View Poll Results: which best describes your view of the inheritance tax?

Voters
153. You may not vote on this poll
  • There should be no inheritance tax of any amount of money or assets.

    84 54.90%
  • The first 5 million dollars should be exempt. After that the tax rate should be 35%.

    21 13.73%
  • The first 5 million dollars should be exempt. After that the tax rate should be 50%.

    12 7.84%
  • The first 1 million should be exempt. After that the rate should be 50%.

    19 12.42%
  • No exempt amount. Tax at 35% from the get-go.

    9 5.88%
  • No exempt amount. Tax at 50% from the get-go.

    1 0.65%
  • Abolish all inheritance. In other words, tax 100%.

    7 4.58%
Page 150 of 195 FirstFirst ... 50100140148149150151152160 ... LastLast
Results 1,491 to 1,500 of 1947

Thread: which best describes your view of the inheritance tax?

  1. #1491
    Sage
    MoSurveyor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    04-13-17 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,985

    Re: which best describes your view of the inheritance tax?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jryan View Post
    It isn't the governments money, they didn't earn squat, it was taxed by the government as they earned it. Then when that person dies, it shouldn't be taxed because that is called double taxation, which is illegal I do believe. Also, again, this still brings up the question of, again, the parents built the future for the child, who is the government to take any of that away? Although, I kind of see a point, an 18 year old getting 10 million dollars is probably not healthy for our society because he will just sit in a house and never put that money into the economy, but that still doesn't address the question of how the government should dictate morals on him and strip it away so he has to get a job. I might see a tax on like Bill Gates' estate because he has SOOOO much and ten bucks says he wants it to be taxed. Personally, I think if you want some of your money to go to the government when you die, that is a good reason why you write a will.
    If I knew for sure he was just going to lay around the house and spend money on gourmet pizza, personal chefs, maids, butlers, drivers, and companionship it wouldn't bother me at all. I also don't see anyone with $5M+ having to get a job if they don't want to.

    I think they should tie the inheritance limit into the poverty line. If rich people want to leave their heirs more money then they can handle their businesses better to make sure the economy is ticking along so everybody has a good life - not handouts but jobs where people can work and be proud. Welfare sucks but having America business rig the game to exclude Americans sucks even more.
    Mt. Rushmore: Three surveyors and some other guy.
    Life goes on within you and without you. -Harrison
    Hear the echoes of the centuries, Power isn't all that money buys. -Peart
    After you learn quantum mechanics you're never really the same again. -Weinberg

  2. #1492
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:50 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,626

    Re: which best describes your view of the inheritance tax?

    Quote Originally Posted by Centinel View Post
    Hm, I present an argument that you claim is better made by a high school sophomore, yet you assiduously avoid even attempting to refute it. Fascinating.
    Your premise is a false one as has been pointed out. As such, there is nothing of substance to refute as it falls on its face.

    Taxation brought about through a law passed by the duly elected representatives of the American people as authorized by the United States Constitution is NOT a denial of any property rights that a citizen may have.

    Protections of the rights of citizens through a law passed by the duly elected representatives of the American people as authorized by the United States Constitution is NOT a denial of any property rights that a citizen may have.
    Last edited by haymarket; 02-21-12 at 10:02 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

  3. #1493
    Sage
    lizzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    between two worlds
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,581

    Re: which best describes your view of the inheritance tax?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jryan View Post
    It isn't the governments money, they didn't earn squat, it was taxed by the government as they earned it. Then when that person dies, it shouldn't be taxed because that is called double taxation, which is illegal I do believe. Also, again, this still brings up the question of, again, the parents built the future for the child, who is the government to take any of that away? Although, I kind of see a point, an 18 year old getting 10 million dollars is probably not healthy for our society because he will just sit in a house and never put that money into the economy, but that still doesn't address the question of how the government should dictate morals on him and strip it away so he has to get a job. I might see a tax on like Bill Gates' estate because he has SOOOO much and ten bucks says he wants it to be taxed. Personally, I think if you want some of your money to go to the government when you die, that is a good reason why you write a will.
    Why are a self-described socialist if these things are what you really believe?
    "God is the name by which I designate all things which cross my path violently and recklessly, all things which alter my plans and intentions, and change the course of my life, for better or for worse."
    -C G Jung

  4. #1494
    Irremovable Intelligence
    Removable Mind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    23,480

    Re: which best describes your view of the inheritance tax?

