# Average I.Q. level in D.C.? (Tax cut related) **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [November 11, 2017, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/average-i-q-level-in-d-c-tax-cut-related/801369 "2017-11-11T21:39:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 10\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2017, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/average-i-q-level-in-d-c-tax-cut-related/801369/21 "2017-11-12T17:09:39Z")
> [@contradancer](#): > > No. the Rules for individual filers and Schedule C filers is different. I understand that professional gamblers filing Schedule C tax returns are treated differently than regular, individual filers. But if you want to start a conversation about something as specific as the tax code, then you need to be much clearer in your claims. You said: > [@contradancer](#): > > so, even if you are a professional gambler, you will only be able to deduct losses to the extent of winnings. A major change is business expense theory. But this is already true, even for professional gamblers who file Schedule C returns. They are only allowed to deduct (gambling) losses to the extent of (gambling) winnings. The difference for professional gamblers is that they can ALSO deduct, even beyond the extent of winnings, the gambling-related expenses they incur. But gambling-related expenses are specifically NOT the actual losses from gambling; they include things like transportation, meals, table fees, and other stuff that is NOT the actual money wagered. It is worth noting, by the way, that allowing professional gamblers to deduct gambling expenses beyond the extent of their gambling winnings is a rather recent development. It was the result of the \*Mayo \*case (2011), which overturned part of the \*Offutt \*case (1951), and which followed a 2009 memo issued by the IRS itself. You can read about the court cases, and the implications of _Mayo_, in this [Journal of Accountancy article](https://www.journalofaccountancy.com/issues/2012/apr/20114684.html): > [@](#): > > _Offutt_ allowed the deduction of wagering losses only to the extent of winnings and included professional gamblers’ nonwagering business expenses in the definition of losses. The \*Mayo \*court, contrary to \*Offutt \*and subsequent cases, allowed a professional gambler to deduct ordinary and necessary business expenses under Sec. 162(a), potentially in excess of gross receipts from gambling as a trade or business. In doing so, the court noted it was following recent IRS policy on the issue outlined in a 2009 IRS legal memorandum. Furthermore, in December 2011, the IRS acquiesced to the court’s holding and analysis (Action on Decision 2011-06). As for the tax plan as a whole, it’s a total clusterfuck, but your mediocre contributions to this thread so far have really done nothing to illuminate its problems. ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2017, 11:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/average-i-q-level-in-d-c-tax-cut-related/801369/22 "2017-11-12T23:44:15Z")
It’s _his_ thread! ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2017, 3:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/average-i-q-level-in-d-c-tax-cut-related/801369/23 "2017-11-13T03:27:43Z")
> [@contradancer](#): > > I think this thing has been very poorly thought out and certainly not by consulting with tax professionals. The law isn’t poorly thought out, it is unethical. According to senate rules, the tax cut bill cannot cost more than 1.5 trillion over 10 years, which works out to about $150 billion a year. The supply side tax cuts that the GOP are pushing are far bigger than 1.5 trillion. Elimination of the estate tax, cutting the upper ranges of income tax, cutting the corporate tax, cutting the tax on ‘small businesses’ (meaning wealthy businesses). That costs way more than 1.5 trillion, so they need to raise taxes on other people to keep the big within the 1.5 trillion limit. So they are raising a ton of taxes by eliminating deductions people use. It is an effort to transfer wealth upwards. They are raising taxes on the upper middle class to fund a tax cut on the rich. It isn’t poorly thought out, this is their goal. ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2017, 3:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/average-i-q-level-in-d-c-tax-cut-related/801369/24 "2017-11-13T03:31:33Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > I suspect the average IQ in DC is 100, but even this lame-ass tax plan is better constructed than the pitiful argument of, “Won’t someone think of the gamblers?!?” It is going to be higher than that. The average IQ of a college graduate is supposedly about 110-115, average IQ of someone with a graduate degree is closer to 120. DC has a very high % of people with tertiary educations. I’d wager it is one of the higher IQ enclaves in the US along with Silicon valley. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2017, 3:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/average-i-q-level-in-d-c-tax-cut-related/801369/25 "2017-11-13T03:33:14Z")
> [@foolsguinea](#): > > It’s _his_ thread! I know. Sad, isn’t it? ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2017, 1:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/average-i-q-level-in-d-c-tax-cut-related/801369/26 "2017-11-13T13:09:49Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Indeed, **catfish** , indeed. > > The new tax bill “allows mortgage interest”. What it isn’t going to allow is for new homeowners to deduct that part of the interest on a mortgage that is \> $500k in a given year from their taxable income. People who already own homes are grandfathered in at the current level of $1M. That is, you get to deduct interest on the first $500K, but not above that. > > Folks would be more sympathetic to you if you did’t keep spouting nonsense. > [@Bone](#): > > This is not ironic at all. Not at all. This thread is hurting my brain. I know a lot of the stuff about the bill is still murky but definitions of words are not changing. > [@foolsguinea](#): > > The average IQ in DC is [Dalek voice]FOUR.[/Dalek voice] So you’re correct, in binary. > > Seriously, though, gamblers being expected to pay taxes on every temporary win would be insane, and only intelligible if one seeks to outlaw gambling. And if they don’t also do it to stocks, bonds, derivatives, and commodities, it would be clearly an attempt to drive compulsive gamblers into betting on the crooks in the finance industry, and therefore _evil._ > > But, since that’s not quite what it is, this is just more rearranging the tax code to avoid actual effective revenue-raising where the actual money is. > [@Wesley\_Clark](#): > > It is going to be higher than that. The average IQ of a college graduate is supposedly about 110-115, average IQ of someone with a graduate degree is closer to 120. DC has a very high % of people with tertiary educations. > > I’d wager it is one of the higher IQ enclaves in the US along with Silicon valley. I think Wesley is correct. Its like judging the IQ of Hollywood based on Charlie Sheen and Darryl Hannah. It takes a LOT of smart people to run the country. When it comes to intelligence and competence, even really smart public figures like Hillary are only about average for an agency head. A lot are smarter but they can’t win elections (and apparently neither can Hillary). ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2017, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/average-i-q-level-in-d-c-tax-cut-related/801369/27 "2017-11-13T14:19:56Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > I suspect the average IQ in DC is 100 People of low IQ have a difficult time performing tasks beyond simple things like mopping the floor and taking out the trash. To rise through the ranks from local to State to Federal government takes a certain amount of general capability that makes it unlikely that anyone is below 100. I’m sure that there are a few people in the 130-140 range, at least, if not higher. And if you don’t have some people in the 60-70 range to balance those out, then you simply can’t have an average below 100. The average is probably around 110. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2017, 2:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/average-i-q-level-in-d-c-tax-cut-related/801369/28 "2017-11-13T14:29:49Z")
> [@contradancer](#): > > One of my single son’s likes to gamble recreationally. He wins infrequently, and over a year he normally loses more than he wins. some years he has won over $100,00. He owns a small cash-type business and this is his recreation. There are three huge casinos in his area. The tax plan will eliminate the gambling loss deduction so he would have to pay tax on money he won (thousands) but not be able to deduct the losses. It would ruin him financially if he has to pay taxes. Maybe he should stop gambling. Regards, Shodan PS - In the hotly contested “OP Least Likely to Arouse Sympathy”, your notion that the Republican tax plan is bad because it is too hard on gamblers is a strong front-runner. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2017, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/average-i-q-level-in-d-c-tax-cut-related/801369/29 "2017-11-13T15:06:10Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > People of low IQ have a difficult time performing tasks beyond simple things like mopping the floor and taking out the trash. To rise through the ranks from local to State to Federal government takes a certain amount of general capability that makes it unlikely that anyone is below 100. I’m sure that there are a few people in the 130-140 range, at least, if not higher. And if you don’t have some people in the 60-70 range to balance those out, then you simply can’t have an average below 100. > > The average is probably around 110. Very fine points. I was talking about all ±650,000 who live in the city, not just those in government. That being said, there’s more college degrees here than anywhere else… but also a horrible high school graduation rate. So I went with 100. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2017, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/average-i-q-level-in-d-c-tax-cut-related/801369/30 "2017-11-13T17:37:54Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Very fine points. I was talking about all ±650,000 who live in the city, not just those in government. That being said, there’s more college degrees here than anywhere else… but also a horrible high school graduation rate. So I went with 100. Fair enough. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/average-i-q-level-in-d-c-tax-cut-related/801369.md?page=1)