74 points

Apart from anything else, why should teachers have to buy the tools to do their job?

permalink
report
reply
78 points

Because for decades teaching has been marketed as ‘a calling’ not a job. People say things like, ‘teachers do what they have to’ or ‘no one goes into teaching for the money’ or ‘you might be the only person in some of these kids lives that care for them.’ These kind of phrases allow higher ups to continually slash teaching budgets while convincing teachers that they must fill the shortfall because of they don’t, who will? It’s bullshit.

permalink
report
parent
reply
32 points

People are in for a rude awakening after republicans get rid of public schools. You think buying your own supplies is expensive — wait until you get the bill for going to private school.

permalink
report
parent
reply
39 points
*

“Oh, you can’t afford to send your child to school? Well the coal mines are always hiring if you need to get them out of the house.”

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

It’s because Republicans really like the unwashed masses they’re easier to manipulate.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Don’t worry, we’ll all be too busy reacting to actually take the time to reflect and learn something.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Much like nurses in the U.K., and their current pay battles. There are even former nurses saying “they should do it for the love of the job”.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

They shouldn’t. Education is critically and routinely underfunded because dumb people vote conservative.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

There will be a point where people will wish that education standards hadn’t been allowed to fall so low…but as long as the rich keep getting richer, I suppose no one will care.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

rich neighborhoods often pay $200+ per student per year for supplies.

poor neighborhoods just get by without supplies

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I read that should as shouldn’t and damn near had a ragefart.

permalink
report
parent
reply
55 points
*

That is because the jets and yachts are company provided and the company writes it off as an operational expense. You know, as schools should be doing with school supplies teachers need to do their job.

Companies also don’t require their employees to bring their own desk and chair… I know… do t give them any ideas… and probably some scumbag employers did this anyway.

This is separate from the fact if companies should be allowed to expense luxury items… Like yachts and jets…

permalink
report
reply
14 points

In Canada, a company-provided vehicle is a taxable benefit when used for personal purposes. This can include if you park the vehicle at home and drive to/from work if you have a fixed office location.

Of course, the rich work around this by making that yacht trip etc a “business expense” and entertaining similarly rich guests.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Still fraud, just not investigated

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

So many people think “tax deductible” literally means you subtract it from your taxes.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

It’s still a hefty discount

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

“Tax creditable” just doesn’t have the same ring.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points
*

Might as well be, if they use it for work it counts. My boss bought a luxury RV for our company, he’s the only one whose ever used it but technically there is a contract if a customer wants to rent it. Not that anyone was ever instructed to actually shill it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

That’s fraud, you can report it to the IRS

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

That means it’s a business expense, not that you can literally deduct 100% of it from your taxes.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Companies also don’t require their employees to bring their own desk and chair

Unless you work from home, then you are expected to have the space, supplies, desk, chair, electricity, internet connection…

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

Plenty of employers provide at least some of that and reimburse for the rest. That should be the norm… and it is still way cheaper than a desk space in an office.

And for employees, the cost saving on the commute makes up for more than the costs of electricity and stuff.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Not really. The company should pay for everything you need to do your job.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Yeah they should but that’s not how it works now.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Check with your boss/HR. My partner works for a University, and they have received an ergo mouse, chair, and motorized adjustable desk for their home office simply by requesting them. Most organizations have a budget for IT accomodations and they hardly ever use it.

Also, if you can get a Dr’s note for it, most places will purchase just about any accomodations you need for work. Larger monitors, ergo keyboard, dictation software…etc…

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

They’re not “allowed to” expense those things. At least, not in the way you mean. Whether or not regulators have an appetite to investigate is another matter.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

In my opinion, companies shouldn’t be allowed to expense anything. The entire concept is pointlessly complicated and only serves to favor businesses that can afford to hire teams of accountants. The law doesn’t encourage any kind of value adding on the slightest, it’s just a game to save money.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

There are complicated parts of accounting, but basic expense tracking is simple and businesses would do it even if it didn’t affect their tax treatment.

If businesses couldn’t write off expenses, it would be nearly equivalent to treating the corporate income tax as a universal sales tax. This would be incredibly damaging to small businesses and benefit behemoth vertically integrated companies, which is probably the exact opposite of what you want.

If you get rid of expenses, you need to get rid of corporate income tax and either replace it with VAT or combine it with increases to personal income tax like taxing capital gains as ordinary income.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Mmmm that’s a great point about vertical integration, I forgot about that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

That would basically guarantee that no new business ever survives.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Companies shouldn’t be paying taxes at all. Just tax the people who own the companies directly based on the value of their shares.

permalink
report
parent
reply
35 points

This is just plain incorrect.

The law doesn’t allow CEOs to write off yachts.

Whether or not regulators investigate them is another matter.

permalink
report
reply
11 points

That’s why they don’t own the yachts, but they own the charter companies that run the yachts.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Can’t they just buy in the name of a company, which would be a ‘business expense’, which is kind of a write off?

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

They would have to justify how it is a part of the companies operations. In theory at least.

So a private jet to fly your execs to business meets? Ok.

A yacht? Maybe for entertaining customers? I don’t know about the US, but here in Australia entertainment expenses are written off at a lower rate than other business expenses.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

A yacht can have meeting rooms, you can receive clients in these meeting rooms for business purposes, making it therefore a business expense.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

here in Australia entertainment expenses are written off at a lower rate than other business expenses.

Sorry mate. Not really correct.

If an Australian company pays for entertainment expenses for staff, it’s considered a fringe benefit and fringe benefits tax is payable. It equates to almost the cost of the actual expense. So if a company pays $10k for an employee to take a holiday, they’ll have to pay almost $10k in fringe benefits tax, but they do get a deduction for the whole $20k, which will save them $5k in income tax.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

It doesn’t work like that. Expenses need to be “necessarily incurred in the course of producing income”. Just be cause a company pays for something doesn’t make it tax deductible.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I can’t have a yacht business meeting without a yacht now can I?

permalink
report
parent
reply
33 points

The system working as intended

permalink
report
reply
6 points

Yup, not a bug, a feature.

permalink
report
parent
reply
28 points

The productive class vs the parasite class.

permalink
report
reply

Political Memes

!politicalmemes@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civil

Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformation

Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memes

Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotion

Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

Community stats

  • 13K

    Monthly active users

  • 3.1K

    Posts

  • 132K

    Comments