Couldn't agree more. And this belief has ancient roots. A land of equal opportunity means equal opportunity.

Most of an individual's wealth can be passed beyond the grave, and that's right and fair. But the opportunities that the USA provides to all for a good life, for a good income, and for wealth accumulation are perhaps unparalleled. Some recompense is appropriate.

My suggestion, however, is that the maximum tax rate for inheritance taxes be the same as the long-term capital gains tax rate on assets held longer than a year, and the short-term tax rate on assets that have been held less than a year. This simplified estate tax would put a lot of estate tax lawyers and accountants out of business, however, and set their minds on to other more lucrative schemes.

why do the dems keep dragging this guy out to talk about STEALING MORE MONEY.....

and I say that seriously.......by the time its estate tax....just HOW MANY FUCKIN TIMES DO DEMS WANT TO TAX THE SAME MONEY.......

"This simplified estate tax would put a lot of estate tax lawyers and accountants out of business, however, and set their minds on to other more lucrative schemes."

Not at all; in fact it's been tried before and it turned out to be much more complex than the current system. The reason being -- it requires the tracking of cost basis on everything for many years. Lots and lots of accounting to do that on a big estate.

BL2 we tax transfers in this country, and it more than likely is not the same money.

My suggestion, however, is that the maximum tax rate for inheritance taxes be the same as the long-term capital gains tax rate on assets held longer than a year, and the short-term tax rate on assets that have been held less than a year.

You could do that but you would then have to get rid of the exclusion and the step-up in basis provisions in order to meet the requirements of "pay-go".

HOW MANY FUCKIN TIMES DO DEMS WANT TO TAX THE SAME MONEY.......


YEAH!

More accurately, HOW MANY MORE FUCKIN TIMES WILL DIRTY CULTISTS REFUSE TO PUT BACK SOME OF WHAT THIS GREAT COUNTRY HAS AFFORDED THEM IN THE FIRST PLACE.......

by the time its estate tax....just HOW MANY FUCKIN TIMES DO DEMS WANT TO TAX THE SAME MONEY.

That's an odd talking point. The money isn't being taxed -- the recipients are. If a relative bequeathed me $1 million in an inheritance, the estate tax would be the first time I ever got taxed for that windfall. (Sadly, this is hypothetical. My kinfolk are spenders, not hoarders.)

"BUSHLOVERTWO"....How about just as long as it takes to pay for "FOR THIS FUCKIN WAR", that you fuck support even without justification!!!!

"BUSHLOVERTWO"....How does it feel to be the last and going down 24% of the people in this country that think your leader is such a failure??? You may want to change your username, no don't do it is good for people to know what a dumb fuck you are!!!

(Sadly, this is hypothetical. My kinfolk are spenders, not hoarders.)

It's the lottery mentality. Republicans have convinced the upper-middle class through the poor that they all have a chance of hitting it rich when some distant relative dies and that the government will take half. Plus, they have tried to trick people into believing that everyone is affected by the tax, i.e. the "death tax", when in reality it affects approximately 2% of Americans every year

"The money isn't being taxed -- the recipients are."

BINGO!!!!

Part of the question that should be answered is why should some one be able to inherit a fortune from dear old dad and be just another idle rich playboy -- without even paying any tax on the money received - while most people work their butts off and pay the government a third or more of what they make. That's one good reason why the estate tax was established.

"If a relative bequeathed me $1 million in an inheritance, the estate tax would be the first time I ever got taxed for that windfall. (Sadly, this is hypothetical. "

If a relative left you $1 million and it was their entire estate you would recieve it tax free in most circumstances (qualified retirement plans excepted). Under the existing law US citizens can leave up to $2 million before the estate tax kicks in. That's $4 million for a couple provided they do it correctly. They can leave an unlimited amount to each other.

This exclusion increases to $3.5 million in 2009 ($7 million for a couple). Deaths in 2010 result in zero tax. Then in 2011 we go back to the old system which had a $1 million exclusion. A lot of us think it likely that the law will end up with a $2 or $3 million exclusion once all's said and done.

you buy a house......you pay taxes

you live in that house and you pay taxes the whole time

you have paid for the house and paid taxes on the purchase and all along

you die and your kids inherit it.....and then??????

they pay TAXES AGAIN.....

whats hard to understand about that.......
of course with taxes back up over 50% because of dems in congress.....whats a few more thousand?????

and isnt warren buffet....sort of a bad example when it comes to us NORMAL PEOPLE talking about taxes........

yes....even SOME of you are under that normal umbrella.

I see maybe the confusion......when I said tax the same money........meant, of course, the same purchase or aquisitions that have been TAXED AND TAXED AND TAXED......

Please, someone, leave me a million dollars and make me pay the estate tax. Just once I'd like to have to pay that much in taxes.

I think people who gripe about how much they pay in taxes should be grateful because they have a job that allows them to pay that much. Some people aren't that fortunate.

I know that statement is going to bring some harsh comments, oh well. When I was working I bitched and moaned about taxes too. Now I wish I wasn't disabled and had my old job back. I would gratefully pay taxes to have that money coming in again.

"you have paid for the house and paid taxes on the purchase and all along

you die and your kids inherit it.....and then??????"

They only pay federal taxes on it if the husband and wife are leaving more than $4 million to the kids (assuming death this year). Just about everyone is exempt from the estate tax.

And there are ways to minimize the actual impact of the tax that are OK with the IRS. You can't do much of that with the income tax most of us pay.

But if you think the kids should get a $4 plus million home tax free....

Regardless, the parents didn't pay income taxes on the house year by year either. They paid real estate taxes. Those won't go away regardless of who owns it. And those don't come from the federal government.

"of course with taxes back up over 50% because of dems in congress"

Tax rates are back up over 50%????

Must be some good stuff you are smoking there, BL2. Wanna share?

no don't do it is good for people to know what a dumb fuck you are!!!

Posted by celisary at 2007-11-15 10:58 AM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e



just every now and then it would be nice to have some dickheaded buttwipe be able to talk about an issue without dropping us into the sewer......but you started it fuckface and I just finished it...



oh and there was a report last week about money and politics.

did anyone else read that out of all the congressional districts in the country.....that there are more dems representing highend districts than there are republicans.........I believe it was by the freedom foundation or something like that?

so that puts an end to the rich republican looking out for the rich republican idea.......well......there is a dent anyway...


NOW YOU SEE celery or whatever the puke your name is......

thats how you at least try and talk about an issue................numbnutte
d putz

"they have tried to trick people into believing that everyone is affected by the tax, i.e. the "death tax", when in reality it affects approximately 2% of Americans every year"

And only multi-millionaires.

The two things you don't want to be in the fourth quarter of 2010 are wealthy and ill. That popping sound you'll hear is the sound of a lot of plugs being pulled, by heirs wanting to save gazillions before the tax laws change.

"so that puts an end to the rich republican looking out for the rich republican idea"

Or maybe it means that the rich republicans are more able to get votes from the religious fundamentalists who are more dominant in the rural areas.

It's the lottery mentality. Republicans have convinced the upper-middle class through the poor that they all have a chance of hitting it rich when some distant relative dies and that the government will take half. Plus, they have tried to trick people into believing that everyone is affected by the tax, i.e. the "death tax", when in reality it affects approximately 2% of Americans every year

Posted by taxman at


okay so why dont you jerk that lotto ticket out of the next mexicans hand when you are standing in line?

and lets put some reality in your argument too.

that 2% that you speak of.......please be honest and tell us of the 50 or better per cent of the total tax bill that they pay......ALREADY>.....I would hope that you would include some of that in your normally reasoned argument......

"The two things you don't want to be in the fourth quarter of 2010 are wealthy and ill. That popping sound you'll hear is the sound of a lot of plugs being pulled, by heirs wanting to save gazillions before the tax laws change. "

No kidding, Danforth. Were I in the bracket where estate taxes were an issue I think I might add a codicil to my will along the lines of "if you pull the plug on me in 2010 then everything goes to charity you greedy ingrates".

Wouldn't that be something?

dragonlady said



Please, someone, leave me a million dollars and make me pay the estate tax. Just once I'd like to have to pay that much in taxes.



hey dont get me wrong.....

if some uncle who I never met died and he owned the liberal cry baby towel company and that means that he would be FILTHY RICH.........and left me with 4 or 5 mill........shit......scrap whatever you want off the top and leave me with a paltry couple of mill..........I think I could handle that......

of course if that happened........in a couple of months.....the next time I would talk to any of you I would be doing it from a laptop on a NUDE BEACH IN tahiti......

(theres a really nice image to leave all of you with).......

Money is taxed everytime it changes hands. This bullshit about paying taxes on money that has already been taxed is whiners who don't understand how the world works. If you get money---that is income. If you get income, you pay taxes---even if the person you get the money from already paid taxes on it.

You have a job--you get money---you pay taxes. Do you think your employer didn't pay a tax on that money when they recived it? Do you think the person you spend the money with won't pay taxes on it?

The whiners about---TAXING TWICE TAXING ON MONEY THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN TAXED---need to STFU and find a situation where money changes hands and no tax is expected. The estate tax is extremely fair, and if it affect you, you should be grateful rather than spiteful you have to pay taxes on your multi-million dollar income----how hard did you work for it?

"of course with taxes back up over 50% because of dems in congress....."

President George W. Bush signed a bill into law raising taxes to "over 50%"?

Tell us, bullshitlover2, when did that happen?

Or has the US Constitution changed in the last 11 months where legislation passed by Congress doesn't need the president's signature to become law?

If that's the case, when did that happen?

Or did Bush veto the legislation raising taxes to "over 50%" only to have said veto overridden by Congress.

If so, bushitlover2, when did that happen?

Or, when you claimed that "with taxes back up over 50% because of dems in congress" you were just talking out of your ass, as usual?

So, which is it, bullshitlover2?

Hans

you die and your kids inherit it.....and then??????

they pay TAXES AGAIN.....


Not again, they haven't been taxed on the money before.

How dense are you?

New money to them and it gets taxed.

Same church different pew. Eliminate the inheritance tax and you're on the way to Plutocracy.

Even more defined than now.......................

if some uncle who I never met died and he owned the liberal cry baby towel company and that means that he would be FILTHY RICH.........and left me with 4 or 5 mill........shit......scrap whatever you want off the top and leave me with a paltry couple of mill..........I think I could handle that......

Posted by bushlovertwo

Then why are you bitching?

If you are taxed on your Social Security payout, it's kinda hard to argue about paying Estate tax.

