We Need to Get Rid of the Death Tax

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Fair is from each according to what they can pay,[/quote]

So then it would be fair to tax everyone (middle class included) more heavily, too?

Tax them until they are are completely unable to purchase anything but what they absolutely need. They CAN pay a lot more. It’s possible. They don’t need a television or a computer or a gym membership or weights at home or supplements or a home with more than one bathroom and bedroom. They don’t need anything but food, water and shelter. Would that be fair?

[quote]sasquatch wrote:
ZEB wrote:
sasquatch wrote:
grew7 wrote:
sasquatch wrote:
Close the current loop holes and then get rid of the tax.

Until then, tax 'em.

What, “loopholes,” are you talking about?

Would you like for me to list them one at a time or can I just suggest that the wealthy of this country pay less percentage of tax than the middle.

Or were you completely unaware of the fact that the wealthy have ‘avenues’ for which to avoid paying some taxes?

You know I have knocked down a good amount of money each year. But, I have yet to take advantage of any of those tax breaks that they say all the “rich” are able to get.

So, please list these advantages and if they make any sense I will send them to my accountant who had better act on them so that I can take advantage of the system.

Becuase…so far it seems that the more I make the more I pay!

I am quite serious, and I thank you in advance.

Zeb

Good amount is different from the majority of people actually affected by the death tax. I’m talking about the people with huge net worths who DO shield a great deal of potentially taxable income.

You want to play semantics. I want everyone to pay their fair share. I gaurantee you people who pull $1 mil/yr are not paying 33% of their income in taxes. And I’ll take the next step and say people who’s net worth puts them in the top 10% of wealth figures take advantage of many of the loopholes and ‘programs’ not available to those of us who survive on a much more modest income.

And I’m not talking about the ‘fake’ rich here. Let’s talk about old money.

I don’t want to see the gov’t take it away. That is not my point. I certainly don’t want to see people who have worked hard not be able to help their children. My contention–again–is with the uber rich who probably have already figured a way to bypass this tax anyway.[/quote]

That was the other point I was going to raise. I was reading about this, and even though I’m not much for tax codes and what not, I read that there are already numerous ways to pass this tax over. “One time gifts”, shifting money around, etc.

The estate tax only effects people with “estates”. That’s not 98% of the population.

[quote]biltritewave wrote:
Irish,

the point you are missing is that those tax cuts, even for the wealthy, raise your standard of living, and the ability of the government to do those little pet projects you want to see.
[/quote]

Really? Funny, because I’m paying more for everything, and gas is $3 a gallon, and prices keep raising. My standard of living hasn’t gone anywhere.

Tax cuts for the wealthy do not help me, and all it does it make rich people richer.

High oil prices have affected everything, so nothing is “outside” of them.

Besides this, you’re talking about taking out a big chunk of taxes by eliminating this…for what? To help the rich more than we already have? No, I don’t think so.

[quote]
The estate tax was not covered by the bush tax plan that was enacted but dont you think it makes more sense to keep entrepeanurial businesses in the hands of their original owners or their families rather than forcing them to sell to corporations so they dont have to pay the tax burden upon death or leave that burden to their children. I sure do. [/quote]

There are already exceptions for family businesses such as farms and what not, and as Sasquatch said, the super rich have found plenty of ways to cut down what they’re paying.

I haven’t seen Paris Hilton or any of the Kennedys crying poverty because of the estate tax…have you?

[quote]grew7 wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Fair is from each according to what they can pay,

So then it would be fair to tax everyone (middle class included) more heavily, too?

Tax them until they are are completely unable to purchase anything but what they absolutely need. They CAN pay a lot more. It’s possible. They don’t need a television or a computer or a gym membership or weights at home or supplements or a home with more than one bathroom and bedroom. They don’t need anything but food, water and shelter. Would that be fair?[/quote]

That’s not what I said at all.

There is a huge difference between the middle class and the super rich that are affected by the estate tax.

because there are a million loopholes to get around the estate tax…

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
sasquatch wrote:
ZEB wrote:
sasquatch wrote:
grew7 wrote:
sasquatch wrote:
Close the current loop holes and then get rid of the tax.

Until then, tax 'em.

What, “loopholes,” are you talking about?

Would you like for me to list them one at a time or can I just suggest that the wealthy of this country pay less percentage of tax than the middle.

Or were you completely unaware of the fact that the wealthy have ‘avenues’ for which to avoid paying some taxes?

You know I have knocked down a good amount of money each year. But, I have yet to take advantage of any of those tax breaks that they say all the “rich” are able to get.

So, please list these advantages and if they make any sense I will send them to my accountant who had better act on them so that I can take advantage of the system.

Becuase…so far it seems that the more I make the more I pay!

I am quite serious, and I thank you in advance.

Zeb

Good amount is different from the majority of people actually affected by the death tax. I’m talking about the people with huge net worths who DO shield a great deal of potentially taxable income.

You want to play semantics. I want everyone to pay their fair share. I gaurantee you people who pull $1 mil/yr are not paying 33% of their income in taxes. And I’ll take the next step and say people who’s net worth puts them in the top 10% of wealth figures take advantage of many of the loopholes and ‘programs’ not available to those of us who survive on a much more modest income.

And I’m not talking about the ‘fake’ rich here. Let’s talk about old money.

I don’t want to see the gov’t take it away. That is not my point. I certainly don’t want to see people who have worked hard not be able to help their children. My contention–again–is with the uber rich who probably have already figured a way to bypass this tax anyway.

That was the other point I was going to raise. I was reading about this, and even though I’m not much for tax codes and what not, I read that there are already numerous ways to pass this tax over. “One time gifts”, shifting money around, etc.

The estate tax only effects people with “estates”. That’s not 98% of the population.[/quote]

The purpose of the gift tax is to stop people from getting around the estate tax. You are spot on on your 98% figure, roughly 2% of all decedents estates are subject to the estate tax. There is an exclusion of $2mm, and this is after you subtract all liabilities from the estate. There are also deductions for burial, charitable deductions, etc.

I don’t agree with adding an extra tax just because someone is rich, don’t even get me started on the jock tax. Tax loopholes are designed not to allow rich folks to avoid taxes ( hence the AMT), but to shape behaviors. An example is the deduction for charitable donations, the theory is that the charity is providing a social good, which no longer has to be paid for with tax dollars. Or excise (sin) taxes on booze and tobacco.

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
grew7 wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Fair is from each according to what they can pay,

So then it would be fair to tax everyone (middle class included) more heavily, too?

Tax them until they are are completely unable to purchase anything but what they absolutely need. They CAN pay a lot more. It’s possible. They don’t need a television or a computer or a gym membership or weights at home or supplements or a home with more than one bathroom and bedroom. They don’t need anything but food, water and shelter. Would that be fair?

That’s not what I said at all.

There is a huge difference between the middle class and the super rich that are affected by the estate tax.

[/quote]

And that difference is? People who are wealthy deserve to spend it as they see fit. It’s not like these aren’t hard-working people.

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
grew7 wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Fair is from each according to what they can pay,

So then it would be fair to tax everyone (middle class included) more heavily, too?

Tax them until they are are completely unable to purchase anything but what they absolutely need. They CAN pay a lot more. It’s possible. They don’t need a television or a computer or a gym membership or weights at home or supplements or a home with more than one bathroom and bedroom. They don’t need anything but food, water and shelter. Would that be fair?

That’s not what I said at all.

There is a huge difference between the middle class and the super rich that are affected by the estate tax.

[/quote]

But everyone can afford to pay it, so why not? It’s for the good of our country. You like our country, don’t you?

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

Fair is from each according to what they can pay, and then letting the government use it appropriately to make the country better.

[/quote]

This is one of the funniest things I’ve ever read.

“…letting the government use it appropriatley…”

I have tears in my eyes.

[quote]grew7 wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
grew7 wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Fair is from each according to what they can pay,

So then it would be fair to tax everyone (middle class included) more heavily, too?

Tax them until they are are completely unable to purchase anything but what they absolutely need. They CAN pay a lot more. It’s possible. They don’t need a television or a computer or a gym membership or weights at home or supplements or a home with more than one bathroom and bedroom. They don’t need anything but food, water and shelter. Would that be fair?

That’s not what I said at all.

There is a huge difference between the middle class and the super rich that are affected by the estate tax.

And that difference is? People who are wealthy deserve to spend it as they see fit. It’s not like these aren’t hard-working people.[/quote]

Really? All of them?

Good to know that no one is born into being super rich anymore, I’m glad we stopped that.

Again, you need to get out more.

[quote]doogie wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:

Fair is from each according to what they can pay, and then letting the government use it appropriately to make the country better.

This is one of the funniest things I’ve ever read.

“…letting the government use it appropriatley…”

I have tears in my eyes.
[/quote]

I knew someone would say something about that.

But either that, or be against all government in general because you can’t trust them. And you aren’t an anarchist.

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

This is one of the funniest things I’ve ever read.

“…letting the government use it appropriatley…”

I have tears in my eyes.

I knew someone would say something about that.

But either that, or be against all government in general because you can’t trust them. And you aren’t an anarchist.[/quote]

OR the correct choice of limiting the federal government to those tasks they are authorized by the Constitution to handle. Not healthcare, not education, ect.

Then they’ll need less money from all of us.

[quote]doogie wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:

This is one of the funniest things I’ve ever read.

“…letting the government use it appropriatley…”

I have tears in my eyes.

I knew someone would say something about that.

But either that, or be against all government in general because you can’t trust them. And you aren’t an anarchist.

OR the correct choice of limiting the federal government to those tasks they are authorized by the Constitution to handle. Not healthcare, not education, ect.

Then they’ll need less money from all of us.

[/quote]

DING DING DING WE HAVE A WINNER

last i checked wealth redistribution isnt in the constitution

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

Because he doesn’t need that tax break of 25,000.[/quote]

“Need?” Who are you to determine who “needs” a tax break? It’s his money not yours!

Do you “need” to grow your arms another one inch?

Do you “need” to drink that extra beer?

You really have to rethink your entire frame of reference regarding the word “need.”

It is certainly not up to the government to determine what someone “needs.”

Come on Irish…

You’re a good man Irish. But your loyalty relative to taxes is very misplaced.

What we should have is a government that is run more lean. Then we could lower everyone’s taxes substantially.

Everybody in America can send extra money into the IRS if they want to. How much extra do you send in each year? Or are you just generous with other people’s money.

I know you are an aspiring writer, but I have no idea what kind of jobs you’ve held or what kind of money you make. If you make $300,000 a year and say you don’t want a tax break, that is fairly noble. If you are only making $30,000 and barely paying any taxes as it is, then your words don’t really mean that much.

Do you not think that this extra money you are willing to let the government have would be better spent by a private charity? Wouldn’t you like to be allowed to choose exactly where the money goes in order to make this country a better place?

[quote]sasquatch wrote:

You want to play semantics. I want everyone to pay their fair share.[/quote]

No I don’t want to play semantics or any other game!

I simply want you to point out all the loopholes that YOU said were in the tax system for the rich.

You made an assertion that “the wealthy of this country pay less than the middle class.”

And percentage wise (there are less rich people than middle class folks) they pay [MORE!

How very wrong you are my friend:

DEPARTMENT OF THE TRASURY

“The individual income tax is highly progressive- a small group of higher-income taxpayers pay most of the individual income taxes each year.”

The top 5% of taxpayers (by income) paid almost 54% of all individual income taxes!

There goes your theory!

Here you go:

More assertions of loopholes yet still you don’t offer up any so that I can take advantage of them. I could get this sort of cheap talk at the local pub. You know when guys have a few beers and start complaining about how the rich get away with everything and they…the poor suckers have to pay up.

