealth is in fewer and fewer hands. That is the big trend in economics right now.
I disagree. Wealth is either infinite, or so close to it that we haven't even cracked the first percent of it.

All current tax schemes are an attempt to take less wealth from those fewer people and more from the many. They can only do this this by attacking the wealth where it exists outside of the hands of the few ....so
Again, I disagree. All current tax schemes are attempts to take as much as possible from every source possible, short of getting yourself thrown out of office. There's a reason budgets always rise, never fall.

income - this is an unpopular choice because it is immediately resisted by the many

healthcare - this is the giant white elephant where a few simple changes can redirect massive amount of wealth

education - another massive reserve of wealth just waiting to be redirected.

real estate - perhaps the biggest of them all - in America the tax sheltering of mortgage interest is the where they will focus their efforts. There will be changes here that the average American does not quite understand or care about.
That's part of the current thinking. But I think you're missing the forest.
 

Hoid

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 15, 2017
20,408
4
36
US budgets always rise because



As as greater percentage of income is directed towards the wealthy few there is less income in the general population to tax. Therefore you must tax wealth in other places.
 

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
60,446
9,587
113
Washington DC
As as greater percentage of income is directed towards the wealthy few there is less income in the general population to tax. Therefore you must tax wealth in other places.
Or take a larger percentage of the wealth of the less-wealthy, usually through a series of abstruse tricks. As a former senior IRS official said, "Complexity trumps transparency."

Or borrow more from the Chinese, which is apparently what the Republicans are going with.
 

Highball

Council Member
Jan 28, 2010
1,170
1
38
One tactic to use is to require the males to put on their undershorts like the rest of us do not on backwards. Then require the females to shave at least twice a week. That might strike terror into their hearts?