Posted on 07/06/2010 8:12:27 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Repeal of the estate tax imposes significant costs on the taxpaying public and promotes concentrations of wealth that harm our democracy.
CLICK ABOVE LINK FOR THE REST
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Let everyone espousing higher taxes and income redistribution, whether they be newsman, pundit or politician, have all their income in excess of $30k per household member be confiscated and half turned over to the Salvation Army, Food Bank, etc., the other half go to paying down the national debt.
Also, all of their vehicles in excess of one per full time working adult shall be confiscated.
While we are at it, all Save the Earth/Carbon Footprint types shall have their electricity cut off, motorized vehicles confiscated, heating/cooling of offices & homes turned off, etc.
Walk the talk! Put your money where your mouths & printing presses have been.
Finally, all the overpopulation complainers, next Tuesday we will stop the world so you can get off. (Actually, I don’t mean that. Some airhead eco-freaks will probably re-start the Buddhist monks solution to the Vietnam war.)
“You say you want a revolution... well you know”.
LLS
I as a conservative am concerned about the concentration of wealth and power, because I know and understand the nature of man. I ALSO stated that the estate tax did not solve this. Please read and think before posting.
You evidently think concentration of wealth and power is ok. Unrestrained capitalism is no better than unrestrained government. Our founders set up a complex system of checks and balances for a reason.
Even God was concerned enough about this to set up the year of jubilee which interestingly enough was never implemented.
See my original post.
1) Very few pay.
2) it is an manipulated emotional issue and very few understand it.
3) GETTING RID OF THE ESTATE TAX WILL ACTUALLY INCREASE TAX REVENUE!
4) The estate tax does not accomplish what I think is the original concern.
A tax is a tax whether it is collected as an estate tax, capital gains, or income tax.
My personal preference is to get rid of the estate tax. If the heirs don't want to pay the income tax, they simply don't have to sell the inheritance. We eliminate one dept in IRS and put some lawyers out of work. Will it solve all problems? NO. we will still have concentration of wealth and power, that is why the right to bear arms is so important.
We counter the consolidation of wealth and power through freedom. We were all equal under the law and had equal opportunity. That was the great thing about America, we were not stuck in a “class” and could move up and down the ladder.
People who write newspaper articles saying taxes are good should have their incomes double taxed.
Covetousness.
Liberals are envious, greedy whiners.
I hope this gnat brain inherits a profitable small business and gets hit with the tax. It’ll wipe him out.
The Joe Robbe family got hammered after Joe died. He was the owner of the Miami Dolphins. His kids inherited the business, but the inheritance tax was so great, they had to sell off the business to raise the cash for the tax.
The inheritance tax was put in place to “soak the rich”, but it catches small business’s and family farms.
It is a very destructive and punative tax that punishes sucess.
It’s the same reason the Wrigley family sold the Chicago Cubs to the Tribune Company several years back.
The government shouldn’t be benefiting by the death of a citizen...They didn’t make the money and it was taxed to death during the life of the citizen...
‘few years ago a very, very liberal family member was trying to get everyone in the family to put our money in some family trust’.
It’s not a bad idea. That’s what my family has done. My grandpa and grandma did the same, and their kids have done the same as well. They all have shares in the family business.
How concentrated must wealth be to be “too” concentrated? Only your commissar knows for sure.
Glad you expressed it. We get nowhere if we don't discuss what we're preaching, or just preach to the choir.
Please examine your statement and see that it doesn't make sense.
Inheritance is something that provides benefit to someone who hasn't achieved anything to get it. Also, if one is going to achieve and advance in the economy, then a progressive income tax inhibits that. Someone who isn't into achievement would want the status quo, where income is taxed progressively. Poor stay poor; rich stay rich...anyone trying to get ahead gets whomped.
Yes, there would be less incentive to spend, and my suggestion would boom the economy too fast and too falsely (people spending instead of saving), and it makes sense to have some income-based tax.
Those with greater assets gain more benefit from the protections of our common defense, etc. Imagine you're sharing a residence who has a collection of Fabergé eggs--so he wants to buy a very pricey security system. If you have relatively little to lose, why should those costs be split evenly with you?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.