It is a rare occasion that I agree with BLT.

Keep the dirty govt mits off my inheritance. I dont care if its 10K or 10000K.

If thats the case then why shouldnt the government tax Christmas Presents?

Thats income right?

and we need the government to tax us everytime we recieve anything, because the goevernment knows how to spend my money better than I do. After all social security will support us all from 65 til we die right. No need to inherit all the money we labored for give half back to the government so we can pay for sick illegals with our bleeding hearts.

you buy a house......you pay taxes

you live in that house and you pay taxes the whole time

you have paid for the house and paid taxes on the purchase and all along

you die and your kids inherit it.....and then??????

they pay TAXES AGAIN.....

I buy a donut, I pay taxes.

The donut shop pays its employee, he pays taxes.

The employee buys a car, he pays taxes.

The car buyer sells it, he pays taxes.

What part of taxation aren't you getting, BLT? Why is there a need to protect multi-million dollar inheritances from taxation, when so many other transfers of money are taxed without it being an issue?

With the death tax it makes more tax-planning sense to buy vacations in Colorado or a painting by Rubens than to invest in new production equipment or expand a business.

Why is there a need to protect multi-million dollar inheritances from taxation

so that hard working families dont have to rely on and simultaniously support failed structures of socialism, government interference and control, when individual free markets could be so much more productive.

Death tax kills small business more than big business.

DCINMA -- Not at all -- Set a benchmark level -- Say for example, $4MM -- a level at which perhaps 90% to 95% of all the dead will have smaller estates, and leave those assets untaxed when transferred (or even make it some benchmark per dependent), then apply a FLAT tax (equal to the LTG rate, now 15%) to the rest of the estate. Certainly pretty fair. And pretty easy to calculate. The dependents clear the 1st $4MM (or whatever) and then 85% of everything else that remains. The Eric Princes of the world get to pass on billions to their heirs and continue their dynasty as long as they can.

Why penilize families that have worked hard, worked smart and have the ingenuity to get ahead? To support bloated govt welfare systems that encourage lazy fvcks to sit on there asses, sqeeze out puppies and watch Oprah all day? come on people!

that 2% that you speak of.......please be honest and tell us of the 50 or better per cent of the total tax bill that they pay......ALREADY

Link it and I'll argue it with you.

"If thats the case then why shouldnt the government tax Christmas Presents?

Thats income right?"

If it's over $12,000 it's a taxable gift, not income. The amount over $12,000 ($24,000 if the couple "splits" their annual exemption) is subject to the gift tax -- or deducted from the additional $1 million lifetime gift exemption that we all have.

Were in the constitution does it say that we should wipe out gains by the wealthy to pay for the masses?

Essentially what your supporting, the death tax, is not capitalist, it is communist.

"Say for example, $4MM -- a level at which perhaps 90% to 95% of all the dead will have smaller estates, and leave those assets untaxed when transferred (or even make it some benchmark per dependent), then apply a FLAT tax (equal to the LTG rate, now 15%) to the rest of the estate."

That's pretty much the system we have right now with the exception that the rates are different. It presently starts at 18% and goes to 45% (once you exceed the $2 million exemption). I'd disagree with the LTCG rate being applied, I think that rate is too low as it is and that we should not tax labor higher than we tax "passive" profit.

Regardless, what you are suggesting is probably something along the lines of where we will end up - and it's pretty consistent with what the Dems have been proposing for the last few years. The Repubs have been insisting on a total repeal so they wouldn't accept a reasonable compromise.

there are ways to bypass this and the wealthy use them..

1-give away assets before you die
2-use a revocable living trust
3-grantor retained annuity trust
4-family limited partnership


buy life insurance for the tax bill..

the wealthy DON'T pay this tax anyway.. so there.

so I can recieve a gift of $11999 but at $12000 I pay taxes on it. So why not tax the $11999? I mean thats fair according to the basic philosophy of taxation right?

Why not tax everything as many times as possible? No matter what the value.

Because its bad economics and encourages nothing productive, while it bloats government. Its a bad thing.

What part of taxation aren't you getting, BLT? Why is there a need to protect multi-million dollar inheritances from taxation, when so many other transfers of money are taxed without it being an issue?

Posted by rcade

The wealthy dont pay this tax if ever.. this is one of the largest red herrings being perpetuated in modern politics to divide the two classes that do pay taxes..the wealthy are laughing their collective asses off at you.. not with you.

1-give away assets before you die

Apparently you're not familiar with the havoc created when King Lear did this...

true legio,

at least for the uber wealthy who are savvy enough to beat the system. the ones who mostly suffer are the families with small businesses which more often than not fail when the first owner dies and tries to pass the business along. Many times the business fail immediatly because of the inheritance tax chops the legs out from under the business.

"Essentially what your supporting, the death tax, is not capitalist, it is communist."

What a dilemma we have here:

Who to believe? The third wealthiest individual in the world (and the second wealthiest individual in the United States of America)...

"Congress should keep the federal estate tax rather than repeal it to help a few rich Americans like him."

"there are ways to bypass this and the wealthy use them.."

"1-give away assets before you die"

Yes, this works within limits. We can give away $12,000 per year per person to anyone we want without any tax. That goes double for couples. Over that you can give away $1 million in your lifetime without gift taxes though it reduces your exclusion at death. The IRS even lets you discount some assets so, let's say, you have an asset worth $100k you want to give away - you might be able to do it by counting it as only $70k or so.

"2-use a revocable living trust"

Revocable trusts are included in the taxable estate and do NOT avoid estate taxation. They do avoid probate and are a decent will alternative. They also can be utilized to help make sure that the first spouse to die utilizes his or her exemption rather than letting it be wasted.

"3-grantor retained annuity trust"

This is a powerful way to get growth on appreciating assets out of the taxable estate without paying gift taxes. There are charitable variations that also give the client a current income tax deduction.

"4-family limited partnership"

This can be an effective way to utilize valuation discounts mentioned above.

"buy life insurance for the tax bill.."

Once the planning team has reduced the tax exposure, the life insurance approach makes the most sense for most people as they can essentially pay the tax for pennies on the dollar.

Try doing that with your income tax.

"the wealthy DON'T pay this tax anyway.. so there."

They do...but only the "very" wealthy - and they use planning techniques that the IRS allows that mitigates the impact of the estate tax on the heirs.

The horror stories that the politicians dig up are generally people who didn't do any planning whatsoever.

I buy a donut, I pay taxes.

The donut shop pays its employee, he pays taxes.



Your argument is not sound here.

So if i buy a donut and give it to my kid when i die he should pay taxes on the donut again?

"So if i buy a donut and give it to my kid when i die he should pay taxes on the donut again?"

If it's worth more than $4 million he should.

the ones who mostly suffer are the families with small businesses which more often than not fail when the first owner dies and tries to pass the business along.

Are you sure its not because the first owner is the one who built the contacts, built the contracts and generally ran things? That seems a more likely than the estate tax killed the business.

starts at 18% and goes to 45% (once you exceed the $2 million exemption)


How many businesses do you know of that exceed the 2 million exemption? I must live in the wrong part of the USA

So if i buy a donut and give it to my kid when i die he should pay taxes on the donut again?

The point of the example is that the US taxes transfers, when you die your assets are transferred to your estate and that transfer is taxed - the purpose behind all of this is that it is easier to tax an estate rather than tax all of the heirs individually.

So if i buy a donut and give it to my kid when i die he should pay taxes on the donut again?

Just a regular donut, then no. But if it's a diamond encrusted platinum donut worth over $2 million (or whatever the cap is), then yes.

Death tax kills small business more than big business.

Prove it.

The estate tax prevents the concentration of wealth in this country. When wealth is concentrated there can be no freedoms for those "have-nots".

"So if i buy a donut and give it to my kid when i die he should pay taxes on the donut again?"

If it's worth more than $4 million he should.

if you think the government has a right to take half of the fruits of your families labor every generation then your not a capitalist free market supporter.

I just dont beleive the government can find better ways of spending my familes hard earned capital than I can. government expendatures have been shown to be a waste. The bigger bloated govt that overbearingly steals from its production base is doomed. Less taxation should be a goal of basic freedom. More taxation is moving towards communist fundamentals.

"So if i buy a donut and give it to my kid when i die he should pay taxes on the donut again?"

No, but you'd be one cheap SOB.

"As soon as the land of any country has all become private property, the landlords, like all other men, love to reap where they never sowed, and demand a rent even for its natural produce."

Adam Smith

"Labour was the first price, the original purchase - money that was paid for all things. It was not by gold or by silver, but by labour, that all wealth of the world was originally purchased."

Adam Smith

government should not be in the business of preventing wealth in a free market society.

Accumulation of wealth in private hands is not a bad thing.

Using wealth to prevent free markets is a bad thing at which point the government should step in to regulate fair competition is necessary.

However taking wealth from those who have worked hard to earn it in order to promote a communist/socialist society is not productive and leads to fat asses watching oprah on anothers dime.

Welfare sucks! Social Security sucks, in reality.

The utopian model of communism sounds great on paper , however, state ownership of society failed in USSR, and it will destablize our Capitalist society to lower our standards of living.

Do you honestly expect to get anything out of your social security benefits? anything that will support the standard of living you want when you grow old?

Why not?, because I can better plan and spend my own money rather than relying on a currupt broken govt to steal my family earnings and then tell me they will take care of me later. Yeah right, social security, the shining example of how big govt will take from the rich and give to the poor. Blah...

Repugnant-
Talk to Adam Smith, who spoke of the danger of too much wealth in too few hands and how that would be dangerous to the republic. He also spoke of the root of wealth - labor. Give it a read. The Wealth of Nations.

Using wealth to prevent free markets is a bad thing at which point the government should step in to regulate fair competition is necessary.

It isn't meant to prevent fair markets it is to prevent the concentration of wealth.

Moreover, without the US Gov't and its citizens you wouldn't have been able to accumulate that wealth.

However taking wealth from those who have worked hard to earn it in order to promote a communist/socialist society is not productive and leads to fat asses watching oprah on anothers dime


Just how much do you think people on SSI and welfare get? Do you even know how hard it is to get either one of these?

Not everyone on SSI or Welfare is living on the dole because they want to. Some people have lost jobs due to injury, some to jobs being shipped overseas, some from lack of education. Gawd, how I wish some people would realize just how lucky they are.

yes i understand how easy it is to get SSI checks,

when I was in college I had two roomates, one was on SSI because he was basically a fvckup, long story short, the SSI earner did not work and just relied on the check and foodstamps, well he went to jail on a probabtion violation for doing graffiti. But his checks kept coming, so my other roomate would take his checks and cash them at the locally owned convenience store and come back with $500. then we'd take his foodstamps and stock up the house. Thats my personal experience anyways.

A consumption tax with no exceptions would be fair to everyone.

No one's talking about taking from the rich to give to the poor or government ownership of the means of production or any of the other "communist" things you seem to be paranoid about.

There are costs to running our society and it's a matter of what is fair in raising money to pay the bills incurred. It's not "communism".

of course with taxes back up over 50% because of dems in congress.....whats a few more thousand?????

......
Posted by bushlovertwo at 2007-11-15 11:02 AM | Reply | Flag

50%?

LINK PLEASE!!

Are you saying that Bush signed a TAX INCREASE????

"A consumption tax with no exceptions would be fair to everyone."

Not really, it would be very regressive.

So why has Warren Buffet gauranteed that the Federal Goverment will recieve 0% of his billions upon death? He has decided to give it all to charity thus avoiding any "Death tax". Sounds like someone talks out of both sides of his mouth. Maybe if the goverment used the money responsibly he would let them have it, but the dont, I dont think goverment is capable of being good stewards of our money. Dems or Repubs

"A consumption tax with no exceptions would be fair to everyone."

We already have that. It's called the gasoline tax. And sales tax. And utility tax. And excise tax. And property tax.

Only the estate tax and the income tax are progressive.

Why penilize families that have worked hard, worked smart and have the ingenuity to get ahead? To support bloated govt welfare systems that encourage lazy fvcks to sit on there asses, sqeeze out puppies and watch Oprah all day? come on people!

Posted by Repugnant at 2007-11-15 11:42 AM | Reply | Flag:

Yeah, that's the only place the money is going. Riiiiight.

You seems to have forgotten the each aircraft carrier costs 4 billion just to build and fighting a BS war for 5 years isn't free either.

"then we'd take his foodstamps and stock up the house. Thats my personal experience anyways.

Posted by Repugnant at 2007-11-15 12:50 PM"

It's deadbeats like you who fuck up this country. Asshole spending someone else's food stamps. You oughtta be locked up.

Well let me tell you my personal experience.

I've worked most of my life. In 2004 I was injured in a job related injury. To say the least doctors have told me I've been disabled for life.

Social Security on the other hand has stated that I am not disabled, and has denied me twice. I had to get a Social Security lawyer just to deal with the red tape.

My late husband who died of cancer was almost denied. His checks were paid almost 3 months after he died, he never saw them.

My father injured his back, broke vertebra, and he was denied, they had to fight it for 3 years before he ever saw a check.

I take it you never saw anything wrong with this my other roomate would take his checks and cash them at the locally owned convenience store and come back with $500. then we'd take his foodstamps and stock up the house.

Thats called fraud, of which you were a party to. It looks like you got away with it but don't want anyone else to.

"Sounds like someone talks out of both sides of his mouth. "

Nonsense. Recognizing something is unfair and speaking about it does not require the discoverer to financially self-inflict himself. As long as those are the rules, it's only fair to try to play by the same ones as everyone else.

If I'm an NFL coach who is dead-set against the instant replay, lobbies against the instant replay, and votes against the instant replay at every opportunity, I'm still going to throw the red flag on Sunday if it'll help my team win under the current rules.

I believe you would, too. Why hold Buffett to a different standard?

"So why has Warren Buffet gauranteed that the Federal Goverment will recieve 0% of his billions upon death? He has decided to give it all to charity thus avoiding any "Death tax". "

Buffet is not attempting to leave his assets to heirs so there is no ESTATE tax. He's doing one better, one that we all can choose to do -- he's paying a voluntary 100% "tax". The law allows him to do that and I'd say good for him. Bill Gates is doing something similar. The estate tax law is doing part of what it's designed to do here - it's discouraging the building up of plutocractic dynasties...and encouraging this person to do some good with his good fortune. Adam Smith (as quoted by another poster) would smile on this.

So why has Warren Buffet gauranteed that the Federal Goverment will recieve 0% of his billions upon death? He has decided to give it all to charity thus avoiding any "Death tax".

Is this really your question? You can't figure out why the government will give someone a tax break for giving money to charity? Moreover, please show me where Buffet has guaranteed he will pay 0% in estate taxes.

so my other roomate (sic) would take his checks and cash them at the locally owned convenience store and come back with $500. then we'd take his foodstamps and stock up the house. Thats my personal experience anyways.


That's two felonies and conspiracy to commit both.

And you brag about it?

But his checks kept coming, so my other roomate would take his checks and cash them at the locally owned convenience store and come back with $500. then we'd take his foodstamps and stock up the house. Thats my personal experience anyways.

Posted by Repugnant at 2007-11-15 12:50 PM | Reply | Flag:

Not to rain on your parade, but you just confessed to defrauding the federal gov't on a public forum.

well if you agree that SSI and foodstamps are subject to fraud then you agree its a open to failure as a program, and that big govt cant really control spending, and that taking money out of hard working families to support a degenerte society is a not good thing.

Yes, fraud is a huge reason that govt wastes money but thats just part of it. You all still fail to show why taking hard earned money from families and turn it into big govt welfare is a proper social solution for economic prosperity. Your arguments support my claim that big govt is a waste.

Seems like you bleeders are quick to argue and forget what your arguing for or against.

Thanks for agreeing that SSI and welfare are broken, subject to fraud, and so caught up in red tape that when you actually need a legitimate claim you cant count on the govt to support you.

All the more reason to keep the money you've earned and keep the govt out of it.

Repug-
re: "well if you agree that SSI and foodstamps are subject to fraud then you agree its a open to failure as a program, and that big govt cant really control spending, and that taking money out of hard working families to support a degenerte society is a not good thing.

A bank is subject to robbery as long as there are criminals. But I do admire your opposition to those "degenerte" in our society who would gladly defraud the gov't for their own personal gain, as you have done.

Repug-
How much do you suppose you and your roommate stole from us?

Moreover, without the US Gov't and its citizens you wouldn't have been able to accumulate that wealth.

Thats not true. Wealth is generated by citizens ability to produce, that is not generated by the govt. It is generated by the availability of resources and the labor to manufacture something of value.

This worked quite well before federal income tax.

We would be a richer more proseperous country today if it weren't for bloated social welfare programs and statist markets.

Of course the govt loves to take control of markets and consolidate corporate control.

Why the hell do you think every company in this country is now being swallowed by a larger corporate fish! Is not a competitive model, competitive models with a decentralized power structure make it harder to control the flow of money. When the corporations and the govt inbreed you can produce social programs that essentially enslave people through taxes and give a minimum of support in return for your investment of labor.

Social Security on the other hand has stated that I am not disabled, and has denied me twice. I had to get a Social Security lawyer just to deal with the red tape.
Good thing you paid into that all your life, excellent return

Govt does not need to be a part of the equation whatsoever unless regulation is neccessary to promote a healthy free market system.

What is wrong with that?

oh cooper come arrast me now and get off your high horse, because you arent focusing on the subject of the argument and trying to turn this into a personal attack,(one which Proves my point)

so keep proving my point people, welfare is broken, big govt is broken, call me a thief and keep supporting the real thieves, the govt!.

Repug-
How much do you suppose you defrauded the gov't (us) in order to prove that the gov't is rife with fraud and waste?

"Thanks for agreeing that SSI and welfare are broken,

Posted by Repugnant at 2007-11-15 02:03 PM"

Thanks for agreeing that you're a degenerate.

So you got yours, but you don't want anyone (people who actually qualify for the benefits you stole) else to get their's. Nice attitude, punk.

haha keep avoiding the subject punk,


come back when you have a real rebuttal to my arguments instead of personnal attacks ..

call me a thief and keep supporting the real thieves, the govt!

So, you feel that you were justified in defrauding the gov't (us) because they (us) are the "real thieves"?

"well if you agree that SSI and foodstamps are subject to fraud then you agree its a open to failure as a program"

Just about any government program can be defrauded. That includes military expenditures, public works projects and others. In fact, it's likely that over the past few years much much more money has been stolen in those areas (remember the missing $1 trillion from the Pentagon that they discovered in 2001?)than in "welfare fraud".

The fact is that private organizations can and are defrauded too.

Does that mean that anything that can be defrauded is a failure?

Somehow I don't see the logic.

call me a thief and keep supporting the real thieves, the govt!

So, you feel that you were justified in defrauding the gov't (us) because they (us) are the "real thieves"?


No I don't feel it is jsutified, because laws exist and they should be followed, but if they are crappy laws they should be repealed through legislation. As the estate tax should be.

No I don't feel it is jsutified, because laws exist and they should be followed, but if they are crappy laws they should be repealed through legislation. As the estate tax should be.

But until then not only will you engage in fraud, but you will brag about it?

The fact is that private organizations can and are defrauded too.

Does that mean that anything that can be defrauded is a failure?


There is a big difference, govt is essentially a monopoly and there is no real competitive disadvantage to fraud other than people bitching and voting like I am now.

Whats easier to stop an employee taking money from the register or a senator bankrolling his cronies?

When a corporation is guilty of fraud, market forces take over and the competition benefits, making fraud in the private sector much easier to fight. private companies will eliminate fraud to remain competitive, the fed govt does no such thing, infact mismangement is supported and continuing to bloat.

Cooper,
come back when you want to engage in meaningful discussion, no one is bragging. I was comparing a specific example of SSI expenditure as brought up by dragon lady. Yur personnal attack means nothing, no one cares, least of all me. So once you have something intelligent to say, lets hear it otherwise STFU.

it amuses and sadens me that you people want to harp on me for some foodstamps, yet you take it in the ass joyfully from the govt every paycheck, as they suck out entitlements that they have bankrupted and you will likely never see..but your all fine with that.

There is a big difference, govt is essentially a monopoly and there is no real competitive disadvantage to fraud other than people bitching and voting like I am now.

Which justifies your theft, as you so colorfully detailed.

Repugnant is either a liar or a self-admitted felon.

But hey, that's off topic, though of course he brought it in the discussion.

Thief or Troll?

Either way FUCKHEAD is his middle name.

Rpug-
re:"I was comparing a specific example of SSI expenditure as brought up by dragon lady."

