Students in Massachusetts will get free lunch and breakfast at school thanks to a new 4% tax put on people who earn more than $1 million.
We need different terms for people who HAVE a million dollars and people who MAKE a million per year. Lots of people will read this millionaire’s tax and think it will apply to them when they are nearing retirement since they finally have a million dollars after saving all their life.
That’s what the campaign to quash the bill did. That, and tried to convince people that they might have a single multi-million-dollar transaction in their life (like selling a large successful business) and have to pay an extra 4% on it.
Always a push to get the “temporarily embarassed millionaire” to support the reach. “Yeah, yanno. My little lawmowing operation that makes me $20,000 coild sell for over a million and then I’m fucked”
Ah, the Philip J. Fry mentality
“someday I might be rich, and then people like me better watch their step”
We need different terms for people who HAVE a million dollars and people who MAKE a million per year.
We have them. The first is referred to as “Wealth” or “Worth” and the other is referred to as “Income”. Therefore what Mass instituted is called an Income Tax.
It’s easier to sell a tax hike if you know exactly where it’s going :)
Unless you’re Waukesha, Wisconsin, where they specifically voted to stop giving kids handouts (i.e. free lunch). Because, you know, kids should work for their food or something instead of using their energy to learn.
probably the same people that say abortion is murdering kids…
I mean, cheap labor has to come from somewhere… Where do you find empoverished people to exploit if you don’t force births?
If you add underage labour liberalisation to that, you get a bingo!
I’ll raise you the most voted pre-candidate to president in my country, who said that people should be able to sell their own organs if they want to. (He plans to worsen things for workers in such a way that they would need to.)
Is this guy an ultraliberal moron or a pretend-conservative who says that but thinks abortion and prostitution should be illegal?
Strangely, both.
Of course it is. But you know, kids lives only really matter up until they are born. At that point the kids, their parents and their livelihoods and happiness…all that can fuck right off.
deleted by creator
kids just don’t want to work anymore these days. they’re too busy with their avocados and ipad games. meanwhile the child unemployment rates are at historical highs. won’t someone think of the economy?
💀
Waukesha County is by far the most conservative in the state, and has been playing a massive role in destroying our state’s democratic process for a few decades now.
Another fun fact about it is that they’ve been trying for years to glom onto the Lake Michigan watershed, which, geographically, it is not a part of. They want to straight up take our water, which they do not need, in exchange for nothing whatsoever of any real value.
Yeah it’s a cesspool that way.
I live in the mke area and when looking for housing Waukesha was a tempting area because of how much more house you can get for the money, but I just don’t think I can handle living there. Not to mention I want my kids going to schools in a community that gives a shit about kids and their education.
“It’s about time these kids had some skin in the game!”
-Some Republican Somewhere I’m sure.
The descriptor “free” misleads - this is exactly the type of thing taxes were always meant to pay for.
This I have always hated the “FREE STUFF!” talking point and how the mainstream bought it.
I’m not talking about demanding some middle class guy be forced to buy me an Xbox, but rather I’m asking multiple billionaires start paying just a little more in taxes (instead of ya know… constant rebates for “cReAtInG JoBs”) so that little Timmy doesn’t die of untreated pediatric cancer.
It’s mad that children could some how not deserve or accumulate debt to eat. It’s even more mad that its exactly what happens.
It’s also mad that this is also the case for adults. When you turn 18, you shouldn’t suddenly lose basic rights (like access to food and shelter), but that’s exactly what most capitalists want to happen (and so that’s how it works).
Goods with inelastic demand shouldn’t be driven by the profit motive. Food, healthcare, housing, etc. We can let luxury goods stay within the private sector for now since people don’t need them to survive, and come back to that conversation at a later date.
Free school meals should be a given since our taxes should go to what our elected officials have so thoughtfully decided where to apply them. What no one rarely brings up let alone tries to solve is the disgusting and unsafe food that the local, state and fed officials decide to make available. There’s too much politics in cafeteria food. They should focus there budget in getting healthy food not the cheapest, uncles cousins or corporate friend contract.
Yes, we 100% should be using our school kitchens as kitchens, not just reheating premade “GFS Food.”
GFS food would be an upgrade over what most are using.
… what are they using?
Aramark and Chartwells are two of the biggest companies, they are custom designing menus to fit the minimum requirements as cheaply as possible. They are getting food in the same tier as bargain frozen dinners or prison.
That’s roughly where GFS lies…
Reason why #3648393847 why representative democracy simply does not work.
When making that argument, you’ll want to add a few examples.
Otherwise people think you mean dictatorship.
Switzerland has a direct democracy and they are doing perfectly fine.
They’re in many ways not the best example.
I would wager you have never been to Switzerland, or if you have, you never left the tourist traps to interact with the ‘real Swiss’.
I only lived there one year, but I can tell you right now, they are not ‘doing perfectly fine.’
Their pretty tourism industry hides some of the ugliest racism, faux-nationalism in the form of cantonal squabbling, sexism, anti-lgbt+, and a general dislike of anyone who does not conform exactly to their specific ways of living. Fuck Switzerland.
deleted by creator
The vast majority (262 out of 351) of Massachusetts municipalities are direct democracy. A further 31 are near enough that it’s not hard to be elected if you run (my precinct has empty rep. slots every year).
Also in contrast to the rest of the US, there are no unincorporated areas (“county land”) in Massachusetts. Counties aren’t a useful demarcation here. Everything is a Town or a city.
The rest of the U.S. needs to switch to something similar.
I think you might be confusing representative democracy with capitalism.
Nah, I mean representative democracy. Trusting someone else to work in your best interests never works. The only one who has your best interests in mind is you, if that.
People rarely have their own best interests in mind. People are short-sighted, undereducated, impulsive, prone to groupthink, and overestimate their ability and control.
I think what is missing is control over the representatives. When you elect someone, you give them your power, you should be able to take it back when they abuse it.
In a representative democracy, transparency and control are key and when this is not enforced, people tend to think the system is broken and does not work. It would work if that is fixed
People shouldn’t be giving their power away at all, but fair.
It’s not a free lunch. It’s just your taxes going to something you actually benefit from.
No shit. It literally says where the money that pays for it comes from right in the headline.
I think the point of the comment was that in the last few decades the rhetoric has been: “Taxes bad” “Government provides free bus passes to underprivileged people” Always divorcing taxes from their positive effects on society. Maybe they were trying to fight that by directly uniting the fact that the government is just a coordinator, collecting taxes and using it to buy lunches for kids.
“4% tax on millionaires pays for breakfasts and lunches for all school children” unlike the above example, is a sentence that reminds people that taxes are what provides these many positive social benefits they recieve, not “the government”, not “for free”, and that taxes aren’t always “bad”.
Or maybe I’m projecting!
Yeah but le redditor needs to show us how much smarts he is.
Of course it is free for the children.
Which I’m ok with
“Nothing is free. Free isn’t actually a word!”
So you’re implying that people regularly make $1,000,000 in annual income by working? Only about 150,000 people in the US make that much. It’s their money.
Kids don’t pay taxes. It’s a free lunch.
This comment is just an extreme lack of understanding of any tax system there is, which is wild.
Something that is free for one person will necessarily cost money for another. But for the kids, it’s free.
deleted by creator
Ok?
Imagine being this fucking pedantic. This place is legit reddit 2.0 and that’s a bad thing.
This comment is just an extreme lack of understanding of millionaires
For the children and the families of the children, it is free
I can’t believe you have the upvoted comment.
Removed by mod
Your first sentence describes your own comment.
Every time you complain, I will post a meme you wouldn’t understand and a comment mocking your boomer ass.
Most of everything is free for kids. What’s your point?
That’s great news! No kid should ever be hungry at school, especially when they really are legally forced to be there!
But that will teach them that free stuff is good which will make them communists who love big government!!1! I want children to hunt for their own food like in the good old days. Didn’t catch anything? Too bad little Timmy, guess you won’t eat tonight because we don’t got no welfare state!
Also I believe in protecting the children and am pro-life.
/s
State House News Service, an independently owned news wire, reported that $1 billion of the state’s record $56.2 billion fiscal budget for 2024 came from the state’s new 4% tax on millionaires. Massachusetts Gov. Maura Healey signed the budget on Wednesday, making Massachusetts the eighth state to adopt a free school lunch plan since federal free school lunches which started during the COVID-19 pandemic ended.
COVID response is wild because for like 2 years we had a robust expansion of both direct government aid and healthcare coverage and accessibility, and the poof most of it disappeared. Like we literally had free healthcare at point of service for one disease which is crazy.
Great to see that at least some states responding to the demand for these heightened services. We should be pointing towards the example of COVID aid to show what the government can do if the public pressure is there. If we did it once we can do it again!
As a student who grew up attending Massachusetts public schools, this is fantastic news. Just wish that could have been me!
I used to bring a lot of boxed lunch in most days instead because school lunches were an unnecessary expense, but sometimes I’d buy school lunch if it was one I liked.
I don’t know if this applies everywhere, but my school district at least had a needs-based free lunch (and breakfast) program for those from low income families, but honestly all students deserve to eat a healthy and nutritious meal during school, which I am sure also takes quite a bit of stress off of parents.
The trouble with needs based programs is that students who receive the free lunch then get shamed by other students for being poor. Thus the movement to give the lunch to everyone. The cost per student is fairly low compared to the other expenses of running a school. Plus there are savings resulting from getting rid of the bureaucracy that figures out who is needy enough to get a free lunch, getting rid of the payment collection operation, etc, that partly offset the cost of the additional free lunches.
It depends on how you manage it. We had a system where parents could pay up front for your lunches, and students using that system got their lunches the same way the needs-based students did - the lunch lady just checked their name off the list for the day. You could guess at who had which, probably, but there was no way to confirm it.
That being said, you’re right about the bureaucracy and I’m all in favor of free lunches for all students regardless of their parents’ income.
Then, idk, sell the lunch program on a semester-by-semester basis and offer subsidies for students who can’t afford it? It isn’t rocket science.
Ok, but why not just not? Just feed the damn kids and quit worrying that someone somewhere is getting something they could live without.
You’re right that it isn’t rocket science, but you are still making it more complicated than it needs to be.
The solution is like how the kids are now getting ot for free in that state because of the new tax.
But but that’s socialism
Cool, but you know who isn’t getting a free lunch now? Those millionaires who worked so hard for that money. What have those kids done to earn theirs?
/s, to be clear. I wish these cool places to live (e.g, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Michigan) weren’t so fucking cold. Why can’t there be a nice liberal southern state?
There is. It is California and a 500sqft house cost $1000000000
Uhh, the cold isn’t the problem. It’s too expensive to live here and the real fix for housing (forced upzoning by the State) is a political nonstarter.
But I will gladly shovel snow versus face the heat, humidiity, snakes, bears, tornadoes, severe hurricanes, drought, wild fires, car oriented development, and whatever other nightmares the rest of the country has to offer. Just get a good coat, LL Bean boots, and a snowblower. It’s not that bad.
Stupid people are lazy and don’t want to shovel snow, thus selecting out where they tend to end up living.
Bro WTF.
I really hope you’re making a bad joke.
I was.
Please explain Idaho, Alaska, Wyoming, the Dakotas, Utah, Nebraska, Kansas, Iowa, Indiana, Ohio, and West Virginia then. All of them are filled to the brim with some the dumbest people on Earth.
Woo hoo suck it Alaska texas didnt make some random list on the Internet
Is it typically expected for you to have to shovel snow in Texas?
Whats snow.
That stuff that shut the state down 2 years ago.
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
I think it’s fair to wonder why policy changes like those are being pushed so late into the presidents term. Seems like primaries and elections drive policy more than anything else.
He’s been pretty busy. The Inflation Reduction Act, the Safer Communities Act, the CHIPS and Science Act, the American Rescue Plan (ARP) and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act is a decent list for the first 2 years in office. A lot isn’t super progressive but it’s unlikely the ideas you’re hearing about now will pass in their most progressive form either. But you have to start pretty far left to get anything even moderately left of center.
And, I know our election cycle makes it seem super late, but we’re like 5/8 of the way into his term. Just a bit over half way. In February it was pretty much half way.
Even smaller stuff like the Respect for Marriage Act. Small thing that got watered down by crazy religious stuff, but hey, it was a start, and bipartisan. We need more people working together.
For what it’s worth, a lot of the stuff the president campaigned on actually got done, which was very impressive.
Also got Justice Jackson through too, who seems to be pretty well grounded.
Yes, you are right!
It is always the go-to for politicians, I see it workong less and less as more people get informed.
Let’s fucking goooo!!! I love my home state ❤️. I wish they did this sooner.
Mass is doing so many things right. There’s still a long way to go to get to European standards, but still doing a lot better than most states.
Same! We are lucky to be in one of the best states to live under the current political circumstances.
My home state too! Too bad I can’t afford to live there
A European here. Aside from going in the right direction, I have a question: Don’t the rich already pay most of their earnings as taxes? So the problem is not that they are not getting taxed, but rather that they avoid paying them through loopholes? Or is that a billionaire problem?
Yeah. The problem is that the richest people have many loopholes to avoid paying taxes. Getting a minimal salary and then just taking loans against their assets is one of them.
This.
And to add to it. If you were making 10 million dollar and someone approached and said that they could make it so that you keep 1 million in taxes if you pay them 100 thousand you would most likely be one of the ones doing it.
If you make enough money you can afford hiring people to find new ways to keep your expenses down. Tax is an expense as any other to many rich people.
“After all, you made your fortune without getting any help so why should your earnings go to p1eople who use the system”
Is this the Steve Jobs $1 special??
Yes
Part of it is loopholes, but an equally big part is that we tax the way the rich earn their money differently. Most working- and middle-class earners make their money from a wage or salary, which is taxed as income. However, the rich make almost all of their money through dividends on stocks, low- or no-interest loans backed by assets, and selling stocks through the market or companies (that they have a seat on the board) doing stock buybacks. All of the income made from the above are taxed differently as “capital gains tax,” which is usually taxed at a much lower rate than income.
Capital gains tax isn’t ‘much’ lower, it’s like 5% lower, depending on the bracket.
Loans make it possible to avoid taxes–temporarily. You eventually have to pay off the loan, at which point you’ll pay taxes. Of course, if you’re making more from your investments than you’re paying in interest (and with plenty of collateral, you can get lower-interest loans), it makes sense to just pay the interest and never the principal of the loan. Of course, if loan interest rates shoot up (which they now have), this can suddenly stop working.
And right now, there is a loophole related to carrying loans–but it requires you to die. When you die, your heir is allowed to sell assets to pay off your loans without paying capital gains tax (or not as much? I don’t quite remember).
Thanks for your answer to my question! More specific answers like this one really help reinforce what the other told me. I also appreciate you not going into politics, like a few others have.
Don’t let anyone tell you high income earners don’t pay tax. I’m a CPA (tax) and most of my individual clients are high and ultra high net worth.
One of my biggest clients is a group of four hedge fund managers in NYC for example. They earned about $50 million each in the last few years. Idk what their net worths are but I’d imagine it’s at least a few hundred million each. They pay at least 37% federal, plus investment income tax (Obamacare), plus 10% to the state of NY plus NYC. It’s a lot and winds up being over $25 million a year. I don’t shed any tears for them because they are left with $25 million to play with (each, per year), which they should be able to scrape by on.
You can certainly argue it should be higher or lower or whatever but there’s this idea out there that wealthy people don’t pay tax and it’s just absurd. Also frankly it makes my job harder because people think I’m a magic anti tax wizard that just makes it go away, I’m just sitting here like you made a fuckton of money and owe a fuckton of tax, what’s the question? ¯\(ツ)/¯
Thanks for the answer to my question! I did not really look into this for a few years. And those that I did were when I really got into US politics. Thankfully I did 180 on that, but my knowledge from that time is untrustworthy to say the least.
