|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
eyepaddle (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:17 PM Original message |
Let's see where this goes: let's talk about a 100% Inheritance tax. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
KittyWampus (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:20 PM Response to Original message |
1. So even though I gave up my gardening business to move back to family business |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
eyepaddle (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:28 PM Response to Reply #1 |
10. Since this is an edge of the envelope spit ball of an idea, yeah. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
KittyWampus (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:35 PM Response to Reply #10 |
21. I do own partial share & can't be given more cause of tax rates. I don't generate much salary |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
eyepaddle (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:44 PM Response to Reply #21 |
24. Well, first of all this is really a "thought experiment" and not a proposal |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
liberalhistorian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:22 PM Response to Reply #10 |
52. Who the hell are you to decide |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dysfunctional press (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:54 PM Response to Reply #52 |
72. he's not deciding- he tossed it out as an idea for discussion, as he pretty clearly stated... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
eyepaddle (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:54 PM Response to Reply #52 |
73. First off, breathe. Second: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Dr.Phool (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 02:54 PM Response to Reply #73 |
104. That's what you say now. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BurtWorm (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 04:06 PM Response to Reply #104 |
125. You mean I have to die and leave all my shit to my heirs before the next election? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dysfunctional press (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:51 PM Response to Reply #1 |
70. if there were a 100% inheritance tax, he'd probably be more apt to relinquish posession while alive. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
FormerDittoHead (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jan-08-09 03:42 PM Response to Reply #1 |
144. Thomas Paine suggested an upper limit of inheritance. I would suggest a hard $100 million. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
flvegan (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:23 PM Response to Original message |
2. There's a lot of real property in that inheritance number, though. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
eyepaddle (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:35 PM Response to Reply #2 |
20. The real property would go back into pool too. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
flvegan (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:45 PM Response to Reply #20 |
25. What happens to the kids/family living in the house that mom owns |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
eyepaddle (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:48 PM Response to Reply #25 |
27. Hmmm, for this example I'd say that they can bid on it just like everybody else. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
flvegan (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:02 PM Response to Reply #27 |
37. But then the family is buying the same house over and over |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
eyepaddle (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:05 PM Response to Reply #37 |
40. Exactly. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Gwendolyn (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:35 PM Response to Reply #40 |
64. With the government basically owning everything, and simply "loaning" it out... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hannah Bell (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 03:20 PM Response to Reply #37 |
110. Or just give a house to everyone at birth & save all the sturm und drang |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dysfunctional press (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:57 PM Response to Reply #25 |
76. the house would be put into a family trust...no one person would "own" it... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
KittyWampus (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 04:03 PM Response to Reply #76 |
123. In most non-Western societies, real estate belonged to the tribe and each family had access to their |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dysfunctional press (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 07:56 PM Response to Reply #123 |
132. i prefer our way. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Cid_B (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jan-08-09 03:56 PM Response to Reply #123 |
146. Check the middle east for how will tribalism works... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
FormerDittoHead (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jan-08-09 03:47 PM Response to Reply #2 |
145. The property could be retained along with the ORIGINAL BASIS of the property for when it does sell. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Democrats_win (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:23 PM Response to Original message |
3. Tax the rich and their dead relatives. (No one else has any money.) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SteelPenguin (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:23 PM Response to Original message |
4. Well...Thinking Outside the Box |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
eyepaddle (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:38 PM Response to Reply #4 |
23. C'mon, let's really get out onthe edge here: if we are going to |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Selatius (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:23 PM Original message |
As it currently stands, I believe the first $2,000,000 of an estate is tax exempt. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
KittyWampus (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:33 PM Response to Original message |
18. And because of real estate prices going through the roof, our property is worth WAY over |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Selatius (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:52 PM Response to Reply #18 |
31. Well, is there a counter-proposal you recommend? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
eyepaddle (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:57 PM Response to Reply #31 |
34. This is what I'm really getting at |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Selatius (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 02:39 PM Response to Reply #34 |
96. A 0% inheritance tax might end up destroying the Republic in a few generations. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
KittyWampus (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 04:04 PM Response to Reply #31 |
124. good question, and yes. Raising cap would make sense. Real estate value has not and will not crash |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Selatius (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jan-08-09 12:19 AM Response to Reply #124 |
133. Well, suppose it is raised to 5,000,000 and left permanently. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GCP (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:23 PM Response to Original message |
5. So having worked hard all our lives |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
eyepaddle (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:31 PM Response to Reply #5 |
16. Yeah, but in that case you'd actually have to give it away, and then live without it. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