Actually, you detailed how you and your roommate stole thousands of dollars from the US tax-payer. Should I remind you?

yes i understand how easy it is to get SSI checks,

when I was in college I had two roomates, one was on SSI because he was basically a fvckup, long story short, the SSI earner did not work and just relied on the check and foodstamps, well he went to jail on a probabtion violation for doing graffiti. But his checks kept coming, so my other roomate would take his checks and cash them at the locally owned convenience store and come back with $500. then we'd take his foodstamps and stock up the house. Thats my personal experience anyways.

Posted by Repugnant at 2007-11-15 12:50 PM | Reply | Flag:

i watched Buffet's testimony yesterday. What a principled man!

If the 2nd richest man in America says that paying taxes on a $200,000,000 inheritence is the right thing for America, I'll listen to him. In this hypothetical, he said, "If someone inherits $200,000,000 and has to pay taxes of $60,000,000, yet says they can't get by on $140,000,000 they're just dead wrong.

OK lets start another forum for how Repugnant belongs in jail for fraud. I thought this forum was to discuss the estate tax.

It cracks me up how a few of you have nothing intelligent to bring to the disucssion.

In fact..

Go set it up a thread for this topic Cooper and I'll race you there, on your mark, get set ... Goooo

"yet you take it in the ass joyfully from the govt every paycheck, as they suck out entitlements that they have bankrupted and you will likely never see..but your all fine with that.

Posted by Repugnant at 2007-11-15 02:36 PM"

I probably pay more in taxes than you gross, but I have no problem contributing to people in need. It's people like you, who defraud the system, who are the problem. What an asshole. Have you thought about repaying us taxpayers what you stole?

I could give a fvck Montecore. if your making nearly half a million a year as you imply and you wont mind giving tens of millions to the govt when you die instead of your children, you may like that, I think youre crazy. But I'd bet you don't and won't.

Seventy-five percent of the new jobs in this country are created by small business, and the death tax is a direct threat to those jobs. First, many small business-owning families are forced to sell their companies in order to pay the death tax. Second, they often have to sell to large corporations, sometimes owned by foreign interests. So the death tax costs jobs and centralizes economic power into the hands of the super-rich.

In theory this sounds good. But how exactly does giving this money to the government benefit society? Last time I checked, my tax dollars are wasted on senseless bullshit year after year after year. I say let the individuals keep the money. Buffet is an idiot.

What does Buffett care about the estate tax? With proper planning, he won't have to pay much of anything.

You consider a business worth over $3.5 million 'small' REPUGNANT?

Buffet said yesterday that if you're lucky enough to win the 'embryonic lottery' i.e. born into wealth, it doesn't mean you shouldn't pay taxes. He suggested that if a 'family owned' business worth many millions is inherited, the estate tax could be paid off in installments, or payment delayed until the business is sold with interest accrued.

Only 1% of all people EVER pay estate tax, and only 6/10ths of 1% of those are for family owned businesses worth over $100,000,000.

Someone inheriting a gazillion dollars shouldn't ever poor mouth anyone.

It really is a difference in philosophy, I happen to think personnal economic freedom and choice will lead to a more prosporous future moreso than letting the government disfunction decide what to waste my families labors on.

Big socialistic govt sucks, ask the Ruskies. The goal of government should be to limit its interference while ensuring fair competition among private industry.

Those who think private industry should be there to support the govt have it bass ackwards.

"many small business-owning families are forced to sell their companies in order to pay the death tax."

If this is true...and the veracity of this statement is in question...then one must wonder if this is a bad thing at all.

Really.

By your own philosophy of laissez-faire economics, the purer the capitalism the better because survival goes to the strongest and most efficient businesses.

Right?

Therefore...

If a small business owner is successful enough to build his operation into something that is large enough to trigger an estate tax issue, then he should be also aware of the tax laws under which he operates. Like it or not, the law is the law, right?

Well, if that business owner has not made allowances for the likelihood of an estate tax impact at his demise, then shame on him. Really.

He probably has a lawyer, an insurance agent and an accountant. If they are halfway competent they should have directed him as to how to avoid the loss of the business to the estate tax. It isn't that difficult.

So I think it is perfectly fine that the heirs have to sell the business to others who might run it more efficiently and with better planning. After all, the market rewards those who work hard and work smart.

The estate tax encourages that, by your own argument.

Buffet is an idiot.

Uh huh. The 2nd richest man in America. He must be a REAL idiot. God forbid he should have a moral compass.

"It really is a difference in philosophy...

Yeah. You have the philosophy of a thief.

Lets say you have a 100 acre farm. That alone covers the 2 million dollar exemption (not 3.5), so you'd have to sell off the equipment that could easily be worth just as much to pay the tax, now what good is a farm without equipment?

Although the current exemption of an estate's first $2 million is helpful, farmland or a small business that has been in the family for many years often has appreciated, on paper, to a much higher value. That value is locked up in the land and facilities and equipment. When the tax man comes and demands cash immediately, there is often no alternative to breaking up the farm or liquidating part or all of the business.

BTW - Buffet is the second richest man in America, if you beleive that forbes announces the incomes of the uber rich. He is the Neuvoriche. and his money pales in comparison to the real economic powers of the world, players who are far older, above and far beyond paying taxes to any country. The real rich are the ones who are loaning our govt money and being repaid by taking the taxes from each and every one of our paychecks.

Taxes are like dues or like condo association fees. Dues gains you admission to a club. Nicer clubs usually have more benefits and therefore have higher dues. Think of estate taxes as a dues in arrears -- a deferred debt you accumulate as you amass more and more benefits. Then when you can no longer benefit from what you have enjoyed, your dues becomes payable. Sure it sucks to be the heirs if you truly loved and depended on the deceased, but if the "dues" are equitable and fair, then it should be a matter of fact.

(If kept to a reasonable 15% of estate value over a handsome sum, that should help the "condo association" keep running and the heirs, many of whom couldn't give a **&@ about the deceased, happy.)

Two other thoughts:

1. In a condo or cooperative apartment, the owners of the best units have the highest fees. In other cultures, wealth is taxed annually.

2. In the USA, the annual "wealth tax" is deferred until the bitter end.

Death tax is more like paying a mortgage your whole life to provide shelter and investment for your families future.

If you did a good job and payed off your house its yours, then you die and the govt comes in and takes 55% of the house from your children.

Yea they are left with something, but the govt has siezed 55% of your lifes labor to support thier socialist wasteful programs.

that dog doesnt hunt for me

Repug...

In your farm example, first of all very basic estate planning (standard credit shelter trust and utilization of the marital exclusion) would shelter $4 million. No tax would be due at the first death in most cases.

Second, if the property is a family farm, as you describe, then there is an available "special use valuation" formula that can reduce the estate tax value of the property by up to $940,000. That shelters, potentially, a total of $4,940,000 for deaths this year.

That covers most family farms, like the one I grew up on, very well.

It might well be possible for the business to qualify for Section 6166 treatment, which would allow the estate tax to be deferred up to 4 years and paid over 10 years at very low interest rates. The estate tax is normally due in 9 months, not immediately, by the way.

If the tax is a problem even after all of this, there are a number of other techniques that can help.

Finally, life insurance mitigates much of this problem anyhow. A couple that are both 60 years old can purchase $1 million of survivorship life insurance for less than $7,500 per year if they are in good health, which is a pretty small number this sort of person. Let's say that they live 15 years...they would have paid less than $112,000 to settle a $1 million debt.

Your nightmare scenarios are few and far between.

By the way, we don't have a "death tax" in the United States. Death you can do for free. Passing a large estate to your heirs is taxed. That's why we call it the "estate tax". Calling it the "death tax" just identifies you as someone who drank the Koolaide, so to speak.

100 acre farm - average price per acre, say $6000 (which is on the high end). Where do you get $2 million from that? Even with equipment you're not anywhere near $2 mil.

Buffet had a suggestion: Defer estate taxes on family owned businesses until they're sold with 3% per year interest accruing.

Man, if only I could inherit $2 million I sure wouldn't be poor mouthing anyone - even after taxes LOL

we have 40 acres in the middle of nowhere missouri, 10 - 20 grand acre is the going price for good farmland these days around here.

Are any of you arguing against the "estate tax" =0 republican? any supporters of Ron Paul?

Or am I dealing with Hillary/Obama whoever else supporters?

Paul notes "Congress was poised to eliminate the hated estate tax permanently. Today, however, several U.S. Senators are using their own wasteful spending habits to justify retaining the tax. In the eyes of these Senators, budget deficits are never the result of too much spending, but rather too little taxing. They cannot imagine giving up even the tiny fraction of federal revenues raised by the estate tax. Why is a one percent revenue cut unthinkable to these lawmakers, while annual three or five percent spending increases are considered business as usual? To answer this question, look no further than the transportation bill passed last week in the Senate. It is perhaps the most pork-filled, wasteful appropriations bill passed in years. The bottom line is that spending money is what keeps these Senators in office. They won't stop pork spending because the American voting public rewards them for it.

The estate tax, more accurately known as the death tax because it is levied when a taxpayer dies, confiscates anywhere from 37% to 55% of a individual's assets. While these rates are unconscionable, the death tax also represents an especially galling form of double taxation. Americans already pay federal and state income taxes throughout their working lives. They pay income and capital gains taxes on money they save and invest. They pay local property taxes on their homes. They pay various sales taxes whenever they buy something. They even pay steep federal taxes on gasoline and telephone use. Yet after a lifetime of burdensome taxes, the death tax punishes Americans one last time simply because they worked hard, saved, and invested to pass something on to their families."

Buffet's and his son own a lot of farmland in Nebraske. 6K an acre.

REPUGNANT

Your scenario is for ONE inheritant. Ever heard of 'trusts' and other forms of estate planning?

As TnC said above, if you leave NO life insurance and fail to do NO estate planning you're gonna pay taxes.

So why has Warren Buffet gauranteed that the Federal Goverment will recieve 0% of his billions upon death? He has decided to give it all to charity thus avoiding any "Death tax".

"Is this really your question? You can't figure out why the government will give someone a tax break for giving money to charity?"

No, I was really making a point about how wasteful our goverment is that even a Philantropist (spell) like Buffet would rather give his entire fortune on his own than let the goverment have it.

Its his money, he can do as he pleases. He is doing it because it make HIM feel good, a selfish motive. Good for him! Altruism is imposible unless you are unhappy all the time. Man's primary moral purpose is to make himself happy without disturbing the liberty of others in the process.

You can not "force" altruisim. Force is at conflict with liberty.

I am not opposed to a taxing inheritance as income, but I am opposed to those who say we have a obligation to help others. We dont.

(standard credit shelter trust and utilization of the marital exclusion) would shelter $4 million.)

