- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: 65% Estate Tax Proposal
Posted on 9/29/14 at 11:16 am to LSURussian
Posted on 9/29/14 at 11:16 am to LSURussian
quote:
You're either otto or DA's alter. I'm trying to decide which it is.
Based on his posts on the other boards I can rule out Otto for you.
0
Posted on 9/29/14 at 11:18 am to Tiger n Miami AU83
My question to those who support this is why is the Government more entitled to this money than the kids of those who earned it?
Posted on 9/29/14 at 11:20 am to MMauler
quote:I don't think anyone is asking you to. But your assertion does highlight this as an emotional issue--not one of merit.
I'm sorry but I can't feel sorry for Little Stevie Forbes because he ONLY got $500 million instead of $1 billion.
You will never be free
until you can look at your neighbors wealth
with joy not jealousy.
This post was edited on 9/29/14 at 11:22 am
Posted on 9/29/14 at 11:21 am to Vols&Shaft83
quote:
What I think is unfair is DOUBLE TAXATION. That money has already been taxed at every level.
In many of the truly wealthy estates, that is not true. These estate are not taxed on the capital appreciation and their beneficiaries receive a step-up in basis at death.
AND, that helps all of us -- especially those of us whose parents aren't worth $10 million.
For example, the largest asset for most of our parents is their house. They may have bought their house for $15,000 in the 60's -- now it's worth $500K. When they die, we get the house with a basis of $500K, so that if we turn around and sell it, we don't recognize a gain.
Without the estate tax regime, we could receive a carry-over basis and have to report a $485K gain -- all so Stevie Forbes can get that $1 billion instead of just $500 million. Yeah, I know, poor Stevie.
Posted on 9/29/14 at 11:21 am to Tiger n Miami AU83
quote:
Unless we reduce skyrocketing wealth and income inequality
Because countries that force income equality are so awesome like the former Soviet Union.
Posted on 9/29/14 at 11:21 am to MMauler
quote:
I'm sorry but I can't feel sorry for Little Stevie Forbes because he ONLY got $500 million instead of $1 billion.
No one is asking you to feel sorry for him. Likewise, I don't feel sorry for you that you haven't amounted to shite in your own life.
Posted on 9/29/14 at 11:24 am to SirWinston
quote:
why would anybody (except the top 1%) oppose this if the limit is only for 10 million dollars or above?
1) The money has already been taxed. The government has no right to it.
2) Trust fund babies will do a better job getting that wealth into circulation than the government.
Posted on 9/29/14 at 11:26 am to Taxing Authority
quote:
I don't think anyone is asking you to. But your assertion does highlight this as an emotional issue--not one of merit.
For me, it's strictly an issue of "fairness".
ALL taxes should be looked at in terms of fairness vis-a-vis all other taxes.
We can all agree that government needs tax revenues. Of course, there will always be disagreement as to how much (i.e., how much should we be spending), but there is some minimal amount.
So, what is the fairest way to achieve that level of revenue.
Is it to massively tax the people who work their a$$es off and earn that money and live paycheck to paycheck?
Let's say the government gave us a choice of keeping ALL the money we earned during our lifetimes, but having to pay an 85% estate tax on ALL of our assets when we die.
I think all but the MOST wealthy would choose the estate tax.
Presumably then, I would argue that most people would think that a higher estate tax vis-a-vis an income tax is "more fair".
This post was edited on 9/29/14 at 11:45 am
Posted on 9/29/14 at 11:26 am to deltaland
quote:
My question to those who support this is why is the Government more entitled to this money than the kids of those who earned it?
Because the kids are winners of life's lottery. It's just not fair.
Posted on 9/29/14 at 11:31 am to JEAUXBLEAUX
quote:Yeah. But that's because you're a leech and leeches like other leeches.
I love bernie. seems like one of the few not bought off yet by the money interests. I said yet
Posted on 9/29/14 at 11:36 am to MMauler
quote:It has nothing to do with feeling sorry for them. It has everything to do with it being their money.
Stevie Forbes can get that $1 billion instead of just $500 million. Yeah, I know, poor Stevie.