aikoaiko (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:24 PM Response to Original message |
6. Wow, we win a Presidential election and now the crazy talk begins |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mmonk (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:25 PM Response to Original message |
7. Let's suppose you have a disabled child that will not be able to take care |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
eyepaddle (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:33 PM Response to Reply #7 |
17. Let's suppose you have one of those right now, and also happen to be |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mmonk (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:26 PM Response to Reply #17 |
57. I have one, but am not poor. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lumberjack_jeff (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:33 PM Response to Reply #7 |
19. Presumably society would be well enough off that they could take care of the child. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mmonk (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:33 PM Response to Reply #19 |
63. Presumably our society could do that now |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lumberjack_jeff (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:45 PM Response to Reply #63 |
68. If the people with money had some skin in the game perhaps it wouldn't always be so. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mmonk (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 02:01 PM Response to Reply #68 |
80. The decisions and priorities are set in Washington. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
eyepaddle (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 02:06 PM Response to Reply #80 |
81. Before anybody gets their feeling too hurt, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mmonk (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 02:19 PM Response to Reply #81 |
86. Mine aren't and I'm with you on the idea of our society taking care |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lumberjack_jeff (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 02:21 PM Response to Reply #80 |
87. I agree, a 100% inheritance tax is a bad idea. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
arcadian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:25 PM Response to Original message |
8. Fuck the tax. Let's just seize their assets |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
yodoobo (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:30 PM Response to Reply #8 |
15. only top 1% Lets go for top 50% |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NeedleCast (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:27 PM Response to Reply #8 |
59. If you make more money than me |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
arcadian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 02:15 PM Response to Reply #59 |
85. The proles defending the elite |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
muriel_volestrangler (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 04:25 PM Response to Reply #8 |
128. You mean "Let's make 3 million people homeless" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Sebastian Doyle (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:25 PM Response to Original message |
9. Bush. Hilton. Rockefeller. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
yodoobo (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:28 PM Response to Original message |
11. Would be a boon for the trust and life insurance industry |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cali (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:29 PM Response to Original message |
12. your idea would ensure the demise of every family farm in my state |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Xithras (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:32 PM Response to Reply #12 |
62. Forget your state. This proposal would ensure 100% corporate farming. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
eyepaddle (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 02:12 PM Response to Reply #62 |
83. Just for the sake of this discussion, do you think Corprarations would |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Xithras (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 02:24 PM Response to Reply #83 |
89. Of course they would |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ogneopasno (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:29 PM Response to Original message |
13. No thanks. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
gravity (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:30 PM Response to Original message |
14. Then the rich would just give away their assets before they die |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:07 PM Response to Reply #14 |
41. Actually, they can't get away with that |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Maru Kitteh (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:36 PM Response to Original message |
22. No. I don't think the government should get one thin dime. I'm fine with taxes on me while I'm |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
eyepaddle (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:45 PM Response to Reply #22 |
26. Well, yeah, in the real world sure. But in the make believe world of my topic, what then? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Maru Kitteh (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jan-08-09 12:35 AM Response to Reply #26 |
135. Your make-believe world, in a best case scenario - might - might |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OPERATIONMINDCRIME (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:48 PM Response to Original message |
28. One Of The Downright Dumbest Proposals I've Ever Heard. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
eyepaddle (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:50 PM Response to Reply #28 |
30. Very candid and direct, but not very useful for the moment |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OPERATIONMINDCRIME (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:55 PM Response to Reply #30 |
32. Your Link: A Child Post As Downright Dumb As The Parent Post. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
eyepaddle (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:00 PM Response to Reply #32 |
35. Well, if you really want to argue with a guy who isn't arguing back I say go for it. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OPERATIONMINDCRIME (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:10 PM Response to Reply #35 |
45. There Was No Argument. Merely Factual Statements. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:08 PM Response to Reply #28 |
43. Most economists and legal scholars disagree with you. So the OP is not dumb at all. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OPERATIONMINDCRIME (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:09 PM Response to Reply #43 |
44. ROFLMAO!!!!!!! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:15 PM Response to Reply #44 |
46. roflmao is not an argument. Why don't we compare sources? nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OPERATIONMINDCRIME (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:19 PM Response to Reply #46 |
50. Statements Rooted In Sheer Stupidity Do Not Require An Argument. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:26 PM Response to Reply #50 |
58. You're right. That's why no one needs to argue with you. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OPERATIONMINDCRIME (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 02:00 PM Response to Reply #58 |
79. Not Surprised That Your Wit Is No More Developed Than Simply "I Know You Are But What Am I" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 02:31 PM Response to Reply #79 |
93. No, facts. See post 88. Do you have a rebuttal? Or just more snark? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OPERATIONMINDCRIME (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 03:13 PM Response to Reply #93 |