So the estate tax does not allow for gay and lesbian couples to enjoy the same protections as heteros? not a very fair civil law is it..



Why are people so afraid of personal success and legacy of family, and in such a hurry to take siphon private assets back into a govt that has shown time and again it is not responsible with taxpayer money and has a serious issues in supporting the solvency of the very programs they say they need the money for?

"confiscates anywhere from 37% to 55% of a individual's assets"

Those are the marginal rates...sort of (they are out of date, the actual marginals are 18 - 45%).

The effective rate - the real percentage paid - is much lower.

Without any major planning you don't hit a 38% effective rate until around $14 million. A $5 million estate (one life) has an effective rate of 27%.

"So the estate tax does not allow for gay and lesbian couples to enjoy the same protections as heteros?"

A side issue, but true.

"...more accurately known as the death tax because it is levied when a taxpayer dies"

He's missing the key word: multimillionaire.

It should probably read "more accurately known as the multimillionaire tax because it is levied only when a multimillionaire taxpayer dies, and only on amounts above the multimillion dollar thresholds."

If I save properly I will be a multi-milionare even on an average income. Why should the goverment get my money when I die?

"If I save properly I will be a multi-milionare even on an average income"

not very likely

But possible.

"But possible."

If you are making $60k and save 10% and earn 10% after tax you'll hit $1 mil in 30 years.

DC is the man

Does that $1M get taxed if given to an heir?

Does that $1M get taxed if given to an heir?

Posted by captainOface

Not a dime.

Ok so just make sure you have enough kids to give them just enough that it is not taxed

"Why are people so afraid of personal success and legacy of family, and in such a hurry to take siphon private assets back into a govt that has shown time and again it is not responsible with taxpayer money and has a serious issues in supporting the solvency of the very programs they say they need the money for?

Posted by Repugnant at 2007-11-15 03:57 PM"

Why are people like you so gung ho to give tons of money to silver spoon heirs who have time and time again shown that drive and initiative is not necessarily inherited along with the cash?

Just because you're born on third base doesn't mean you hit a triple.

Kids of the rich have already enjoyed better schools, better access to influential people to help them along, etc. If they can't make due with that and a few million to get them going, then they don't deserve to be in charge of even more money.

www.landsofmissouri.com

more lies

guess your not to good with the math there are you ozark? badadaadaa ding dang ding dang ding dang LOL...from your reference

10 acres
$249,900.00
LANDMARK REALTY

Putnam County, Missouri
3000 acres by Unionville, Missouri for sale Lake Property
3000 acres
$20,000,000.00

Putnam County, Missouri
2513 acres by Unionville, Missouri for sale Acreage
2513 acres
$6,000,000.00
OEI Properties

ectt....

10 acres WITH house

3000 acres Unionville "Lake Property"

2513 acres - under $3000 an acre

Just because you're born on third base doesn't mean you hit a triple. ..If they can't make due with that and a few million to get them going, then they don't deserve to be in charge of even more money.

Says who? I say thats Bullshit.

So a parent should not be able to help ensure the success of the childrens future by offering as much as they can without the government taking half of what they've worked hard for?

I completly disagree. its called the American Dream where you and you family can prosper. its why the settlers left England dude. I understand your all for big govt spending and wasteful social programs, but I will fight you tooth and nail all the way.

"Lets say you have a 100 acre farm. That alone covers the 2 million dollar exemption (not 3.5), so you'd have to sell off the equipment that could easily be worth just as much to pay the tax, now what good is a farm without equipment?"

Give it to your spouse. You won't pay a dime. Or sell it when you're alive, pay a 15% capital gains tax and give away the maximum gift tax exempt amount to all of your close family members every year. Won't pay a dime that way either. There are far more elaborate schemes that one can devise to get around the estate tax if they can afford a good estate planner.

When a nation spends as much as we are right now people with money are going to be taxed one way or another. If we don't tax them inflation will eat up their holdings. If they want to prevent the inflation they are going to have to pay the taxes required to cover the nation's debts.
There is no free lunch (or war).

Monte - you are correct in all your points but the goverment should not be in the buisness of taking money from people.

It would be great if people did something responsible with their money after death -- like Mr. Buffet.

However you can not force altruisim! Personal property, including weath, is personal property, not the goverments. Its not for you or me to decide how much is too much, its not ours.

"If they want to prevent the inflation they are going to have to pay the taxes required to cover the nation's debts."

-How about we spend less instead

Hey Ill take no war over death tax anyday!

Captain - they need to take money. Otherwise, they will not be able to afford wars of choice and subsidies to "farmers" in Manhattan.

There are far more elaborate schemes that one can devise to get around the estate tax if they can afford a good estate planner.

Posted by joe


Ahh so if you already have the money, you can find ways around actually paying the tax. that would generally fall on the very well to do who know how to play the shell game.

the ones who are left paying the bill are the ones who do not have availble capital to consult the proper planners or have inherited a family business worth several million in assets but may not be generating enough cold hard cash to pay half of its taxable value to uncle sam without shutting the business down. So America!

Otherwise, they will not be able to afford wars of choice and subsidies to "farmers" in Manhattan.
- Ok stop all three and now we are getting somewhere.

OK Monticore i get it you want to strip away small business money in order to support a govt that lies and decieves its public into paying for a war that feeds the MI complex. After all govt knows how to best spend our money they strip from our families in order to allow prosperity for a the nation through war spending. NICE Logic .. NOT

"Ahh so if you already have the money, you can find ways around actually paying the tax. that would generally fall on the very well to do who know how to play the shell game."

You don't need that much to get some general information on where to transfer your assets. If you're dying with more than $2M in farming assets, then sell one of your tractors and get a lawyer. Not very expensive compared to what you'll save in taxes. Anyone can do that.

"inherited a family business worth several million in assets but may not be generating enough cold hard cash to pay half of its taxable value to uncle sam without shutting the business down"

How many people would want to continue such a hypothetically unprofitable business in the first place?

"the ones who are left paying the bill are the ones who do not have availble capital to consult the proper planners or have inherited a family business worth several million in assets but may not be generating enough cold hard cash to pay half of its taxable value to uncle sam without shutting the business down. So America!

Posted by Repugnant at 2007-11-15 04:31 PM"

Yes - in other words, the dumb ones who shouldn't be trusted with all that money.

my bad aggie, I'll admit id didnt take the time to look at your post in detail, as i dont really care about the tangent youre on

now can your ADD ass focus on the actual discussion about estate tax, or can you only do personal attack, because you have no real point?

"Yes - in other words, the dumb ones who shouldn't be trusted with all that money." - Again not your money or your position to make a judgment. You cant force altruisim

If you're dying with more than $2M in farming assets, then sell one of your tractors and get a lawyer.

Perfect! So instead of having a farm with a tractor , you'll sell off your equipment to get a lawyer. So after you dick with the legalities of the bureaucracy you can get the lawyer to go out and sow and reap yoru crop. American Efficiency at its finest.

Can you see how this model is not good for business??


How many people would want to continue such a hypothetically unprofitable business in the first place?

the fact of the matter is not a lot of farms have huge amounts of cash on hand, so they can sell off thier equipment to keep the business productive?

and hey they can always start taking govt handouts through subsidies at that point, what an efficient system, you can pay the govt your half your families assets then get into one of thier social programs to support subsidies instead letting the free market economy run its course, bloated bureaucracy for everyone. again NO!

Cap't: You can encourage it, though. Folks who have a choice of giving $20M to their kids at a 50% tax or $20M to their alma mater or the soup kitchen with no tax may choose the altruism.

Cheers - I'm going to Bandon to golf in the rain and wind, and to worry about how much to give my kids when I kick off.

Can't help it repugnant. You post bullshit around here and someone is going to call you on it.

Personally I'm for a transaction tax. About 1% would fund the government and eliminate all the rest of the bullshit.

Day traders, the guys in arbitrage, and the banks oppose it so Congress won't even talk about it.

"So instead of having a farm with a tractor , you'll sell off your equipment to get a lawyer."

Who said you had to sell your equipment to the point where you couldn't operate the business? You don't need that much money to talk to an estate planner. If you are dying with over $2M in assets, pardon me for not getting tears in my eyes when you whine about having to pay a lawyer.

I don't support the estate tax, but I also don't support people being too cheap or too stupid to figure out how to get around it.

REPUGNANT

The reason Buffet is giving his money to charity is because he doens't believe in leaving billions to his children. He's said that time and time again.

It has nothing to do with not wanting to pay estate taxes.

Here's the 2nd richest man in America, living in a 6000 sq ft. house, and driving a 3 year old Buick. Glad he's around to show others that money needn't be the root of all evil.

I'm all for that, Repugnant. Get rid of the estate tax and get rid of corporate welfare while you're at it. Given the state of our political system, I don't see that happening anytime soon. While the tax is still in force, I don't feel sorry for anyone dumb enough not to take advantage of the current system.

Let Warrwen buffet do whatever the hell he wants with his money, no one is arguing anything about how buffet spends his dough

Who said you had to sell your equipment to the point where you couldn't operate the business?

umm you did

"So instead of having a farm with a tractor , you'll sell off your equipment to get a lawyer."

"Let Warrwen buffet do whatever the hell he wants with his money, no one is arguing anything about how buffet spends his dough."

What a dilemma we have here: Who to believe?

The third wealthiest individual in the world (and the second wealthiest individual in the United States of America):

Billionaire Warren Buffett, one of the world's richest people, told the U.S. Senate Finance Committee on Wednesday that Congress should keep the federal estate tax rather than repeal it to help a few rich Americans like him.

"umm you did

"So instead of having a farm with a tractor , you'll sell off your equipment to get a lawyer."

Wow - you intended to prove I said something, then posted a quote of yourself. Fucking brilliant.

did somebody say something?





oh somebody said nothing, again

Let Warrwen buffet do whatever the hell he wants with his money, no one is arguing anything about how buffet spends his dough

Posted by Repugnant

You were suggesting he was giving away his money to charity to avoid estate taxes in your 3:56

"So why has Warren Buffet gauranteed that the Federal Goverment will recieve 0% of his billions upon death? He has decided to give it all to charity thus avoiding any "Death tax".

REPUGNANT"

"oh somebody said nothing, again"

Posted by Repugnant

My point, exactly.

Hans

what was your point hans?

That people shouldnt engage in discussion about the death tax because Warren buffet is giving his money to charity?

How about try offering an opinion instead of just shitting on other POVs

I'll ask again Repugnant.

Who said you had to sell your equipment to the point where you couldn't operate the business?

