[Huck]

And should the children be forced from their home just because a parent died? It's the same thing to say they should lose the family business and their source of income.

I don't think they "should." But before I react to the idea, I'd like more information. I'd like to know if that actually happens, why it happens, what can be done to prevent it, etc. What I am reading says there are exemptions and loopholes available for people to keep the family business.

I don't know if your numbers are right or not. But would you think the numbers mattered if the law affected only you? Fair is fair, no matter how many people are affected.

I have a pretty cold view of taxation. In my opinion, we get screwed when the money is allocated. That's where the unfairness occurs. Everyone goes for a piece of the action, then it's a scramble to see how gets stuck paying for it. I am not going to volunteer to pay any more than I have to, and it follows that if I favor a repeal of a tax I don't pay, that somewhere someone else is going to have to make up the difference. Now, if the GOP proposed a repeal of the estate tax, with a conservative estimate of the revenue lost--lets use the 750 billion or whatever number is out there--and within the same legislation proposed a federal cigarette tax estimated to offset that revenue loss, I would call my Senator tomorrow in support, because I don't smoke, and as a person on the sidelines, a cigarette tax is more fair than an estate tax, because one doesn't HAVE to smoke.

gree that we shouldn't be blind to party politics. But the "soak the rich" mantra is the most poisonous of all.

I am no saying soak the rich. I am saying don't soak me.

[speekinout]

There are two basic problems with your arguments. The first one is that the current system (which you are defending) benefits mostly the lawyers. When you talk about exemptions, exclusions, and regulations you are talking about the basis for the hugely lucrative estate law industry. The only ones who profit from that are lawyers. Even middle class people these days wind up spending thousands for estate planning.
The second problem is that you are assuming that the economy is static, and gov't expenses are also fixed. And that's not true. Gov't policies that increase economic activity bring in more revenue. A good example is what happens when they lower capital gains tax rates. Every time they do, more money is collected in capital gains taxes. And there are secondary effects as well. When more money is available to support business, more businesses start and grow, and the base for income taxes of all sorts rises.
So, lowering taxes on business could actually mean that your individual tax rate could be lower.

The bottom line is that tax codes do drive behavior. There are two ways to guarantee that no money at all is collected from income taxes - one is with a 0% rate and the other is with a 100% rate. The same thing applies to other taxes.
Estate taxes like we have today penalize some people, but more of the money goes into the estate planning industry than into the gov't coffers.