107. Your Post 88 Was Completely Irrelevant To This Discussion. Completely. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 03:18 PM Response to Reply #107 |
109. I see. You see no connection between 100% and 90% as compared to zero |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OPERATIONMINDCRIME (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 03:36 PM Response to Reply #109 |
115. Does Your Strawman Have A Name? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 03:40 PM Response to Reply #115 |
117. "COMPLETELY different argument" ??? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OPERATIONMINDCRIME (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 04:15 PM Response to Reply #117 |
127. Your Inability To Comprehend The Severe Flaws in Your Responses Is Troubling. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cherokeeprogressive (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:15 PM Response to Reply #43 |
47. "Most legal scholars" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:18 PM Response to Reply #47 |
49. OK. I forgot the Bush era has made people disparage expertise |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cherokeeprogressive (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:28 PM Response to Reply #49 |
60. Get your data from Limbaugh if you like. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mmonk (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:56 PM Response to Reply #43 |
75. You do understand what 100% means? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 02:34 PM Response to Reply #75 |
95. 100% marginal rate at some point |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mmonk (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 02:44 PM Response to Reply #95 |
100. I didn't see mention of a progressive estate tax, just a 100% one. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
eyepaddle (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 06:07 PM Response to Reply #100 |
131. Yeah, but since I also said it was tongue in cheek I think that indicates I'm willing |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Evoman (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jan-08-09 08:54 AM Response to Reply #28 |
138. Yeah, it may not be very rational, but the point is that you are supposed to make an argument. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OPERATIONMINDCRIME (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jan-08-09 10:25 AM Response to Reply #138 |
139. Retarded Proposals Require No Counter Argument. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Evoman (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jan-08-09 02:53 PM Response to Reply #139 |
140. No, quite the opposite. Retarded proposals are EASILY counter argumented and should be |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OPERATIONMINDCRIME (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jan-08-09 03:16 PM Response to Reply #140 |
141. Not Quite The Opposite Whatsoever. In Fact, My Statement Was Spot On. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Evoman (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jan-08-09 09:57 PM Response to Reply #141 |
155. Ha...your sun proposal is actually a staple of science fiction. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Gwendolyn (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:49 PM Response to Original message |
29. Lol, that sure is thinking outside the box. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jmg257 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 12:56 PM Response to Original message |
33. NO thanks. One reason we work hard is so our kids can be/start better off then we were/did. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ebdarcy (654 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:02 PM Response to Original message |
36. I'll pass. An inheritance isn't always just about the monetary value. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AngryAmish (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:02 PM Response to Original message |
38. Accountants and attorneys full employment act |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:04 PM Response to Original message |
39. In the past, both progressives and conservatives favored confiscatory inheritance taxes |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
eyepaddle (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:08 PM Response to Reply #39 |
42. Thank you, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:25 PM Response to Reply #42 |
56. Not online sources -- mostly books |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Sanctified (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:18 PM Response to Original message |
48. This is the perfect method for creating a serfdom. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 02:40 PM Response to Reply #48 |
97. There's a famous article on inheritance tax that made a similar point |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Sanctified (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 03:27 PM Response to Reply #97 |
112. Sounds like the article did not take into account the human nature of greed. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cherokeeprogressive (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:19 PM Response to Original message |
51. Which room in the Kennedy mansion at Kennebunkport do you think they'll give me? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
eyepaddle (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 02:09 PM Response to Reply #51 |
82. Well, you'd be free to put in a bid, let's hope it wins. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Burma Jones (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:23 PM Response to Original message |
53. It would make leaving the USA a very attractive option |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NeedleCast (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:24 PM Response to Original message |
54. The effects for many people would be a disaster |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:38 PM Response to Reply #54 |
66. No, most modern societies have had confiscatory inheritance with no problems |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NeedleCast (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:52 PM Response to Reply #66 |
71. You are not playing along with the rules the OP set |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 02:30 PM Response to Reply #71 |
92. What he said. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Gwendolyn (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:55 PM Response to Reply #66 |
74. The OP is proposing a 100% inheritance tax. You don't seem to be. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
eyepaddle (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 02:00 PM Response to Reply #74 |
77. Yeah, but that's just the intial point for debate |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Cleita (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:25 PM Response to Original message |
55. I dunno. The rich usually put most of their money in living trusts for their heirs before they |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
eyepaddle (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 02:14 PM Response to Reply #55 |
84. Thank you, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 03:30 PM Response to Reply #55 |
113. This is a myth. Lifetime gifts, like living trusts, do not avoid inheritance taxes |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Cleita (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 03:47 PM Response to Reply #113 |
119. I never said it avoided taxes. It avoids inheritance tax though and probate |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 03:56 PM Response to Reply #119 |
121. It didn't avoid taxes. It avoided fees. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mnhtnbb (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:30 PM Response to Original message |
61. Offshore accounts would explode! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JNelson6563 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:35 PM Response to Original message |
65. I appreciate where you're coming from |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MajorChode (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:44 PM Response to Original message |
67. I don't believe in the principle of the inheritance tax |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 01:48 PM Response to Reply #67 |
69. Actually, the main original purpose of the estate tax was not to capture income tax |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MajorChode (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 02:00 PM Response to Reply #69 |
78. If that was the purpose, why not level the playing field during their lifetime? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 02:29 PM Response to Reply #78 |
91. It has to do with incentives |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MajorChode (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 02:59 PM Response to Reply #91 |
105. I can't agree with you |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 03:11 PM Response to Reply #105 |
106. I don't think we disagree on very much |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MajorChode (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 03:53 PM Response to Reply #106 |
120. I'm not sure how you can argue for both |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 03:59 PM Response to Reply #120 |
122. The second tax is not to the person who earned it |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
endarkenment (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 04:11 PM Response to Reply #67 |
126. Huge amounts of inherited wealth has never been taxed. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 02:24 PM Response to Original message |
88. Presidents against swollen inheritances, for high inheritance tax: Teddy Roosevelt, Hoover and FDR |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hannah Bell (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 02:48 PM Response to Reply #88 |
102. Bull, The Roosevelt family's millions went back to the 1600s, through |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 02:50 PM Response to Reply #102 |
103. He was called a class traitor |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hannah Bell (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 03:16 PM Response to Reply #103 |
108. I don't give a damn what he was called. The Roosevelts kept their $$ |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 03:22 PM Response to Reply #108 |
111. I used to know one of the "broke" Rockefellers |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hannah Bell (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 03:34 PM Response to Reply #111 |
114. and i bet you met the broke rockefeller in an ivy university. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 03:37 PM Response to Reply #114 |
116. Yes, but you've been saying that they don't give up one penny in taxes |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hannah Bell (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 05:44 PM Response to Reply #116 |
130. The Rockefeller dynasty started with 3 brothers. How many folks do the Trust Funds support |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Dreamer Tatum (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 02:25 PM Response to Original message |
90. Then the government would start killing rich people |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
VA4Moran (12 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 02:32 PM Response to Original message |
94. stuff it |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Manifestor_of_Light (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 02:41 PM Response to Original message |
98. I have not been able to get a job (a decent one or a permanent one) since 1996. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Two Americas (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 02:44 PM Response to Original message |
99. of course |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hannah Bell (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 02:44 PM Response to Original message |
101. only if the rockefellers give up what they passed on through 6 generations |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
KillCapitalism (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 03:44 PM Response to Original message |
118. 100% is too extreme for any asset level. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Manifestor_of_Light (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jan-07-09 04:37 PM Response to Reply #118 |
129. I'd start taxing at a higher level. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
anonymous171 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jan-08-09 03:18 PM Response to Reply #118 |
142. Tax should start at $250,000 not $150,000 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TheKentuckian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jan-08-09 12:29 AM Response to Original message |
134. To harsh but 70% above 2-2.5 million would reshuffle the deck a lot |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
scrinmaster (563 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jan-08-09 01:13 AM Response to Original message |
136. Stupid idea. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
I814U (65 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jan-08-09 02:45 AM Response to Original message |
137. "Family" is a fabrication of the religious and the rich... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
anonymous171 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jan-08-09 03:21 PM Response to Reply #137 |
143. Marriage as a state institution (not a religious one) helps society. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
I814U (65 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jan-08-09 03:57 PM Response to Reply #143 |
147. Exactly my point |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tritsofme (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jan-08-09 04:02 PM Response to Reply #147 |
148. Private property is a myth? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
I814U (65 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jan-08-09 04:17 PM Response to Reply #148 |
149. Yes, a myth. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tritsofme (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jan-08-09 04:31 PM Response to Reply #149 |
150. I'm not going to play a game like this. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
I814U (65 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jan-08-09 05:07 PM Response to Reply #150 |
151. I have no intention of starting a fight only a dialogue... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
leftofthedial (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jan-08-09 05:48 PM Response to Original message |
152. one year's worth of the maximum wage (40X the minimum wage) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
deaniac21 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jan-08-09 06:04 PM Response to Original message |
153. Unless you can perform combat hand rolls on either side in |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Incitatus (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jan-08-09 06:41 PM Response to Original message |
154. It sounds like a good way to further destroy the middle class. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
csziggy (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jan-08-09 10:09 PM Response to Original message |
156. Then there would be no point to being anything other than a government or corporate drone |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Paladin (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Jan-08-09 10:20 PM Response to Original message |
157. No. (n/t) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Tue Jun 04th 2024, 10:20 PM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC