He earned that money and has paid all of the appropriate taxes. Why should that money be taxed multiple times?
I always marvel at the ability of the American middle class to flagellate themselves and those lower for the benefit of the perpetuation of dynastic wealth of which they will never, ever partake. somebody please kill me
The current limit for estate tax is actually a moving target, with the tax being complete gone by 2012(i might be wrong about the exact year). But it will be only for a year, and it goes back to the 1Million estate tax limit the year after unless new laws are signed.
I'm not 100% in love with your tone. I never said that I would partake in that kind of wealth, I'm not even close nor do I expect to be. I'm also not saying that changes shouldn't be made because I absolutely want things to be better. In the interim, people can either make the best of the situation or they can dig themselves in a deeper hole. Do you not take advantage of the system in place? It isn't like you are on food stamps.
The arguments that you are citing have absolutely nothing to do with the arguments regarding the estate tax -- the savings habits of lower classes are just not relevant to that issue. What I find interesting is that the reaction of people in a discussion about taxes on the very, very rich is to start complaining about the poor being irresponsible - it just doesn't make sense.
There was a discussion about tax loopholes and how they effect the wealthy and poor. I didn't feel that type of discussion was limited to estate taxes. I just assumed that financial matters such as taxes, savings, spending, etc are all related. Perhaps that is more ignorance about the economy on my part. I don't think it is though. Multiple Choice Question: The majority of poor people make _____________ decisions when concerning their finances. a.) Responsible b.) Irresponible
I don't know the answer to this. I'm sure there are lots who fit into either or both categories. And there always will be. Nothing new there. But I don't think this is relevant to what we're talking about, which has nothing to do with the poor, rather it is the alarming increase in concentration of power & money in the hands of the few.
It amazes me also sam. every argument about wealth and what's the responsiblity of the wealthy degenerates into this discussion. I guess everyone in america feels they will be wealthy one day or maybe they have just been brainwashed. and it always boils down to, "poor people are irresponsible, don't save money, blah, blah. when its like you say, it has nothing to do with the topic. people act like the topic is rich people should sponsor poor families. when the topic is about the economy as a whole, debt financing, defense spending, etc. its not a rich vs. poor topic like it is as classified as.
Actually no, tell it to Warren Buffet & Bill Gates & George Soros & Ted Turner. You think they just hate rich people and hard work and capitalism? Doubtful. What is happening is that they see a problem and are trying to address it, even if it might be against their own self interest. The concentration of wealth and power in the hands of a few elites is a problem that should concern all americans, rich, poor, and in between.
With all the numbers being thrown around, you'd think this was a math problem. It's not. Let me use a few illustrative quotations, and maybe one of y'all can guess who said them; I always think of this quotation whenever I see someone regurgitate stock values as some indication of how well the country is doing. Now here's the one that explains the resistance to a more equitable and realistic tax system -- and please note it has nothing to do with the faux-economics that anti-poor pundits toss out: The numbers can be used in multiple ways - a slight shift in perspective, and TA-DA, the numbers support the other side (I'm not saying the numbers aren't genuinely reflective of an actual state, but that the insistence on counting beans deflects criticism away from the character of those who throw a handful of beans at you to argue in favor of the status quo). There are many, many people in this country who, if they did not have wealth, would not have anything. Mediocrity thrives in capitalism, because those with natural talents, great skills, creativity, or a genuine interest in the way the world works, or people with a strong and abiding faith in higher ideals, do not pursue wealth as an end, but as a means to achieving different ends. Most of those who pursue wealth as an end in itself are wholly (and slavishly) dependent on the accumulation of wealth to differentiate them from other people - to make them 'better' than other people. Without that social distinction (and the poor buy into it as well), they are not the same as everyone else - they are lesser than everyone else. Whatever numbers are thrown out, that is the real reason (in many, if not most) cases of resistance toward any sort of economic levelling to reduce disparities between people. Wealth brings respect to people who, otherwise, may possess no qualities particularly worthy of respect. Take away the fact that they have more money than other people ... and what are they?
Of course it just happens that most people who have natural talents, great skills, creativity are more likely to have more money than average. Most of the "rich" people I know are hard working and very good at what they do. There is a reason money is what it is. Are you saying highly paid doctors, bankers are not smart/talented people? But keep telling yourself "although I have no money, but I am really smarter, more talented, more skilled than those rich people"
Because people love to bash rich people. LOL LOL ------------------------------------------------------------------ I find it moronic to tax the people who create the jobs and growth in this country at a very high rate.
Adam Smith said it. But he had a simple solution to this apparent paradox. He suggested equal access to education would breed social mobility.
Rich people avoid taxes by avoiding wages. Put all your money into a trust and only pay yourself only what you need. You want a fancy car. Have the trust lease it. Now its an expense and comes off your taxes.
You're talking to the same people who support autocrats and the revoking of habeus corpus and the illegal surveillance of American citizens. There's a substantial group in this country who have forgotten or conciously chosen to ignore what the Revolution was about, what the Civil War was about, what the New Deal and WWII were about, what the struggle for labor and voting and civil rights were all about. What's next on their plate... Bringing back primogeniture? I don't want to live in Victorian England. I don't want to live in the US of the 1890's. I like living in the first country in history to make the Middle Class a majority. "There is a natural aristocracy among men. The grounds of this are virtue and talents... There is also an artificial aristocracy founded on wealth and birth, without either virtue or talents; for with these it would belong to the first class... The artificial aristocracy is a mischievous ingredient in government, and provision should be made to prevent its ascendency." --Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, 1813. ME 13:396 "Though there is less wealth [in my native country than in Europe], there is more freedom, more ease, and less misery." --Thomas Jefferson to Baron Geismer, 1785. ME 5:129, Papers 8:500
MB, Sam is tone deaf. You haven't figured that out?? I was about to post that I was going to give a tip of the hat to you for having income and assets high enough to worry about any possible estate tax. Now I see that you are like the white soldiers of the South during the Civil War. They were willing to lay down their lives so rich slave owners could continue to own slaves. (yes, I know state's rights were the paramount issue, at least in my opinion, but bear with me) Slaves were very, very expensive to buy, and to keep fed and housed so they would remain useful. The odds of the typical white Southerner ever having enough money to purchase one were almost nil. You hollaring about some "evil" (my quotes) estate tax taking that which you sweated blood for is playing right into the hands of the mouthpiece you probably listen to, Rush Limbaugh, who is worth tens of millions of dollars, easily, and of the most ardent pushers towards getting rid of the estate tax, who would benefit from it's demise. And what kills me is they always bellow about the estate tax being this great burden, what they call the 'death tax," yet they have no answer for replacing the billions and billions of dollars lost to the Federal Treasury by abolishing it. So your kids, who you rightly worry about, and I worry about the future of my own two children, as well... your kids will be paying higher taxes to the Federal government to cover the ever increasing Federal debt, a debt grown to immense proportions by the soon to be history, thank god, Republican Congress, and the incompetent Bush Administration. I also noted a lack of response to the fact that a person is only taxed up to $90,000 for Social Security. I happen to benefit from that, but that doesn't make it right. If the rich were forced to pay the same % everyone else does who has to pay the tax, we would be much closer to solving the SS crisis. Just a thought. D&D. Have You Hugged Your Dog Today?
The SS tax isn't really a tax, you are suppose to get back what you paid into it. Although we all know its more like you pay know and hope there is still money to pay you back when its time to collect. (You can't count on it, 401k is your friend)
