Jump to content





Photo
- - - - -

2013 will be a bad year to die.

Death Tax

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
120 replies to this topic

#85 Delhommey

Delhommey

    Moderator

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: 12,792
  • Reputation: 2,493
Moderators

Posted 13 December 2012 - 03:47 PM

The economic benefits of an estate tax should be obvious. Do we have an argument against it other than "It's not fair"?

#86 Bronn

Bronn

    Sellsword

  • Joined: 26-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 5,326
  • Reputation: 1,581
HUDDLER

Posted 13 December 2012 - 04:44 PM

Lots of things have benefits that aren't right...

Robbing a bank has benefits too...

Why is it acceptable for the government to double dip the same funds? They are manufacturing more debt in a system that survives on manufactured debt.

#87 stirs

stirs

    I Reckon So

  • Joined: 01-December 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 12,997
  • Reputation: 2,366
HUDDLER

Posted 13 December 2012 - 04:51 PM

Liberals love to spend money buying votes to retain power. Their eyes light up with the thought so just what/who they can buy next with new revenues. "Oh, the good we could do with these funds" Just like the good they are doing now. I think we will all stand in line to get more of what they are putting out.

#88 Bronn

Bronn

    Sellsword

  • Joined: 26-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 5,326
  • Reputation: 1,581
HUDDLER

Posted 13 December 2012 - 04:52 PM

Why do all your posts have to include some version of "liberal?"

#89 Delhommey

Delhommey

    Moderator

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: 12,792
  • Reputation: 2,493
Moderators

Posted 13 December 2012 - 05:35 PM

Lots of things have benefits that aren't right...

Robbing a bank has benefits too...

Why is it acceptable for the government to double dip the same funds? They are manufacturing more debt in a system that survives on manufactured debt.


Sometimes it's "double dipping", but a lot of times it's just unrealized capital gains.

Besides you can angle a lot of taxes to show that they "double dip" in some way shape or form. It's hard not to when you tax most financial transfers of wealth.

#90 google larry davis

google larry davis

    fleet-footed poster

  • Joined: 06-August 12
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 4,846
  • Reputation: 1,430
HUDDLER

Posted 13 December 2012 - 11:12 PM

Who else is entitled to Kurb's parents wealth if they deem he should receive it? Not me. Not you. No one else is, not even the gov't.

He is their heir, he should receive it if that is his parents choice. It's not a hard concept.

You're playing apples and oranges to try and make some obscure point about "libertarians" and it's not working.


btw i don't believe that people shouldn't be able to give their money to whoever they want, so long as it's taxed appropriately. you're battling a straw man. however in the absence of the estate tax, i'm fully willing to argue that i, and everyone else, has an equal claim to the wealth of the dead as whomever happened to win the genetic lottery.

it's a transfer of wealth. it gets taxed. sorry for everyone that won the genetic lottery but that's how it is. if the counter argument is "b-b-b-but the money gets taxed more than once" well uh then i guess we just shouldn't have taxes then.

I'm with Bronn on this... the issue, as Cantrell has tried to derail it to, is not the heir issue, it's the fact that the gov't is taxing monies multiple times.


you can extend this argument to literally every tax. hey did you know that, after estates are taxed, and you use your new found wealth to purchase tissues to cry into, you're going to have to pay a sales tax during that transaction! it's triple taxation! far more sinister than double taxation

I'm sorry but what transfer of wealth ISN'T taxed?


but this time it's not fair. as the child of rich parents i'm entitled to those things that i didn't work for, and it's not fair that big gubmint taxes this transfer of wealth because *feelings*

#91 Darth Biscuit

Darth Biscuit

    Dark Lord

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 34,973
  • Reputation: 9,072
HUDDLER

Posted 14 December 2012 - 11:42 AM

So basically what you guys are saying is that you don't care how the government taxes everyone or how much we are taxed, it's all good... right?

#92 Happy Panther

Happy Panther

    Now even funnier.

  • Joined: 16-March 09
  • posts: 18,507
  • Reputation: 3,471
SUPPORTER

Posted 14 December 2012 - 12:45 PM

So basically what you guys are saying is that you don't care how the government taxes everyone or how much we are taxed, it's all good... right?


Exactly,

It seems we have all become numb to the fact that government takes whatever it wants and continually is dreaming up ways to justify it's own programs.

It should work the other way. Draw up a simple and fair tax plan and then size the government to fit that.

#93 Delhommey

Delhommey

    Moderator

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: 12,792
  • Reputation: 2,493
Moderators

Posted 14 December 2012 - 12:54 PM

So basically what you guys are saying is that you don't care how the government taxes everyone or how much we are taxed, it's all good... right?


Yes, that's exactly why I gave a specific number on what I thought would be a respectable number for the cap to go down to on a tax that's somehow been around for close to a hundred years without destroying the fabric of our society.

#94 mmmbeans

mmmbeans

    FBI SURVEILLANCE VAN

  • Joined: 26-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 14,027
  • Reputation: 442
HUDDLER

Posted 14 December 2012 - 12:56 PM

as many businessmen often point out, the smart thing to do isn't always the fair thing.

#95 Darth Biscuit

Darth Biscuit

    Dark Lord

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 34,973
  • Reputation: 9,072
HUDDLER

Posted 14 December 2012 - 01:31 PM

Yes, that's exactly why I gave a specific number on what I thought would be a respectable number for the cap to go down to on a tax that's somehow been around for close to a hundred years without destroying the fabric of our society.


Well, this isn't even a discussion then because if you don't care what way or how much money the gov't takes from you, that's something I can't even fathom.

#96 Delhommey

Delhommey

    Moderator

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: 12,792
  • Reputation: 2,493
Moderators

Posted 14 December 2012 - 01:54 PM

Yes clearly that's what supporting a compromise of a 45% tax rate on anything above $3-4 million implies: Complete blind and slavish loyalty to the IRS.