• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

which best describes your view of the inheritance tax?

which best describes your view of the inheritance tax?


  • Total voters
    126
Status
Not open for further replies.
we have been over this before. Your hyperbolic over the top USE OF FORCE is actually taxation. So lets get real.
Yes, of course it is taxation. And I think it is important to keep clearly in mind exactly what taxation is. It is the taking of another's property, it just happens to be being done by government people.

You seem to be the only person who feels you can run a government for 311 million people without a system of compulsory taxation.
"Running a government" can mean lots of things. To you, it means using the government to take money from some people and hand it to others. I happen to believe that taking other people's stuff to hand over to another is wrong, whether it is done by government or not. You obviously are fine with taking other people's stuff to give to others.

Having the government act as your thug does not equate to "running the government". I think that "running the government" means having the government PROTECT the life, liberty, and property of its citizens, not act as a street corner mugger.

It all boils down to what you think a government should be used for. For some, it is used to as a protector. On the other hand, your agenda is to have the government act as a looting machine, taking from some in order to hand money over to others.
 
Yes, of course it is taxation. And I think it is important to keep clearly in mind exactly what taxation is. It is the taking of another's property, it just happens to be being done by government people.


"Running a government" can mean lots of things. To you, it means using the government to take money from some people and hand it to others. I happen to believe that taking other people's stuff to hand over to another is wrong, whether it is done by government or not. You obviously are fine with taking other people's stuff to give to others.

Having the government act as your thug does not equate to "running the government". I think that "running the government" means having the government PROTECT the life, liberty, and property of its citizens, not act as a street corner mugger.

It all boils down to what you think a government should be used for. For some, it is used to as a protector. On the other hand, your agenda is to have the government act as a looting machine, taking from some in order to hand money over to others.
so.....how do you finance your 'version' of government?
 
'Those who keep the lights turned on, the gears greased and the wheels of industry turning,'.......you mean the the common working man/woman, right?
You're joking, right?__Surely you don't actually believe something so obviously flawed as this?!__Only a liberal would suggest such a thing.

The common working man and woman would still be living in cold dark caves if not for the visionaries who created the gears, the grease, and the wheel.

If you don't mind me asking randel, how old are you and what level of education do you have?


"The fact that we presently have an Administration in power that continues to grow the dependent half of the population........." you are aware that republican policy, from the last administration, increased the number of non-tax payers, right? the current administration is getting the ship back on course, as 20+ months of economic growth and job creation shows.
I am well aware of the destructive policies of the previous administration and acknowledge it's contribution to our current predicament.

The present problem lies with the people who believe the man behind the curtain who tells them everything is fine and getting better.

Until you open your mind to sources other than that man behind the curtain you will not recognize the destructive policies of the current administration.

I am neither democrat nor republican__To be quite frank, I don't see much difference in them__Both are taking us to the same place, one just a little bit quicker.

Liberals operate on blind faith__You like the direction the Democrat/Progressive Party is taking us__The problem is, you won't like it when we get there, but it will be too late.

Like the liberals, the old school republicans are blindly loyal to their GOP__Libertarians and conservatives on the other hand, are natural born skeptics and loyal only to themselves.

The path to personal enlightenment__If you wish to become politically savvy, you must first abandon all party loyalties and become a devout objective skeptic.
 
Gee, I don't know, I guess the United States never existed before the Income Tax Act of 1913
simple question , seems you are against any tax whatsoever, and it seems you labor under the illusion that everything from defense to infrastructure pays for itself, without out taxes, in one form or another, please explain how your 'version' of government would fund itself? if you can't give a straight up answer, then that tells me you really havent thought this all the way through.
 
I'd probably be okay with 'exempt to a certain point, then taxed at XX-rate", though I'm not sure specifically what those rates should be. Also, I'm not sure exactly how valuations are performed regarding inheritance.

My father's entire "wealth" will come to me when he dies and I'll probably end up selling a lot of it off (land parcels, vehicles, etc) and renting out the house. I don't have a problem paying tax on the income from the sale, but the item itself? I'm not sure it should be taxed anymore than it already is (i.e. vehicle registration fees, licensing fees, property taxes, etc).
 
You're joking, right?__Surely you don't actually believe something so obviously flawed as this?!__Only a liberal would suggest such a thing.

The common working man and woman would still be living in cold dark caves if not for the visionaries who created the gears, the grease, and the wheel.

If you don't mind me asking randel, how old are you and what level of education do you have?


I am well aware of the destructive policies of the previous administration and acknowledge it's contribution to our current predicament.

The present problem lies with the people who believe the man behind the curtain who tells them everything is fine and getting better.

