Why is
public tax money allowed to go to private school vouchers, when private schools do not have to test and, therefore, are not held «accountable»?
Not exact matches
The Christian Right wants
public money to be used for private religious education (vouchers), buildings and services to be used for private religious purposes (this article), and they want subsidies in the form of
tax breaks, special exemptions of other sorts, and they even want to destroy Aid to Needy Families so they can drive people into seeking help at their private religious «missions» where you are not
allowed to eat unless you are a Christian, and so on.
MMA should be
allowed because the
public will pay good
money to attend these events and that will attract a fairly significant
tax base (plus spin off benefits abound in restaurant sport bars, souvenirs, gym memberships, promotional firms, etc), but whats my opinion worth, I am just a CPA with a law degree and LL.M.
One is an education
tax credit that would give donors a
tax break for funding scholarships to
allow poor children to attend private schools, and also for
money given to extra curricular programs at
public schools.
The federal
tax credit proposal is one of several ideas under review by the White House to fulfill Donald Trump's campaign promise to promote the expansion of charter schools and vouchers that would
allow families of low income to use
public money for private school tuition, sources tell POLITICO.
For when families are
allowed to leave the regular
public schools for new options — charter schools or (via vouchers or
tax credits) private schools — the regular
public schools lose
money and jobs, and so do the incumbent teachers in those schools.
Charter schools are
public schools run with
tax money, but they're
allowed more flexibility in their programs than traditional district schools.
FOI laws were created to
allow individuals to access
public data held by the Federal Government, and since the IRS is part of that Government, you can use Freedom of Information Requests to see how they calculated your back
taxes owed, how they've determined what penalties, fees, fines, and interest should apply to your debt, and look for problems that would
allow you to reduce or even wipe out the
money that they're demanding.
But, if a carbon
tax would be simpler and easier, and if the only unique «advantages» of cap - and - trade are that it would
allow traders to make
money and it would fool the
public into thinking that it has nothing to do with prices, then a carbon
tax would be the better choice, right?
If regulators don't order a refund of all
tax savings, they might require some
money to go to projects that produce savings and other
public benefits, «such as modernizing the utilities» grids to
allow for better incorporation of clean energy resources,» suggested a joint brief filed by the Environmental Defense Fund, Ohio Environmental Council, Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club and the Environmental Law & Policy Center.