    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor View Post
    Welfare sucks but having America business rig the game to exclude Americans sucks even more.
    Ditto, Mo, Ditto!

    Back to inheritance. Most people don't get huge inheritances. The generational poor...inherit....?

    IMO, giving legally earned, legitimate gifts, of any amount, to immediate family members while living...should never be taxed. Legally earned or inherited money that was bequeathed to those of a person's choosing, in any amount , the recipients should never be taxed. Those who have significant sums...usually have that money working and those who inherit that money - normally grow up with money people and usually want that money to continue to work and make them more money.

  5. #1495
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Penn's Woods
    Last Seen
    09-01-12 @ 09:09 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,984

    Re: which best describes your view of the inheritance tax?

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    Your premise is a false one as has been pointed out. As such, there is nothing of substance to refute as it falls on its face.

    Taxation brought about through a law passed by the duly elected representatives of the American people as authorized by the United States Constitution is NOT a denial of any property rights that a citizen may have.

    Protections of the rights of citizens through a law passed by the duly elected representatives of the American people as authorized by the United States Constitution is NOT a denial of any property rights that a citizen may have.
    Yes, I completely understand that taxes enacted by the government are perfectly legal. I am not arguing otherwise. I am not arguing whether they are legal, I am arguing that the legislation be changed.

    I am pointing out that those who are interested in ethics might not wish to support legislation that collects taxes for purposes other than property protection. If taxes are collected for any purpose other than the protection of property, then the government is acting as a plunderer, not a defender. And anyone who votes for such taxes is an accessory to the plunder.

    For example, if the government collects tax money and then uses that money not for the military, police protection, or the courts, then the government is taking property. By taking property it is violating its mission to protect property.

    I guess it all depends on what one regards as the legitimate purpose of government. I see it as a tool for the protection of property. You seem to think that it is a tool for taking the property of some in order to give it to others. I have serious ethical problems with using the government to that end, while you seem to think it's fine. I will never support the government using coercion to take from one in order to give to another.

    Taxes for any purpose other than the military, police, or courts make the government an attacker of property rather than a defender of property.

  6. #1496
    Klattu Verata Nicto
    LaMidRighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    30,534

    Re: which best describes your view of the inheritance tax?

    Quote Originally Posted by Centinel View Post
    Yes, I completely understand that taxes enacted by the government are perfectly legal. I am not arguing otherwise. I am not arguing whether they are legal, I am arguing that the legislation be changed.

    I am pointing out that those who are interested in ethics might not wish to support legislation that collects taxes for purposes other than property protection. If taxes are collected for any purpose other than the protection of property, then the government is acting as a plunderer, not a defender. And anyone who votes for such taxes is an accessory to the plunder.

    For example, if the government collects tax money and then uses that money not for the military, police protection, or the courts, then the government is taking property. By taking property it is violating its mission to protect property.

    I guess it all depends on what one regards as the legitimate purpose of government. I see it as a tool for the protection of property. You seem to think that it is a tool for taking the property of some in order to give it to others. I have serious ethical problems with using the government to that end, while you seem to think it's fine. I will never support the government using coercion to take from one in order to give to another.

    Taxes for any purpose other than the military, police, or courts make the government an attacker of property rather than a defender of property.
    It's interesting that you have used coercion in this as it is exactly how the federal has come to trump the states. Since the last century the federal has created boards and administrations dealing with whatever pet issues it has adopted, they pass regulations on states who are on the hook for enforcement which eats into budgets forcing them to collect more in taxes but it still falls short meaning they must accept federal monies to make up for shortfalls, once the federal becomes a paying party they coerce the states to follow federal mandates or else lose funding meaning many states must adopt conditions they are diametrically opposed to and the federal does an end around on state's rights.

    I know this is about the inheritance tax but it is the same principle, we have a government that takes property to use against the state and the individual. And then those who support this inanity of course like to say "rights are not absolute" towards everything from attaining as much property as possible to what property can be attained(guns, cars, homes) and every other aspect they can crap on of American individualism. Rights are in fact absolute however they are limited properly in their effect, much like the doctor "do no harm" applies to every natural right, they naturally end where harm to another occurs but in benign exercise they are in fact absolute regardless of any judicial theory(according to the founding fathers and U.S.C.).
    Last edited by LaMidRighter; 02-21-12 at 03:16 PM.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  7. #1497
    Sage
    lizzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    between two worlds
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,581

    Re: which best describes your view of the inheritance tax?

    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor View Post
    And here I thought you were a capitalist! Obviously you're not - or you haven't been following the tech industry's patent wars very closely. I don't consider $5M "misery" in any way, shape, or form. I could be wrong, though, Turtle certainly whines enough but you wouldn't think he'd be so keen to keep something that hurts so much.
    You don't have to have alot of money to think that capitalism is the most successful and workable economic model going. If I wanted to, I could make much more money than I do, however my priorities in life don't dictate that I do this. I am not materialistic, but I do think that materialism is as valid as my own priorities. We are each individuals, with different interests and capabilities. If someone wants to use his industry and energy to build a financial empire, he/she has my full support, as long as he's not stepping on my toes. There's not a zero-sum game of money. Those who generate alot of money are not taking it from the poor or from anyone else. Those who buy goods and services which make someone wealthy are willingly paying for those goods and services, and are not being coerced by anyone else.

    I don't consider $5M "misery" in any way, shape, or form. I could be wrong, though, Turtle certainly whines enough but you wouldn't think he'd be so keen to keep something that hurts so much
    If you are envious of those who have more than you, it reflects on your own character, and not that of those you envy.
    Last edited by lizzie; 02-21-12 at 03:49 PM.
    "God is the name by which I designate all things which cross my path violently and recklessly, all things which alter my plans and intentions, and change the course of my life, for better or for worse."
    -C G Jung

  8. #1498
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: which best describes your view of the inheritance tax?

    Quote Originally Posted by Centinel View Post
    Exactly none.
    None voted against the Iraq war, or none got elected in order to be able to vote against it?

    Which Libertarians voted against the Iraq war?
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  9. #1499
    Sage
    lizzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    between two worlds
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,581

    Re: which best describes your view of the inheritance tax?

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    None voted against the Iraq war, or none got elected in order to be able to vote against it?

    Which Libertarians voted against the Iraq war?
    There are no Libertarians in congress (afaik), and the only one I know of who describes himself as libertarian is Ron Paul, who did not vote for the Iraq war.
    "God is the name by which I designate all things which cross my path violently and recklessly, all things which alter my plans and intentions, and change the course of my life, for better or for worse."
    -C G Jung

  10. #1500
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:50 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,626

    Re: which best describes your view of the inheritance tax?

    from Centinel

    Yes, I completely understand that taxes enacted by the government are perfectly legal. I am not arguing otherwise. I am not arguing whether they are legal, I am arguing that the legislation be changed.
    As as your right.

    I am pointing out that those who are interested in ethics might not wish to support legislation that collects taxes for purposes other than property protection.
    Changes in the law require new legislation passed by a majority of the peoples elected representatives. I see precious little impetus for such an idea.

    If taxes are collected for any purpose other than the protection of property, then the government is acting as a plunderer, not a defender.
    Your opinion. To get a new law passed you are going to have to show most people and their representatives would agree with you. I see nothing of the kind.



    And anyone who votes for such taxes is an accessory to the plunder.
    Again, your opinion and I see little to no practical public sentiment agreeing with you.

    For example, if the government collects tax money and then uses that money not for the military, police protection, or the courts, then the government is taking property. By taking property it is violating its mission to protect property.
    Again you have a right to your opinion. In a representative democracy you are going to have to convince a majority of the peoples representatives to share that opinion. I see no such support. can you point to any survey or poll which demonstrates support for this idea?

    I guess it all depends on what one regards as the legitimate purpose of government.
    Exactly.

    I see it as a tool for the protection of property. You seem to think that it is a tool for taking the property of some in order to give it to others.
    NO. I see taxation passed by the peoples government as the price we all pay to live in civilized society with certain programs and services and functions we want as a people.


    I have serious ethical problems with using the government to that end, while you seem to think it's fine. I will never support the government using coercion to take from one in order to give to another.
    Since I do not support what you claim I do, your premise for it is false.

    Taxes for any purpose other than the military, police, or courts make the government an attacker of property rather than a defender of property.
    Again - your opinion. And an opinion which ignores the very Constitution of the United States which in great detail lists many many more powers and functions of government that just defense or the police. Ignoring that basic reality dooms your opinion to remaining only that.
    __________________________________________________ _
    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

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •