Rick Steves with family. He got divorced last year.
Posted on 08/27/2011 5:48:24 AM PDT by Dr. Scarpetta
Rick Steves said Thursday his donation equals what he saved from the tax cuts approved by former President George W. Bush beginning in 2001.
"Over the last decade, my tax burden has decreased even as public funding for important local programs and institutions has been decimated -- a trend I find alarming," he said in a written statement.
Steves is encouraging other people who are financially well off to make similar donations.
"It's my hope to inspire other caring high-income people to step up and fill those funding gaps with private donations, to support causes that should be borne collectively by a community -- arts centers, parks, schools, libraries, local symphonies, and to speak out on the wisdom of rolling back the tax cuts for our wealthy."
The donation to the arts center will be divided into 10 annual gifts of $100,000, said Joe McIalwain, executive director for the Center for the Arts.
"I see it as a civic duty for businessmen like me, who's directly benefited from our vibrant communities, to do our fair share," Steves said.
"This donation is my way of helping to empower the fine people who've been working for years for the good of Edmonds' art and culture -- especially now, as what I consider a false austerity is being forced on the finer points of our culture."
The Bush tax cuts, which applied to all income brackets, were set to expire in 2010 but after much debate were extended for two more years.
President Barack Obama campaigned in 2008 on removing the cuts for people making more than $250,000 per year but backed off in the face of opposition from Congress.
(Excerpt) Read more at heraldnet.com ...
Now if Warred Buffett could do more...
Now if Warred Buffett could do more...
Steves made 99% of his money from tax funded PBS travel videos.
Rick Steves with family. He got divorced last year.
I'd like to see proof of this decrease in funding. I bet it is the complete opposite.
That said, if true. Good, that's the way it is supposed to be.
"It's my hope to inspire other caring high-income people to step up and fill those funding gaps with private donations, to support causes that should be borne collectively by a community -- arts centers, parks, schools, libraries, local symphonies, and to speak out on the wisdom of rolling back the tax cuts for our wealthy."
I call this a win win. It is local communities and its people that should fund and support these types of programs. I'd like to understand how, this loser thinks it is better to funnel money through the federal bureaucracy so a few pennies on the dollar actually get back down to a local park or art center.
I’d be curious to know if he takes a tax deduction for the donation.
Unfortunately I bought a set of those DVD travel videos about 5 years ago. I recently read some of the liberal stuff Rick Steves wrote on Facebook and I ‘unfriended’ him.
Good for him. Now because of lower taxes someone was able to donate to a private arts center while saving the taxpayer’s money they would have given.
Mike
In Rick’s weak attempt to point out how unfair Bush tax cuts were he has actually shown how funding is supposed to be done.
Well, I’ll give him credit for putting his money where his mouth is. With donors like him, who needs the National Endowment of the Arts?
With their own money!
Gee, I wonder if the gifts will be.....ahem.....tax deductible.
Even a simpleton liberal like Steves doesn’t trust the government to spend his money more wisely than can he! That’s called ‘hypocrisy’.
Why didn’t he give the money to the Treasury if he thinks he didn’t pay enough?
What a dunce. He’d rather have no control over the direction of his philanthropy? This is an argument FOR tax cuts. It’s called patronage. He should study the Medicis.
I hope the greedy SOB doesn’t take a deduction for that donation.
And why doesn’t he give TWICE as much. After all, he doesn’t NEED it.
It doesn’t mean a thing unless he gives back the Reagan tax cut. I presume that he is in what would have been the 70% rate, so this wealthy sop needs to cough it up if he really wants to make ammends.
There! How’s that?
On a personal note, I’m very happy that public funds aren’t being used of an arts center. The are community has proven that they cannot be good stewards of public funds.
Gosh, isn’t this how it’s SUPPOSED to work?
When government takes less of people’s money people are free to then spend their money in the manner they choose. Some use it to buy nice things (that other people make), others use it to grow businesses and put people to work, and still others donate their money to causes they support. That’s perfect. It’s certainly much better than the government deciding for individuals what causes they should support and extracting a “contribution” from them in the form of taxes and redistribution.
Mine, too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.