Your answer really clarified and added a lot rather than repeating what others said, along with it being from a professional, which is well appreciated. So again, thank you and the others for taking the time to answer my question.
Do you ever get a sense of whether your clients ‘get’ just how disproportionate there income is compared to the median?
According to this $50 million puts them comfortably in top 1%, receiving median annual US income in just under two hours (if my math is good:
(40*52)*(46,001/50000000) = 1.91?).Yeah it’s really hard to see that in the context of kids literally starving.
Regarding your question, it’s a mix. I would say many if not most understand they are extremely successful and fortunate. The variance is how out of touch they are. Some are incredibly generous, while others are grumpy or miserable. Some actually want higher taxes, some are Scrooge types.
I once had an UHNW individual who consistently donated so much to charity that he exceeded deduction limits. I had to research ways to optimize his giving, which was refreshing.
Then there was a trust fund beneficiary worth at least $100 million, a really nice guy who lived modestly, bought the whole office lunch and dressed casually. Very down to earth. We were in the process of setting up a charity trust for him before I left that firm.
Other end of the spectrum, I had a paranoid and unstable client who repeatedly pushed us to do unethical and illegal things, making everyone uncomfortable. We fired him even though he was a ~100k/yr client for us. Easy decision.
All kinds really.
The issue is more likely that taxes aren’t being used in ways that benefit the public, like they are in other countries. But also many Americans don’t want that because grrr filthy socialism
If you’re actually curious, look up “progressive tax rates”. You can absolutely still get obscenely rich in the US, even if you pay your taxes as intended. They won’t though, because psychopathy and crippling narcissism are prerequisites to “earning” enough money to even have that conversation in the first place.
Remember that billionaires…
- don’t live next to normal people
- don’t work next to normal people
- don’t commute/travel next to normal people
- don’t eat next to normal people
- don’t shop next to normal people
- don’t sweat next to normal people
They could not be further removed from the reality of their kingdoms below, unless they were on Mars. They don’t want to contribute to the social safety nets that stop the little people from freezing/starving/dying. They’ll spend a million dollars to not spend $200 in taxes that contribute to the public good.
And they are looking into that Mars thing…
While true …. We have different income tax brackets where those with a higher income pay a higher percentage, for federal tax. However Massachusetts had a flat tax rate on income: we all pay the same percentage. Now that state tax will be more progressive, at least to the extent that rich people have “income”
Thanks for your answer to my question! Simple and to the point, without getting into politics, like a few others have. I had a more general knowledge from a few years ago, so a specific for this case helped.
Again, thank you and the others who took their time to answer me.
That’s hilarious. Only the “little people” pay taxes.
Douchebag Trump hasn’t paid taxes in about a decade
Even ignoring every singly loophole, we tax the ways the rich collect and store their wealth at a much lower percent than actual income. Meaning even if the rich didn’t dodge taxes, they end up paying much less % wise.
Adding in loopholes they pay nothing or next to nothing.
deleted by creator
What do you propose the government should limit/stop spending on to reach over 0.5% of the real yearly earnings of Gates, Musk, Bezos, the Waltons and all their billionaire friends?
(Note that I’m not even asking about if the actual real yearly earnings of millionaires.)
Slightly off topic. A lot of public schools already get free meals thanks to federal education dollars. The school lunches are free in my area because of this, even though the (red) state won’t act.
The state has attempted to kill off those dollars in the past.
The GOP is dead set on continuing something called “school lunch debt.” Let that phrase sink in for a moment.
https://www.npr.org/transcripts/1167163106
https://jacobin.com/2023/05/universal-free-school-meals-program-act-lunch-debt-opposition
[https://www.investmentnews.com/welcome-to-the-millionaires-tax-240997](An overview for those that don’t know anything about this.)
Edit: fixed the link An overview for those that don’t know anything about this.
a 4% surtax on individual earnings above $1 million. This new provision, which comes into effect from Jan. 1, 2023, will be layered over the preexisting 5% state income tax rate.
Heads up, it’s supposed to be [text] then (link)
Thank you, that explains a lot.