Try to answer that without posting a quote of yourself this time.

You were suggesting he was giving away his money to charity to avoid estate taxes in your 3:56

"So why has Warren Buffet gauranteed that the Federal Goverment will recieve 0% of his billions upon death? He has decided to give it all to charity thus avoiding any "Death tax".

REPUGNANT

Posted by AMERICANUNITY"



Nice cut and paste job their AU, but you've got the wrong guy, I think your talking bout Captn O face, but hey keep on trying to manufacture arguments that dont pertain to me.

Right you are REPUG My bad.

I'll ask again Repugnant.

Who said you had to sell your equipment to the point where you couldn't operate the business?

Try to answer that without posting a quote of yourself this time.

Posted by JOE at 2007-11-15 05:48 PM



If you're dying with more than $2M in farming assets, then sell one of your tractors and get a lawyer. Not very expensive compared to what you'll save in taxes. Anyone can do that.

Posted by JOE at 2007-11-15 04:36 PM


Sorry your hallucinating Joe, but you said it, and then attributed the statement to me. I think you and Hans got the brown acid..

Enjoy your inheritences guys. Me? I have a negative one as I'm spending money on taking care of my elderly sick mom.

Must be nice.

I hate arguments that devolve into he said she said.


Nice talking with you DCINMA, you present a factual conversation and make some in depth points, even if I dont agree with the economic philosophy behind it.

The rest of you can get a clue from DC and not turn a discussion into a 3rd grade hissy fit that goes off topic into meaningless argument.

L8

"sell one of your tractors"
posted by me,

Is different than

"So instead of having a farm with a tractor , you'll sell off your equipment to get a lawyer."
posted by you.


You imply that the farm will no longer be functional if you sell just enough to pay a lawyer to figure out your estate plan.

Regardless, I don't give a fuck if you think lawyers are too expensive for small businesses. The taxes you'll save more than make up for it, and anyone with a brain doesn't. You're sticking up for people without a brain.

Didn't Buffett just put his entire fortune into a foundation, which will escape the Estate Tax?

I wonder how enthusiastic Buffett would be, were we to revoke tax-exempt and charitable trusts for, say, estates over $10 million?

Warren Buffett knows and does one thing with his personal fortune, and says another when the tape recorders are on. He knows that the private sector is the best allocator of capital, and that the private sector will see to his philanthropic interests better at death than the US government ever could, and he has proceeded accordingly. Buffett created his foundation even in an age of plunging estate tax rates; were the taxes to go back up, it would only encourage MORE people to act exactly as he has done.

Watch what they do, not what they say. When it comes to estate taxes, Buffett has hired the best attorneys on planet earth to ensure that his family won't be paying a dime.

were the taxes to go back up, it would only encourage MORE people to act exactly as he has done.

This sounds like an excellent strategy.

Enact an ESCALLATING inheritance tax and start closing the loopholes on trusts and Philanthropy will flourish!!!

And don't you Leftist Liberal Democratics forget...

Right IS Right!

Right IS Right!

Posted by OzarkAggie at 2007-11-15 07:16 PM


As shown by the last 6 years.


Dummy.

Finally, life insurance mitigates much of this problem anyhow. A couple that are both 60 years old can purchase $1 million of survivorship life insurance for less than $7,500 per year if they are in good health, which is a pretty small number this sort of person. Let's say that they live 15 years...they would have paid less than $112,000 to settle a $1 million debt.

that doesn't sound like a very good deal for the insurance company. Actually the deal isn't quite that good in that same situation but the premise still exists. At the very least it is the equivilent of paying your estate taxes with discounted dollars.

Ok, the average farmer isn't some plutocrat sitting on a $2MM farm! Stop the nonsense.

The real crocodile tears are being shed for the DeVoses and Coors and Cheneys who will die with multi-billions to their names and who want their legacies carried on by dimwitted scion who couldn't get better than a C- at Yale (and that's with the legacy donation and building trust fund).

So a tractor costs $150K , but you think a farm isn't worth 2mil?!

how much is the house worth, how much for the outbuildings, farm equipment, land, crop, savings.

I think you can get to 2mil pretty quickly, but

the farm is just one example of the many negative effects of the estate tax, this would apply to any business. The negative effect of this tax on small business is well documented. Its just another excuse for big govt. socialism. Cut govt waste, don't pick our pockets even after we die,

declare the pennies on your eyes

TAXMAN

well if you agree that SSI and foodstamps are subject to fraud then you agree its a open to failure as a program, and that big govt cant really control spending, and that taking money out of hard working families to support a degenerte society is a not good thing.

Yes, fraud is a huge reason that govt wastes money but thats just part of it. You all still fail to show why taking hard earned money from families and turn it into big govt welfare is a proper social solution for economic prosperity. Your arguments support my claim that big govt is a waste.

Posted by Repugnant at 2007-11-15 01:58 PM | Reply | Flag:

Well, Iraqi is full of fraud and abuse at the hands of our very own Bush administration.

I hope you feel that it should end immediately because of this.

and didn't we discuss that its not the Cheneys and the Coors being effected by this? that its the familys who are not fortunate enough to have proper tax strategies in place to defend themselves against the IRS.

Or as one fascist refered to as


Regardless, I don't give a fuck if you think lawyers are too expensive for small businesses. The taxes you'll save more than make up for it, and anyone with a brain doesn't. You're sticking up for people without a brain.

Posted by JOE

yeah, OK so Cheney will be fine, the rich get around it through loopholes and lawyers, so this law mainly hurts the broad spectrum of family business that help grow this country from the ground up. But I guess you prefer to shop at Wal-Mart and Home Depot for your and Chinese product because hey, fuck the successful middle class entrepenuer trying to get thier family ahead in this world.

God forbid private American Companys be given fertile ground to grow in the new America where socialism trumps Capitalism. but but but Warren Buffet said ... what did Warren Buffet do?

Well, Iraqi is full of fraud and abuse at the hands of our very own Bush administration.

I hope you feel that it should end immediately because of this.

Posted by COMMONSENSE

Absolutely, but thats not really on topic, But I will say they are willing to spend $1.5 trillion in order to steal, I mean secure, private contracts for control of $30+ Trillion in Iraqi oil over the next 3 decades.

Sad fact is most people won't care we are raping their land as long as gas and energy prices are low, and the dollar is stable. Those contracts are the Bush administrations only measure of success - foreign or domestic.

because every farmer has several of these 150K tractors to trade or barter for lawyer services with

Joe is only trying to make the point that you don't have to go bankrupt to hire an advisor. BUY A CLUE! An estate tax advisor might cost you a couple thousand out of your multi-million dollar estate. Said tax advisor would probably save the estate 10s of thousands. Hire an advisor, or read some books and educate yourself. Complaining about the taxes all you like, but if you're unwilling to educate yourself on how to minimize the taxes you're not going to get much sympathy.

If you really have a significant tax burden on the "small business", the business should be worth enough to borrow against so you may pay the taxes. The business should then be able to make enough to pay back the loan. If the business can't do the above it was overvalued to begin with.

Someday he's going to be a millionaire, and he might have to pay some taxes because of it. He's also stated that he has no problem stealing SS checks and foodstamps. Boo-fucking-hoo...wahhhh!!!! Let's all cry for Repugnant!:(

If Warren Buffett so loves giving the government his money then why didn't he pledge it to them instead of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation?

Nothing is stopping him from voluntarily giving it to the wasteful government.

I can't believe the idiocy here on this board.

If someone earned money and paid tax on it then they should be free to leave it to you after they die without it being taxed again!

You have to be pretty stupid to not understand that.

Joe said "sell one of your tractors and get a lawyer" - in order to stop the IRS from overtaxing families assets.

I never said you have to go bankrupt to hire a lawyer, you misrepresent yet again, but then again I never said I stole SS checks, I said my roommate did. You can reread it if you like, as the simple facts easily elude you.

Any way the prevailing attitude that if a family business cant handle being chopped in half then it deserves to fail along with the death of the owner is pretty sad. Its baffles me some people would rather give the money to George Bush or Hilary Clinton's corrupt IRS system than keep it in the family.

You have to be pretty stupid to not understand that.

Although I don't agree with the rates, inheritance is income, and income is taxed. It makes sense to me.

IF I'm stupid, through education I may eventually understand. Unfortunately, YOU will ALWAYS be an asshole.

But his checks kept coming, so my other roomate would take his checks and cash them at the locally owned convenience store and come back with $500. then "we'd" take his foodstamps and stock up the house.

Piss off...thief.

Neocons dont like widespread privitization. Thats why corporations rule. they swallow up and repress innovation that doesnt fall in line with their plans.

This "estate tax" is a very effective method to repress private industry growth. The "estate tax" first came in to law in 1916. Just a few years after the federal reserve and IRS was formed. It is a method to promote corporatization and repress free market capitalism. If your a 200 million dollar company your likely not going to be private company, corporations dont face estate tax every couple decades. A 4-10 million dollar business could be more productive and competitive over time, but if you chop it in half every 25 years then your not going to be as likely to succeed. The IRS is repressing private business with this tax, we should be providing growth incentives and cutting govt spending instead. Its all about centralization and socialization for you people, NUTS!

yes, yes its true... , jail me, I used food stamps from a man in jail, Jesus forgive me!! Amen.

too bad when you actually try to make a point you cant write a sentence without contradicting yourself though, basically saying -

I agree with the tax but I disagree with being taxed that much... duhhhh

So yeah, Your a bunch of Statists who would rather see the money centralized in the govts dirty hands than in the pockets of the citizens who worked their asses off to get ahead. Your a bunch of rabbits in a pot and you don't even notice how hot its gotten

Throughout the late 19th and early 20th centuries, corporations reshape every aspect of life in America and much of the rest of the world. factory systems turned self sufficient farmers into wage earners and transformed the family from an interdependent economic production unit to a consumption oriented collection of individuals with separate jobs.

While corporations came to own and dominate sources of information, media, entertainment, and to control politicians. The Estate Death Tax is a method to promote these principals at the cost of private free market industry.

but I disagree with being taxed that much

I didn't say whether it was too much or too little, and you complain about MY reading comprehension.

You're the one who would rather cry about estate taxes then educate yourself about whether you even have to pay them. I suspect that if only those who were actually inheriting a taxable estate remained on this thread, it would be a pretty small group. If those that are inheriting a taxable estate are the only ones who have a say about it, most will keep the money. Most who are in line to inherit a taxable estate ARE NOT the ones "who worked their asses off to get ahead". That would be their parents.

Repug, on other subjects I've agreed with you. On estate taxes, whether I agree or not, you're being a serious whiner. Get over it!

P.S. A sincere apology for steeling food stamps would have gone a lot further.

steeling should be stealing

Corporations, and the estate tax are mostly separate issues. This conversation is hopeless.

Good night.

Warren is a good guy!

He likes planned parent hood.

He prefers to live with his girlfriend instead of his wife.

Warren has normal family values...

He has modern day sweat shops where his employees toil..

Warren wants to pay taxes like the boy next door.

Right.................

"fairtax"

The first, basic problem with the FT is it uses bogus formulae. If you currently buy something for $100 and the total cost is $107, it's because you pay a 7% surcharge, in most cases a 7% sales tax.

But what if you bought something for $100, and paid $130 for it? Would you call that a 30% tax?

Well, me too, and every economist, actuary, & tax planner I've ever read.

But the FairTax people don't call that a 30% tax. They call that a 23% tax, using a bogus formula unavailable to economists and tax planners. It's fuzzy math at it's fuzziest.

"because every farmer has several of these 150K tractors to trade or barter for lawyer services..."

Wait, you don't get it both ways: if the farmer doesn't have enough assets, he probably doesn't have a taxable estate. If he has a taxable estate, he probably has a few thousand in assets worth investing to save 10s of thousands.

A land of equal opportunity means equal opportunity...

Some recompense is appropriate.

Bullshit.

You are confusing "opportunity" with "outcome".

We all have a right to opportunity. That doesn't mean we all have a right to the same outcome. The outcome you get is dependent on how well you take advantage of the opportunity.

You don't have a right to what I have... but you have the right to try and do as well as I do.

That basic difference in philosophy is a big part of what separates the conservatives and liberals. Liberals seem to think that everyone is owed the same outcome... not the same opportunity. Therefore they think nothing of taking from those that have and giving to those that don't, regardless of what they have earned or have a right to.

Read up on what the founding fathers thought about taxes. For that matter, read up on what they thought about opportunity as opposed to outcome.

"Wait, you don't get it both ways: if the farmer doesn't have enough assets, he probably doesn't have a taxable estate. If he has a taxable estate, he probably has a few thousand in assets worth investing to save 10s of thousands."

Exactly. But we're all supposed to cry when we hear about Repugnant's dream situation where a farmer is sitting on a bunch of land that won't produce any money and a bunch of assets he can't sell. Never mind the fact that if none of his shit is worth anything, he won't die with an estate worth more than the $2M unified credit. Never mind the fact that he could give the unrealistic hypothetically "broke" $2M farm to his wife without paying a dime.

Nope. We're supposed to sit here and cry about someone who will die with more assets than anyone in my family has ever died with, and who's dumb enough not to hire a lawyer to boot.

We're supposed to sit here and cry about someone who will die with more assets than anyone in my family has ever died with

We are supposed to cry for your family because they never amounted to anything despite the wonderful opportunities this country provides? Well boo hoo then. Get over it. That doesn't mean you have a right to anyone elses stuff.

Whether they earned it or inherited, they have a right to it. You don't. If you think you do then you are nothing but a thief... even if the government approves. That doesn't change anything, it just makes you a State SANCTIONED thief.

We need more Paris Hiltons in order to compete in the global marketplace.

Nice deflection there Cooper. Who the fuck cares about Paris Hilton? She has money... so what? Jealous?

I just thought it was funny and relevant.

"We are supposed to cry for your family because they never amounted to anything despite the wonderful opportunities this country provides? Well boo hoo then. Get over it. That doesn't mean you have a right to anyone elses stuff."

My only point is that if you are dying with $2,000,000, you can afford a lawyer to tell you how not to pay taxes on it. I never said my family was entitled to anyone's money. I brought that up because I feel like I've had a pretty good life, despite having less money than the people we're supposedly obligated to feel sorry for when they are rich and dumb enough to be subjected to the estate tax.

Like I said earlier - get rid of the estate tax, and cut federal spending. I'm all for that. In the meantime, I don't feel bad for anyone stupid enough not to know how to get around the law.

Did you know there is an unlimited marital deduction, beyond the $2M credit that everyone gets when they die, Moomanfl? Christ, if the government can "steal" from you at that point you might as well just write them a check now.

My only point is that if you are dying with $2,000,000, you can afford a lawyer to tell you how not to pay taxes on it.

My point is: Why should you HAVE to? Why should you have to have a lawyer to keep people from constantly stealing your stuff?

Also, I think that the founders would be aghast at the political and capitalistic dynasties that we(you) worship. Their vision was a land of opportunity, not the entitlement granted royalty. But what has come to pass is a society that worships wealth for its own sake. (Why do I even know of Paris Hilton, eg). You are among the acolytes of this trend, and it bleeds from every post.

Did you know there is an unlimited marital deduction, beyond the $2M credit that everyone gets when they die, Moomanfl?

Ok... try this one on for size:

Say, hypothetically, that I had spent years collecting comics. The value on some of them have risen dramatically and now the collection is worth $3 million. It is my prized possession. Other than their worth, I am just a normal middle-class guy.

I die. Now you are saying my wife, if I leave it to her, will have to either somehow come up with enough money to pay current market prices for some of those comics just to be able to keep them.... or sell of a portion of the collection that I prized so much just to pay the taxes because I died.

Fuck that. That is nothing more than robbery.

If not my wife.... then suppose I left it to my sister. Same thing.

"My point is: Why should you HAVE to? Why should you have to have a lawyer to keep people from constantly stealing your stuff?"

I don't know. Because currently our government finds it necessary to impose an estate tax. If you don't want a lawyer, then buy an estate tax textbook. They cost about $100. Read it yourself, and plan your own estate. Or is that too expensive as well?

"Now you are saying my wife, if I leave it to her, will have to either somehow come up with enough money to pay current market prices for some of those comics just to be able to keep them.... or sell of a portion of the collection that I prized so much just to pay the taxes because I died."

That's incorrect. You can give as much property as you want to your wife, without paying a dime in estate taxes. You could give her $10 Billion worth of comics. There is an unlimited marital deduction.

Oh those poor rich people.

I can see all those rich people appealing with the behest of principles for the poverty.

"then suppose I left it to my sister. Same thing."

If you wanted to leave the comics to your sister, that would not be your best plan. This would be your best plan: Give $2M worth of the comics to your sister, because you get a $2M credit no matter who you're giving to. Give the other $1M worth of comics to your wife. In the end, you pay no estate taxes.

This is like studying for my upcoming exam. Keep the hypotheticals coming.

If you wanted to leave the comics to your sister, that would not be your best plan.

What if I have no wife and my sister is my only relative?

See, your reasoning at some point breaks down. You assume that even though the system is flawed and full of shit that it doesn't matter, because everyone has a way out. That just isn't the case.

In my scenario, my sister would wind up having to get rid of a significant portion of my prized possession. No two ways about it.

Oh those poor rich people.

I can see all those rich people appealing with the behest of principles for the poverty.

Oh... so those people deserve to be stolen from just by the very fact that they have money?

In my scenario, my sister would wind up having to get rid of a significant portion of my prized possession. No two ways about it.

Who gives a flying .................Your dead!!!!

mooman-
You're bitching (hypothetically) because you lived in the greatest nation on earth which provided you the opportunity to amass great wealth and you can only leave 2-4 million in assets without the recipient paying taxes on the rest?

How much do you resent this country?

Who gives a flying .................Your dead!!!!

And you are a douche... but who is keeping score?

Oh... so those people deserve to be stolen from just by the very fact that they have money?

These people need to pay tax on the stuff they didn't own. It is as simple as that.

When money or the process which money can exchange hands it is taxed, in all things.

I've noticed this trend from the right for some time now, and it nauseates me. I have friends and family members who died serving their country, and this notion that the "gov't" is stealing Mooman's comic books is repulsive.

which provided you the opportunity to amass great wealth

Wow... the country did that for me???

According to the founding fathers it was the Creator that did that through my inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

They seemed to think that it was just a given that we have those things and that it was immoral of a government to deny those rights. They certainly didn't feel they were a gift of the government. If anything they felt that governments tend to hinder those rights.

Try again, Cooper.

Oh... so those people deserve to be stolen from just by the very fact that they have money?

I also see you avoided the actual contention of my post.

We see those rich people helping the poor people with the high value of principles they possess don't we,.............Lazy fucking poor deserve what they get.............but oh, please don't subject my sister to my gift of 2 million when I die.

Hell I don't know why You can't just make Your sister a co owner of these comic books while alive then You would think that when You died it would be like just dropping Your name from ownership. Know what I mean??

Larry Mohr

"What if I have no wife and my sister is my only relative?"

Oh, I get it. A loser who collects comic books probably wouldn't be married in the first place.

In that case, I guess you're just shit out of luck. You'll "only" get to give away $2M in comic books that you would have been taxed on had you sold them when you were alive. You'll pay a tax of about $345K on the rest. So your sister (who probably didn't give a shit about your comics) will have to sell 11% of your comics, and get to keep $2.65M worth of shit, for free. Ouch.

Or, just don't die till 2009. The unified credit jumps to $3.5M that year.

It's as if they are so narcissistic that they feel that they live in a vacuum, and forget that this nation is a rarity in the history of mankind.

Ingrates.

As far as I am concerned, you die, all possessions belong to the state, period.

No more Paris hilton types, use it all or lose it all.

I have friends and family members who died serving their country, and this notion that the "gov't" is stealing Mooman's comic books is repulsive.

Well we agree on that then, Cooper.

I find it repulsive that the government does that too considering how many have sacrificed their lives so that we could be free from oppression. For the government then to be to one to do something like that is just pissing on all their graves.

As far as I am concerned, you die, all possessions belong to the state, period.

No more Paris hilton types, use it all or lose it all.

Ahhh... I guess it IS jealousy then. You are too pathetic, runneysore.

As far as I am concerned, you die, all possessions belong to the state, period.

No more Paris hilton types, use it all or lose it all.

Posted by moneywar at 2007-11-16 02:38 AM | Reply


WOW if that isn't some shitty attitude if I ever saw it. Tell that to the Family Farmer who has had their farm for 6 Generations. Oh Farmer Fred died so now that Farm belongs to the STate. FUCK THAT.

Larry Mohr

"Wow... the country did that for me???"

No. Hundreds of thousands of men and women who gave their lives for the constitution and this nation did that for you.

But they were another breed, and not the petty whiners such as yourself. This is your country, and it was paid for in blood. To hear you whine about your (hypothetical) comic book collection is enough to make me wretch.

"Hell I don't know why You can't just make Your sister a co owner of these comic books while alive then You would think that when You died it would be like just dropping Your name from ownership. Know what I mean??"

Unfortunately that's considered a taxable gift, right when he gives her that right to co-ownership.

"As far as I am concerned, you die, all possessions belong to the state, period."

Unfuckingbelievable.

Hell I don't know why You can't just make Your sister a co owner of these comic books while alive then You would think that when You died it would be like just dropping Your name from ownership. Know what I mean??

It is still the same, making her co owner means she acquired wealth and is subject to having that wealth taxed.

Dead does not mean acquired gift that was not yours in the first place to not be taxed.

Your wealth went up, the value of the wealth should be taxed.....period.

Hundreds of thousands of men and women who gave their lives for the constitution and this nation did that for you.

No, the founders were clear... the Creator did that.

What those thousands did was die to keep others from taking it away by force. It is called "protecting"... notice they even use that word to describe what they do.

Unfortunately the government does it anyway.

Unfuckingbelievable.

Paris hilton speaks!

Mooman owes nothing, and for our democratic republic to tax his beneficiaries is theft to him, as he is an ingrate, and a selfish fool.

No, the founders were clear... the Creator did that.

You are not worthy of contempt.

Good night. Cuddle your comic book collection for me, and give it a kiss.

To hear you whine

Yes, and the founding fathers were just "whining" about England... uh huh.

Unfortunately you are so broke intellectually speaking, I don't think you could even BUY a clue.

"When money or the process which money can exchange hands it is taxed, in all things."
Posted by moneywar

In all things?!?

Um, in a word...no.

There are many exchanges of money which are tax-free. Two examples of many are a) renting your home for 14 days or less, and b) (almost always) selling your 2yrs+ home for profit.

Gain on Roth IRAs is another.

Passing wealth down the family line is how one becomes "KING."

Danforth,

You clearly understood my meaning but I will clearly agree with your post.

Mooman-
re: "Yes, and the founding fathers were just "whining" about England... uh huh."

Wait a sec. What do you mean by that?

Okay Moneywar, let's run with this.

Let's say there's a lower middle class family that's just scraping by. The husband takes out a life insurance policy with a $250K payout. He dies in a car accident the next day. The family is emotionally and financially devastated.

If he had any control over who got the payout at the moment he died (which is almost always the case), that is considered HIS PROPERTY and is taxable to him. Under your logic, the government should be able to take all of it.

Maybe the guy didn't have any life insurance. Maybe all he owned was a home. Guess the government gets to take that to, since when your dead it doesn't matter anymore.

too and you're. Must be late.

Passing wealth down the family line is how one becomes "KING."

Posted by moneywar at 2007-11-16 02:49 AM | Reply

Tell that to the poor ole sap that has a shack and leaves it to His Son. I am sure that is how everyone becomes king Rolls Eyes

Larry Mohr

Mooman-
Do you feel that the gov't of the US should be overthrown in a revolution because they are taxing your comic book holdings above 2-4 million?

What those thousands did was die to keep others from taking it away by force.

No, they died for the creation of a more perfect union.

Mooman-
I'll speak to you again about this. You can count on it.

Tell that to the poor ole sap that has a shack and leaves it to His Son. I am sure that is how everyone becomes king Rolls Eyes

The poor sap didn't create the pass down rules because the poor sap would never become king.

Joe,

I understand the direction you are moving, do you understand the direction I am moving?

One great feature of a confiscatory estate tax is that it avoids the problem of second-generation liberalism. Most first-generation wealthy are conservatives; those that inherit wealth tend to be liberals. This is generally true even among the foundations that were originally established--a style drift toward more liberal causes, as succeeding generations become further divorced from the original virtue of money, and the need to earn it themselves.

How about a 100% tax over $2 million, indexed to inflation? This ensures that Warren Buffett's hypocrisy can be assuaged, and we no longer have to worry about what little monsters Paris Hilton's children will become. No more Kennedy and Kerry dynasties, no more Hunt and Ford and Carnegie Foundations that get progressively liberal over time. Shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves in three generations anyhow, let's just make it two.

HOW MANY FUCKIN TIMES DO DEMS WANT TO TAX THE SAME MONEY.......

Posted by bushlovertwo at 2007-11-15 10:41 AM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

At least enough times to pay for your dumbass president's venture into IRAQ

Hundreds of thousands of men and women who gave their lives for the constitution and this nation did that for you... This is your country, and it was paid for in blood. To hear you whine about your (hypothetical) comic book collection is enough to make me wretch.

Posted by Cooper

So why the double standard? If we owe it to the country then why should we keep anything by your communist measures. We could be come a totalitarian govt where everything is owed to and due to consequence of the state.

That aint the way it works though. Again you have your cart in front of your horse.

The state owes its success to the production power of its citizens, not the other way around.

That production should be encouraged to keep propagating, however the estate tax does the opposite and discourages private growth and feeds the state in a way that keeps non corporations relatively powerless.

Most of you dont have a clue as to the unfair balance between a corporation and a private company.

If you think the founding fathers had the idea of private citizens owing the govt half of everything they earn in a lifetime you don't know shit about history. they did there best to repress corporations as they thought they were unfair advantage.

If your agenda is socialism then move to Russia, or china, the state does a great job of controlling things there and making everybody equal. Lets the real Americans continue the dream of economic production independent of state theft every generation. the consumption taxes provided by profitable business are more than enough to provide for a prosperous govt. you monkeys want to see corporations that truly do suck the money out of the middle class prevail at the expense of private citizens - right comrades!

Moneywar -- worth repeating your post: "Passing wealth down the family line is how one becomes 'KING.'

Posted by moneywar at 2007-11-16 02:49 AM | Reply"

Some repugs think all government is bad. And if they "choke the beast" (as Cheney would say) what would be left? No national defense, no free highways, no regulation, no state department, no nothing. It would be a bit of a free for all until a monarch or plutocracy developed -- perhaps a bit like Iraq today. Perhaps since today's Iraq was created out of repug philosophy, that kind of chaos is what tax-free government is all about???

Buffett over 20 years ago in an interview said I was not leaving his billions to his daughter. He does not believe in inheritance so of course he has not problem with taxes.

Could be some people want to pass on to their children and want them to have it all - I would/do. A persons tax bracket should have no bearing of what he/she amasses in their lifetime to pass on to their children. All I read here is once more class envy, the typical let's screw the rich because they succeeded in life while (I) didn't and (I) don't like it.

I'm not rich, yet I find it disgusting that so many have the aforementioned attitudes. Why is it seen as a crime to bust ass and succeed in life, and yes, most of the rich have earned it as opposed to have inherited it. And, even if you did inherit it, so what?

No national defense, no free highways, no regulation, no state department, no nothing. It would be a bit of a free for all until a monarch or plutocracy developed

no one is advocating your "Sky is falling" scenario. What I am saying is that a consumption tax would generate more than enough income for the federal govt. to run on. What you haven't figured out is that the more you feed the pig, the more it keeps eating, and it wont stop before you will, it will eat everything.

the state needs to be moderated by the people and its law, not the people need to be moderated by the state, that attitude is not in line with Capitalism or the American Dream, in fact it allows Plutocracy to flourish as the corporations that squash private enterprise, expand corporations that squash the worker bee and pay millions to thier CEOs regardless of the ability of the corporation to produce, just like Enron, Worldcom ect.

What's the word when statism and corporatism combine to repress private enterprise? Its a massive contradiction that people who say they hate Bush and the corruption want to keep feeding the pig at the expense of private citizens.

Republican president Theodore Roosevelt said "The man of great wealth owes a particular obligation to the State because he derives special advantages from the mere existence of government." He was a big supporter of the estate tax.

MSGT -- If the markets don't all tank, then my family is likely going to have to pay an "estate tax", or "death tax" as others call it, when I pass away.

I am no leech and I certainly would like my family to get every leg up that they can get to do well in life. But I am the first generation in my family to get a college degree and post graduate degrees (all from top schools). I retired from the military with over 34 years credited active and reserve service. I have worked at tough, lucrative jobs and am now semi-retired. But I have always been told what Ben Franklin said, "There are only two things certain in life --death and taxes."

Sure, I want to bitch about taxes. Anyone who pays taxes does. Barry Goldwater wrote that margianl taxes should never rise above 30% and that makes sense. But there is a selfish class in this country who do not believe that they should even have to pay that. And of the millionaires I've advised, there is a cluster who are part of the selfish class who don't give a f-&k about anybody but themselves. They still share in the same benefits of government as we all do -- safe streets, roads and highways, clean air and water, good schools, a strong national defense, consumer protections, a nation that feels identified with each other rather than by class or tribe. These intangibles are worth soemthing and helped those affluent get their wealth. Where else in the world could they have made such progress by themselves?

And the odd thing is that those who inherited their wealth were the ones least appreciatie of the need to give back something to one's country. They were the least likely to serve in the military, the least likely to feel a kinship with less wealthy Americans, and the first ones to complain.

So, like Barry Goldwater, I believe in taxes. It comes with the territory. I just believe in reasonable taxation, and even then there will remain some selfish sots who couldn't spare to pay their way for the blessings they have enjoyed as Americans. For those selfish slobs, I say take your billions and live on some little island in the Caribbean or in Asia somewhere. Count your money and bribe all the people you can until you have the same feeling of freedom and security you enjoyed in America.

"All I read here is once more class envy, the typical let's screw the rich because they succeeded in life..."

Really? The last six years of Republican rule enacted tax codes which screwed everyone BUT the rich. Stats show wages stagnating and the wealthy getting much wealthier. Where've you been?

"No more Kennedy and Kerry dynasties, no more Hunt and Ford and Carnegie Foundations that get progressively liberal over time. Shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves in three generations anyhow, let's just make it two."

Fine by me. But you left out the most destructive dynasty currently afflicting this country.

The Steinbrenners?

The first issue I don't think has been discussed, is the repeal of the current level. 2.5 million reverts in 2010, back to a lower level. I think it's going back to a million. That's too low in my opinion.

Also I believe the focus should be on how much in inherited per individual, not how much is left. A person getting 2.5 million is different then a family of 5 children getting 500K each.

ALSO if done properly, a couple can leave 2.5 million EACH, using a by pass martial trust. Therefore a couple can pass 5 million federal tax free. To me that's enough, go ahead and tax anything above that.......

And if that's not enough gifting it prior to passing can reduce the size of one's estate.