It’s really all just cheap talk huh?

Well…you keep saying it but can’t seem to come up with any verification for your pie in the sky working class theories…

Yet, I have shown you proof that the top 5% of all income earners in the country account for almost 54% of all taxes paid.

Stop the apparent jealous fit. If it were not for what you term as the “rich” in this country I think it’s safe to say that we would be a lot worse off.

Have you hugged a millionaire today?

:slight_smile:

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
sasquatch wrote:
ZEB wrote:
sasquatch wrote:
grew7 wrote:
sasquatch wrote:
Close the current loop holes and then get rid of the tax.

Until then, tax 'em.

What, “loopholes,” are you talking about?

Would you like for me to list them one at a time or can I just suggest that the wealthy of this country pay less percentage of tax than the middle.

Or were you completely unaware of the fact that the wealthy have ‘avenues’ for which to avoid paying some taxes?

You know I have knocked down a good amount of money each year. But, I have yet to take advantage of any of those tax breaks that they say all the “rich” are able to get.

So, please list these advantages and if they make any sense I will send them to my accountant who had better act on them so that I can take advantage of the system.

Becuase…so far it seems that the more I make the more I pay!

I am quite serious, and I thank you in advance.

Zeb

Good amount is different from the majority of people actually affected by the death tax. I’m talking about the people with huge net worths who DO shield a great deal of potentially taxable income.

You want to play semantics. I want everyone to pay their fair share. I gaurantee you people who pull $1 mil/yr are not paying 33% of their income in taxes. And I’ll take the next step and say people who’s net worth puts them in the top 10% of wealth figures take advantage of many of the loopholes and ‘programs’ not available to those of us who survive on a much more modest income.

And I’m not talking about the ‘fake’ rich here. Let’s talk about old money.

I don’t want to see the gov’t take it away. That is not my point. I certainly don’t want to see people who have worked hard not be able to help their children. My contention–again–is with the uber rich who probably have already figured a way to bypass this tax anyway.

That was the other point I was going to raise. I was reading about this, and even though I’m not much for tax codes and what not, I read that there are already numerous ways to pass this tax over. “One time gifts”, shifting money around, etc.

The estate tax only effects people with “estates”. That’s not 98% of the population.[/quote]

If even one man is “robbed” isn’t it still a crime?

[quote]Diomede wrote:
because there are a million loopholes to get around the estate tax…[/quote]

I keep hearing about these loopholes…but for some reason no one can point them out to me.

It’s almost like they aren’t there.

:slight_smile:

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

Really? All of them?

Good to know that no one is born into being super rich anymore, I’m glad we stopped that.

Again, you need to get out more.[/quote]

Hey buddy I like you, but you are on the WRONG side of this issue.

“Most are entrepreneurs who have built “boring” empires: drycleaners, construction companies, laundromats, mobile home parks. But they are providing a needed service and have slowly, consistently built their businesses by the same frugal principles with which they manage their personal finances. They are very likely to be found fixing a washer, running a register or hammering nails.”

That’s right most millionaires are self made!

And regarding the super rich don’t they have a right to hand down their hard earned dollars to their children?

At what level of income does it become “evil” to hand down your wealth to the next generation?

And why is it evil?

If you had a son and you wanted to leave him you entire net worth how would you feel if the government stepped in and said “I don’t think so.”

Now that’s evil!

Matters not if you are leaving him 10-K or 1 billion dollars.

It’s your money and you should have a right to do with it what you like.

Think about it Irish…

[quote]doogie wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:

This is one of the funniest things I’ve ever read.

“…letting the government use it appropriatley…”

I have tears in my eyes.

I knew someone would say something about that.

But either that, or be against all government in general because you can’t trust them. And you aren’t an anarchist.

OR the correct choice of limiting the federal government to those tasks they are authorized by the Constitution to handle. Not healthcare, not education, ect.

Then they’ll need less money from all of us.

[/quote]

Now your talking like a conservative!