Until you open your mind to sources other than that man behind the curtain you will not recognize the destructive policies of the current administration.

I am neither democrat nor republican__To be quite frank, I don't see much difference in them__Both are taking us to the same place, one just a little bit quicker.

Liberals operate on blind faith__You like the direction the Democrat/Progressive Party is taking us__The problem is, you won't like it when we get there, but it will be too late.

Like the liberals, the old school republicans are blindly loyal to their GOP__Libertarians and conservatives on the other hand, are natural born skeptics and loyal only to themselves.

The path to personal enlightenment__If you wish to become politically savvy, you must first abandon all party loyalties and become a devout objective skeptic.
41 with college education....how old are you? what level of education? and no, i'm not joking....being a 'visionary' is all well and good, but will only go so far...you still need those willing to do the work, to run the machines, to fix the machines, to do the actual labor, to accomplish anything...or will that 'visionary' be able to do this all by their lonesome? would henry ford have been able to run the factory all by himself? no, he couldnt, so he had to hire laborers to run it for him.....were fred meijer or sam walton going to be able to run their stores in multiple states by themselves? were they personally going to drive the supply trucks to each store? you need to think this through all the way.
 
Well it would be nice if you defined what you mean by a "non contributor"? Are you limiting this to one tax? One program? One aspect of life?
Your question inspires me to suggest you as a likely example of the answer__bye-bye!
 
41 with college education....how old are you? what level of education? and no, i'm not joking....being a 'visionary' is all well and good, but will only go so far...you still need those willing to do the work, to run the machines, to fix the machines, to do the actual labor, to accomplish anything...or will that 'visionary' be able to do this all by their lonesome? would henry ford have been able to run the factory all by himself? no, he couldnt, so he had to hire laborers to run it for him.....were fred meijer or sam walton going to be able to run their stores in multiple states by themselves? were they personally going to drive the supply trucks to each store? you need to think this through all the way.
Unbelievable__if taxpayers funded your college education, they should demand their money back__seriously_
 
If you are that tired, perhaps I can recommend some therapy to ease your pain? A long vacation in the tropics away from computers would be a start.


I hear Afganistan is nice this thime of year and everything there is very cheap to buy, you could even save more money, Turtle:peace
 
Unbelievable__if taxpayers funded your college education, they should demand their money back__seriously_
what is unbelievable is that this is the response you give...seriously, read my post, then think about it....is an inventor/entreprenuer/ visonary going to be able to everything necessary to bring their product/idea/innovation to market by themselves? or are they going to require laborers at some point? now please dispense with the snarky replies, and answer my question. no need to insult everyone you disagree with, we have enough of those around here already.
 
so.....how do you finance your 'version' of government?
My version of government is the same as yours. I just want different laws than the looters want. I want to eliminate laws that take money from one person and give to another. I want to preserve laws that protect people's life, liberty, and property. Then a hell of a lot less taxes will be required.
 
My version of government is the same as yours. I just want different laws than the looters want. I want to eliminate laws that take money from one person and give to another. I want to preserve laws that protect people's life, liberty, and property. Then a hell of a lot less taxes will be required.
STOP!!!! BUT TAXES WILL STILL BE REQUIRED.....so you are willing to tax to fund your version of what the government should be, so you admit that your VERSION will require funds to operate....soooooo.....you are no better than those you call 'looters', 'muggers', so you will be taking anothers 'property' to fund your VERSION of what government should be....how ironic, you are no better then those you rail against.
 
The government taking money from me, to give to you, is just as much theft as you holding a gun to my head and taking it yourself. Even if the government is taking it for you, the result is the same. The end does not justify the means, no matter how much you rationalize that it's *right*.

I have some questions about this post.

"The government taking money from me to give to you is just as much theft as you holding a gun to my head and taking it for yourself"

I am quoteing you am I not?

However if this is true and since money as no label on it, then the tax cuts for the rich could very well come from taxes I've paid , or it could have come from some poor working stiff that paid in and got nothing back . or the so called bailouts, loans and reserch grants could have came from Social Security that too would be considered THEFT would it not?

If I gamble and win a million dollar lottery the IRS. would be right there even if I died before it was cashed the IRS would be there collecting money from the person I left it to with that would be a person with an inheritance , would not that be theft as well??