Posted on 9/29/14 at 11:39 am to Scruffy
quote:
It has nothing to do with feeling sorry for them. It has everything to do with it being their money.
And, the money YOU actually EARN isn't?
I think the problem is that people have just become so use to paying income taxes -- and hardly anyone pays the Estate tax -- that they don't look at the fairness of all the different types of taxes we pay.
If I could unilaterally make just ONE change to the tax code it would be to suspend withholding for just one year. I would love for people to actually see what they actually pay in income taxes. Let them cut a check to the federal government every year (like many of us "nonemployees" have to do), and you would see a tax revolt. People would actually question the income tax and not be so concerned with an estate tax that they'll never in their wildest f*cking dreams have to even consider.
This post was edited on 9/29/14 at 11:58 am
Posted on 9/29/14 at 11:43 am to MMauler
quote:
MMauler
You are making some good points. Especially about the step up in basis as part of the estate tax laws which benefits a lot of people.
Also, I agree I think most would go for less taxes in their lifetime with higher estate taxes (and maybe no step up) at death.
This post was edited on 9/29/14 at 11:45 am
Posted on 9/29/14 at 11:45 am to Tiger n Miami AU83
quote:
unless we end the ability of the super-rich to buy elections
except for Soros, he can do what he wants
Posted on 9/29/14 at 11:46 am to MMauler
quote:
I think the problem is that people have just become so use to paying income taxes -- and hardly anyone pays the Estate tax -- that they don't look at the fairness of all the different types of taxes we pay.
I make no secret that I think individual tax liability should be kept as low as possible.
However, I'm also concerned about the justification for taxing property simply because the owner has died. Is it because dead people don't vote (outside of New Orleans and Chicago)?
I want the government to stop looking at our property as sources for "multiple income streams" and focus on meeting it's Constitutionally mandated functions as cost-effectively as possible. I know that's idealistic, but a person can dream can't he?
This post was edited on 9/29/14 at 11:47 am
Posted on 9/29/14 at 11:51 am to Ace Midnight
quote:
However, I'm also concerned about the justification for taxing property simply because the owner has died. Is it because dead people don't vote (outside of New Orleans and Chicago)?
Again, you should look at all taxes.
Since you brought up "taxing property," that is another tax. Some older people who have lived in their houses their entire adult lifetime are forced to move out because they can no longer afford their property taxes.
Is that fair?
We pay taxes we don't even see. To me, we should look at EVERY tax we pay and see what we think is "fair".
And, to me, the "fairest" of all taxes is the estate tax. First, we don't pay it -- our kids (or other beneficiaries) do. Kids that have done nothing to earn it, and have benefited from that wealth their entire lives already. Second, it's at death so we can keep the money WE earned our entire lifetime.
Of course, that's all assuming that you're actually in the 1% that actually pays estate tax.
My biggest dream in life is that I'm hit with a MASSIVE F*CKING ESTATE TAX. That would mean I was one rich mother f*cker during my lifetime.
This post was edited on 9/29/14 at 11:54 am
Posted on 9/29/14 at 11:52 am to DelU249
quote:
There should be NO estate tax
Posted on 9/29/14 at 11:56 am to SirWinston
quote:
the fact that nobody is questioning whether or not there's a certain exemption amount is shocking to me. why would anybody (except the top 1%) oppose this if the limit is only for 10 million dollars or above?
It's not Biblical!
Posted on 9/29/14 at 11:57 am to MMauler
quote:
And, to me, the "fairest" of all taxes is the estate tax. First, we don't pay it -- our kids (or other beneficiaries) do. Kids that have done nothing to earn it, and have benefited from that wealth their entire lives already. Second, it's at death so we can keep the money WE earned our entire lifetime.
So you would be in favor of replacing an income tax with an estate tax?
Posted on 9/29/14 at 11:57 am to Tiger n Miami AU83
quote:
quote:
“Unless we reduce skyrocketing wealth and income inequality,” he declared, “unless we end the ability of the super-rich to buy elections, the United States will be well on its way toward becoming an oligarchic form of society where almost all power rests with the billionaire class.”
As opposed to an oligarchic form of society where almost all the power rests with the political class? I'm sure we can all agree that would be much, much better, right?
Page 3 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News