Your comment was completely ignorant and completely typical of the kind of nonsense that you fellas bring out to scare people whether its the family farms/estate tax argument or the medical costs/tort reform argument or any similar number of BS arguments. I'll post the facts when I have an opportunity.
Here is a chart showing the estate tax rate over the past century or so. Notably, the existence of estate tax has very little effect on how American, free, moral or entrepreneurial America is. It is just another tax. There is nothing inherently right or wrong about it. The rate and exempt amount under it is whatever the elected legislature determines it to be.
This..... It is a distraction... Lets worry about the global economic crisis, the energy shortages, the population explosion and global environmental destruction.... I do not care if someone that inherits $5,000,000 has to pay a tax.
This is a very narrow view of the world. We can or should worry about all those important things but it does not mean we should ignore this "little" problem. It's a distraction to you because it does not affect you. Just as your own problems mean nothing to some of the "rich" folks. If you don't care about their problems, why should they care about you. It's a vicious cycle where everyone can only think about himself.
If you lend a person $10, it's not taxable because you'll get the money back. But any interest you get paid IS taxable. If you give someone $10, that isn't taxable - because of the hassle, we have a minimum exception, just as the estate tax does. If you give someone $50,000, it certainly is taxable. How does this work? Let's say you have a home, and it goes from worth $100k to $200k? You want people to pay taxes on that, despite the fact that they gained no cash from it?
Who are you to decide $10 can be exempted, or 1 mil or 10 mil? If the argument is valid for 1 amount, it should be valid for all or it is not valid at all. ?
the judgement is made on the 'burden' of the tax. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excess_burden_of_taxation
That's a problem with our entire system of taxation then - we set minimums on everything from income taxes to estate taxes to gift taxes. You said: On the other hand, I think you should tax that estate while it was growing. If my house gains value, I assume you want to tax it when that happens, rather than when I die, yes? Or am I misunderstanding what you're suggesting?
Yes, you tax the interest, the capital gain that money was generating when the estate was built. You don't double tax the same money?. You assume something I never said. That tax could be another discussion but whether is was right to tax the value of your real estate does not prove that is was right to tax the estate. The reverse is also true.
I think I'm misunderstanding you here. Are you only talking about only taxing the cash income part of your estate? What is you make non-cash gains? Are those taxed; and if so, when?
You have no idea what my parents financial situation, nor my wife's parents financial situation. You are making an assumption. All of this BS about "gays shouldn't marry", and "Obama is a foreigner" and "Mitt Romney has a fake tan" is all a distraction from the HUGE issues that get pushed under the rug.
Wow...what a democrat...are you kidding...I don't care if I win $100m playing lotto and I wanna park it in a 1% cd whose business but mine is that...are you kidding me?
It's not always cash...assume my cousins and I inherit 10 convenience stores...how many jobs would be lost if we had to sell said assets to pay back our tax obligation...I simply ask what's the point? Our dads worked hard and lived what was once the American dream coming frOm india
Zero jobs will be lost since whoever buys one of the stores will still need to hire people to work in it. They might even run it better and create more wealth and employment opportunities.