In my case I would not complain ,I'm sure the biggest part of my taxes would go to the biggest tax spender the Defence Department keeping America safe.
That is unless you want everybody to pay less taxes to the Defence Department??
In my opinion that would be a bad idea.:peace
 
STOP!!!! BUT TAXES WILL STILL BE REQUIRED.....so you are willing to tax to fund your version of what the government should be, so you admit that your VERSION will require funds to operate....soooooo.....you are no better than those you call 'looters', 'muggers', so you will be taking anothers 'property' to fund your VERSION of what government should be....how ironic, you are no better then those you rail against.
I'd be fine with those who would rather that their life, liberty, and property NOT be protected by any particular government to forego those services and keep their taxes. No skin off my back. I'm not really into forcing other people to do what I want.
 
I'd be perfectly happy if they took all the money from the estate and burned it - just take it out of circulation. For me this has nothing to do with increasing revenue, it has to do with pest control.
so let me understand this rant of yours

you want all wealth to be destroyed after someone dies or just the property of the rich. I have often termed left wing views on wealth as "economic vandalism" and that seems to sure fit my definition. Pest control? I think that term is best reserved for the parasites who want to take the wealth of others and the pimps in political office who pander to them
 
I must admit that I'm more than a little surprised at the results of this poll thus far considering the growing popularity of Progressivism and it's policy of "from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs".

It's reassuring to know that most americans still believe that We The People should be the chief executors of our accumulated assets even in death, rather than having government confiscate them for scrupulous politicians to buy votes with or waste on $800 toilet seats.

Half the people in the United States are presently paying all the bills and when this nation reaches the tipping point, those who pay nothing will demand that they pay more and more by means of an unjust democracy at a ballot box they will soon control.

Those who keep the lights turned on, the gears greased and the wheels of industry turning, which creates jobs for the masses, may be forced to relocate off shore to nations where their accomplishments and services are appreciated as has already been happening as of late.

The fact that we presently have an Administration in power that continues to grow the dependent half of the population while demanding ever more from the decreasing half, suggests that this Administration is either ignorant of the obvious or 100% aware of what it is doing.

The United States now rests in the hands of the ever increasing number of non-producers whose survival is dependent upon government entitlements as payment for their votes__Their future generation's disappointment will be legendary when they realize the utopia promised is in reality a totalitarian nightmare.

Not being sarcastic here but is the following fact true or false?

The more people that have jobs the more people paying taxes , the more people paying taxes the less taxes people will have to pay.:peace
 
given those who spend the most time on this board howling for the rates to be jacked up are people who DO NOT PAY Inheritance/Estate/Death taxes I find it hilarious that you are pissing and moaning that the rates are too low

This is the reason you are going to be so surprised when the GOP loses in November. You refuse to admit what the majority of the county is already aware, lack of income and 30 years of excessive military spending and optional wars create debt, which the GOP then expects the seniors and middle class to be on the hook for.

There is no benefit for the middle class or the economy to keep voting for the tax cuts for the rich and increased military spending that simply increase the debt we are then responsible for. This will become more apparent to you in November.
 
Last edited:
The government taking money from me, to give to you, is just as much theft as you holding a gun to my head and taking it yourself. Even if the government is taking it for you, the result is the same. The end does not justify the means, no matter how much you rationalize that it's *right*.

They are not giving it to me, they blew it on the GOP war in Iraq and asking me to be responsible for it, so **** them and the tax cuts for the rich they rode in on!
 
Last edited:
This is the reason you are going to be so surprised when the GOP loses in November. You refuse to admit what the majority of the county is already aware, lack of income and 30 years of excessive military spending and optional wars create debt, which the GOP then expects the seniors and middle class to be on the hook for.

There is no benefit for the middle class or the economy to keep voting for the tax cuts for the rich that simply increase the debt we are then responsible for. This will become more apparent to you in November.

Where Have I said the GOP is going to win? You have a built in advantage by pandering to the many with the wealth of the few. For every winner there are dozens of losers and the Dems spend tons of time trying to convince more and more people that they are not able to win and need the dems to take care of them

there is no benefit for those who suck on the public tit to tell the government to stop spending or to keep the taxes on the producers down. And you do everything possible to increase the number of tit suckers
 
They are not giving it to me, they blew it on the GOP war in Iraq, so **** them and the tax cuts for the rich they rode in on!

LOL and when I point to spite and envy motivating the takers' position some claim I am wrong

thanks for backing me up
 
LOL and when I point to spite and envy motivating the takers' position some claim I am wrong

thanks for backing me up

I envy Iraq????
 
Glad you agree the GOP is going down!

what you or I say will happen means diddley squat. what will happen will happen. If most people think they need to be coddled by the government your side will win. If more people think they can achieve-you will lose

but you braying as if you are better if your side wins is idiotic. I was rich when Clinton was president, I was rich when Reagan was president and I was richer when W was president and I am richer now than at any time

and I suspect you will still be whining about your lot in life no matter who wins
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom