“If we must have an enemy at the head of Government, let it be one whom we can oppose, and for whom we are not responsible, who will not involve our party in the disgrace of his foolish and bad measures.”
- Alexander Hamilton. Spiritual father of #NeverTrump
from Turtle defending generations of inherited wealth
Well you can thank Republican President George Bush for coming up with that idea and thank the 91% of Republican House and Senate members who supplied the YES votes for that system. As a progressive Democrat, I would have joined by fellow Democratic Congressional members who voted NO on that scheme. I have said many times that I believe ALL Americans should pay some federal income tax.what really goes against what America was founded on is 47% of the voters not paying any federal income taxes but instead lying back and sucking of the wealth that others earned.
What idea would that be? Obviously the Constitution had to be amended to allow for it, but income taxes were instituted off an on throughout American history long before the 16th Amendment.Income tax runs contrary to the idea upon which this country was founded
We have already dispensed with your obsession about people who do not pay. I agree that ALL should pay something in federal income tax. Although you are well aware that even those who do NOT pay federal income tax stil pay countless other taxes and in many cases pay a much larger percentage of their overall income in one tax or another compared to the wealthy. So the demonization of one group who does not pay federal income tax is highly selective anger intentionally adopted for political purposes.if you are going to spew your hate at the rich based on what America is based on you need to save most of your loathing for the freeloaders. a kid who inherits a billion and never invests it but merely goes under the mattress each week to spend some of what was left after the death tax toll might be a sloth but he isn't costing me any money because as you say, the dead don't pay taxes and what was taking from his inheritance is going to cover his costs for the rest of his life if a billion remains. what costs me money are those who are getting money FROM the taxpayers merely because they EXIST and they cannot or will not (or a combination thereof) pay their own way
As to inheritance taxes, they are as American as apple pie and have a long and rich history in this nation. In America, we glorify and honor the self made man or woman and that is what made the nation great. Daddykins or Mumsy-wumsy birthing Junior and keeping them in satin diapers until they are old enough to take over the manor and all its bowing servants is not the American ideal. We have far too many people who were born on third base, and then wallow in the mental delusion that they have hit a home run in life when it was Daddykins who owned the ballclub and Mumsy who bribed the umpire to call them safe at the plate. No, that is not the American ideal at all.
I have little doubt that it is the mindset of some old money families. And it is a damaging mindset because it robs their own children of initiative and self determination. You have provided no evidence that one cannot both spend foolishly and give to their offspring if one has enough to do both so your point there is invalid. Hugh Hefner certainly spends his money in a manner what some would call foolishly but still will be able to leave some behind for his daughter. So one can do both. Besides, I would rather they spend and help the economy and other people could then benefit.... even if it is spent foolishly.and your claim about America is complete BS. Much of what this country was founded on was people making sacrifices so their children would have it better than they did. Its the mindset of just about every old money family around. People who saved and invested and worked hard for their children rather than spending recklessly and foolishly.
Estate taxes should be high and steep. Andrew Carnegie recognized this and he was the personification of the American capitalist in the rough and tumble wide open Gilded Age of the robber barons. He gave it all away and left his daughter nothing.
"The question which forces itself upon thoughtful men in all lands is: Why should men leave great fortunes to their children? If this is done from affection, is it not misguided affection? Observation teaches that, generally speaking, it is not well for the children that they should be so burdened. Neither is it well for the state. Beyond providing for the wife and daughters moderate sources of income, and very moderate allowances indeed, if any, for the sons, men may well hesitate, for it is no longer questionable that great sums bequeathed oftener work more for the injury than for the good of the recipients. Wise men will soon conclude that, for the best interests of the members of their families and of the state, such bequests are an improper use of their means."
The reality is that he gave away most of his fortune. The reality is that he advocated steep estate taxes. The reality is that he recognized that he had an obligation to the American people beyond taxation and stepped up and fulfilled that with his hundreds of Carnegie libraries and other good works. He understood that the worship of Mammon was a terrible thing and would ruin his soul and character.
"Man must have an idol -- The amassing of wealth is one of the worst species of idolatry. No idol more debasing than the worship of money."
I think Roberta Brooke Astor had it right. The New York socialite inherited great wealth and learned to understand what money really was and how to use it for the public good
"Money is like manure; it’s not worth a thing unless it’s spread around.”
One does not have to be uniquely American to feel this way.
Alfred Nobel (1833-1896) left his immense wealth for the establishment of the Nobel Prizes rather than to his children. Only a small portion of his wealth was left to relatives, the greatest amount of his legacy valued at 31 million Swedish crowns (equivalent of $220 million today) was designated for five Nobel Prizes.
"I regard large inherited wealth as a misfortune, which merely serves to dull men's faculties. A man who possesses great wealth should, therefore, allow only a small portion to descend to his relatives. Even if he has children, I consider it a mistake to hand over to them considerable sums of money beyond what is necessary for their education. To do so merely encourages laziness and impedes the healthy development of the individual's capacity to make an independent position for himself."
Bill Gates recognizes that and Warren Buffet does also. Bob Dylan wrote ".. helpless as a rich mans child".
Inherited wealth is a curse on the fop or dandy who accepts it. It is a good thing we have even the small estate taxes that we do.
"Better to have good fortune than to be a rich man's child."
~ proverb (1639)
Last edited by haymarket; 07-19-11 at 05:53 AM.
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers
Oh, I've got stories...
Anyway, I was a libertarian ~14 and lost religion ~8 (guess I spent ~4 years stewing over the Santa thing and finally said, out loud, screw u guys). Volunteered ~20, left a nice private university to do so.
ps. Lost virginity at 15 and was 100% sober through HS, president of debate team, AP english, government and history, and honors everything else except Intl. Relations (no honors class for that).
We could spend the rest of the thread talking about me, but I guess you guys are doing something.
Last edited by ecofarm; 07-19-11 at 06:08 AM.
When someone whines that estate taxes should be "high and steep" the only conclusion to be drawn is that the speaker either is fabulously wealthy or hates those who actually have an inheritance to look forward to. Its based on envy and its a surcharge on those who have already paid more than their fair share of taxes. Nothing is funnier than someone who pretends to adopt the alleged noble views of the very wealthy in order to have the government confiscate wealth of people more industrious than he is. What Haymarket ignores is that most wealthy people work hard for their families and while some may wish to leave their wealth entirely to charity (which, of course is their right) to claim that justifies government confiscation of such wealth is specious and of course spiteful
anyone who thinks that those on this board who constantly argue for other being taxed more are doing so out of some misguided beneficient social sense of good is delusional. We know what motivates these tax hikers. Its in my signature
Referring to us as 'volks' is a little disrespectful.