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 62 of 195 FirstFirst ... 1252606162636472112162 ... LastLast
Results 611 to 620 of 1947

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

  1. #611
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:03 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,878

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

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    So do you still assert that inheritance is income or not?
    My position is that inheritance should NOT be taxed as something special with its own estate tax but rather simply be taxed under the income tax schedules since it is a gain of substantial money to a new person. I came to that position from our fellow poster Turtledude who passionately argued against an estate tax and I came to agree with him that it should be abolished.

    One could not be clearer than 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

  2. #612
    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 TurtleDude View Post
    its clearly not income but its something the government needs far more than I do according to some
    I remember him stating it is income and should be taxed as such. Of course it isn't but I'm about to drop the hammer.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  3. #613
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:03 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,878

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

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    Your concept of contradictory is amusing
    Well here it is in your own words from you own posts giving your own positions that you flip on and make a complete reversal on.

    Sadly for your Turtle, there is the record to go to of your own posts, in your own words, explaining your beliefs and views. And that speaks louder than any lies you try to tell to cover your tracks or get out of a tight spot.

    Here is your position and your reversals on taxes:

    Again, first you took the position that taxation must be based on the amount of government services one used. We even had an entire thread for that purpose. Of course, that plan would have given you a tax cut.

    Page Not Found - Debate Politics Forums (Taxation as Retail Shopping Model)

    Turtle makes it very clear what his ultimate idea of a system of taxation would be:

    ECONOMICS
    Does Anyone Actually Think........ Deficit/Debt
    18 #175 6/9/11


    My definitions of fair-which reject the From each according to their ability

    THE FAIREST

    You pay for what you use

    just like every other area of human interaction
    That is clear and straight forward and unambiguous. The FAIREST tax system he advocates is one in which "you pay for what you use".
    He makes this clear again in this post using much the same words:



    ECONOMICS
    The Truth About Who Can Afford To Pay More Taxes
    p. 18 #172 1/21/11


    I want people to pay for what they use so when they demand more it costs them more
    =================================

    Again, his idea of taxation if for people to "pay for what they use".

    Yet again, in another discussion of taxation he expresses the same idea

    ECONOMICS
    Constant References to Billionaires
    23 #228 6/23/11


    fair would be everyone paying the same tax rate or people paying for what they use
    ===================================

    Here he looks back fondly on the ideal he believes once existed in which people paid for what they used in government services

    ECONOMICS
    Brief History of the Bush tax Cuts
    25 #243 6/2/11


    your obsession is that you like the current system and think that it cannot be changed.

    and it once was different. people once paid for what they used
    =====================================

    And once more into the breach

    ECONOMICS
    Tax Increase On the Table
    4 #37 4/14/11


    I know how the tax system works and why its ruining this country.

    and yes, people should pay for what they use rather than voting themselves the wealth of others
    ============================================

    Here he says that the "standard" used in taxation should be the "value recieved" which is another way of saying what government services you consume

    GENERAL POLITICAL DISCUSSION
    Flat Tax
    7 #66 7/4/11


    Given I reject the From each according to their ability argument and note that value received should be the standard, and a flat tax prevents the many from jacking my taxes up what other argument do you have other than you want to keep more of your next dollar than I get to keep
    Then, you abandoned not only the plan itself, but you abandoned the principle behind it. Your completely trashed and flushed the idea of connecting taxation to how much consumes in government services in favor of a per capita levy on all persons based on government spending. Your impassioned plea to connect taxation to how much one consumes in government services was trashed and flushed and as gone with the wind. You did a 180 and completely embraced a principle that was opposite of your first. Of course, this new scheme also gave you a personal tax cut.

    Then you trashed and flushed the per capita idea in favor of a consumption tax in which the entire idea of how much one consumed or even a per capita levy on it was trashed and flushed altogether in favor of a tax based on consumption.


    I have always said a consumption tax is the most desirable practical tax.
    I guess , to you, the meaning of the word ALWAYS is interchangeable with "of the moment and what I now have retreated to"?

    Of course, you would get a tax cut in that scheme also.

    Three different ideas, all very different, some 180 degrees opposite the other, all based on very very different principles.

    Or are they?

    The one "principle" (if one can call selfishness a principle) in all three is that you get a tax cut.

    Now that is the most honest presentation of your taxation positions there is and are completely supported by your own words. If you have a problem with that, state it clearly and I will speak to it.

    You reversed, not once but at least twice and that does not even consider any other tax scheme that you signed on to simply because it gave you a selfish tax cut regardless of the principles or methodology behind it.
    __________________________________________________ _
    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

  4. #614
    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 haymarket View Post
    My position is that inheritance should NOT be taxed as something special with its own estate tax but rather simply be taxed under the income tax schedules since it is a gain of substantial money to a new person. I came to that position from our fellow poster Turtledude who passionately argued against an estate tax and I came to agree with him that it should be abolished.

    One could not be clearer than that.
    So then you consider it income, it isn't. All you are doing is justifying re-taxing already taxed money. Let me help you out;

    Economics A-Z terms beginning with I | The Economist

    And I quote:
    Income


    The flow of MONEY to the FACTORS OF PRODUCTION: WAGES to LABOUR; PROFIT to ENTERPRISE and CAPITAL; INTEREST also to capital; RENT to LAND. Wages left for spending after paying taxes is known as disposable INCOME. For countries, see NATIONAL INCOME.
    Income Definition | Investopedia
    And I quote:
    Definition of 'Income'
    Economic wealth that is generated in exchange for an individual's performance of agreed upon activities or through investing capital. Income is consumed to fuel day-to-day expenditures.

    In businesses, income can refer to a company's remaining revenues after all expenses and taxes have been paid. In this case, it is also known as "earnings".

    Read more: Income Definition | Investopedia
    So, we have two economic pages at your disposal who say *gasp* the exact same thing. You can look around all OBJECTIVE sites will say the exact same thing. *shocker*
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  5. #615
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:03 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,878

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

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    I remember him stating it is income and should be taxed as such. Of course it isn't but I'm about to drop the hammer.
    Do you understand the difference between the the way INCOME is currently defined in a law and its intention to create a definition which gives discriminatory preferences to certain types of money coming in to a persons pocket and the discussion here of how to tax that same money coming into a persons pocket which many people consider as income regardless of the law?

    Is that something you can even understand?

    Do you understand that in the writing of law and legislation that terms are carefully defined so as to fit the law being crafted and what it does or does not do and often bear little relationship to certain aspects of life?

    Is that something you can even understand?

    Do you understand that in America, the Golden Rule is often a powerful instrument in the writing of law and in defining those terms in the law?

    Is that something you can even understand?
    Last edited by haymarket; 02-02-12 at 11:47 PM.
    __________________________________________________ _
    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

  6. #616
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,700

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

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    Well here it is in your own words from you own posts giving your own positions that you flip on and make a complete reversal on.

    Sadly for your Turtle, there is the record to go to of your own posts, in your own words, explaining your beliefs and views. And that speaks louder than any lies you try to tell to cover your tracks or get out of a tight spot.

    Here is your position and your reversals on taxes:

    Again, first you took the position that taxation must be based on the amount of government services one used. We even had an entire thread for that purpose. Of course, that plan would have given you a tax cut.

    Page Not Found - Debate Politics Forums (Taxation as Retail Shopping Model)

    Turtle makes it very clear what his ultimate idea of a system of taxation would be:

    ECONOMICS
    Does Anyone Actually Think........ Deficit/Debt
    18 #175 6/9/11




    He makes this clear again in this post using much the same words:



    ECONOMICS
    The Truth About Who Can Afford To Pay More Taxes
    p. 18 #172 1/21/11



    =================================

    Again, his idea of taxation if for people to "pay for what they use".

    Yet again, in another discussion of taxation he expresses the same idea

    ECONOMICS
    Constant References to Billionaires
    23 #228 6/23/11



    ===================================

    Here he looks back fondly on the ideal he believes once existed in which people paid for what they used in government services

    ECONOMICS
    Brief History of the Bush tax Cuts
    25 #243 6/2/11



    =====================================

    And once more into the breach

    ECONOMICS
    Tax Increase On the Table
    4 #37 4/14/11



    ============================================

    Here he says that the "standard" used in taxation should be the "value recieved" which is another way of saying what government services you consume

    GENERAL POLITICAL DISCUSSION
    Flat Tax
    7 #66 7/4/11




    Then, you abandoned not only the plan itself, but you abandoned the principle behind it. Your completely trashed and flushed the idea of connecting taxation to how much consumes in government services in favor of a per capita levy on all persons based on government spending. Your impassioned plea to connect taxation to how much one consumes in government services was trashed and flushed and as gone with the wind. You did a 180 and completely embraced a principle that was opposite of your first. Of course, this new scheme also gave you a personal tax cut.

    Then you trashed and flushed the per capita idea in favor of a consumption tax in which the entire idea of how much one consumed or even a per capita levy on it was trashed and flushed altogether in favor of a tax based on consumption.




    I guess , to you, the meaning of the word ALWAYS is interchangeable with "of the moment and what I now have retreated to"?

    Of course, you would get a tax cut in that scheme also.

    Three different ideas, all very different, some 180 degrees opposite the other, all based on very very different principles.

    Or are they?

    The one "principle" (if one can call selfishness a principle) in all three is that you get a tax cut.

    Now that is the most honest presentation of your taxation positions there is and are completely supported by your own words. If you have a problem with that, state it clearly and I will speak to it.

    You reversed, not once but at least twice and that does not even consider any other tax scheme that you signed on to simply because it gave you a selfish tax cut regardless of the principles or methodology behind it.

    :selfish tax cut=me still paying hundreds of thousands more than the average person

    I pay too much Haymarket

    I pay too much compared to

    1) what I get in return

    2) compared to others

    and you have the nerve to call me selfish when it is you who constantly demands that others pay more and more and more taxes to a government you worship and think needs more and more and more money

  7. #617
    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 haymarket View Post
    Do you understand the difference between the the way INCOME is currently defined in a law and its intention to create a definition which gives discriminatory preferences to certain types of money coming in to a persons pocket and the discussion here of how to tax that same money coming into a persons pocket which many people consider as income regardless of the law?

    Is that something you can even understand?
    So then you are for ending the discrimination against the wealthy in favor of the poor? Why didn't you just say so.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  8. #618
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,700

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

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    Do you understand the difference between the the way INCOME is currently defined in a law and its intention to create a definition which gives discriminatory preferences to certain types of money coming in to a persons pocket and the discussion here of how to tax that same money coming into a persons pocket which many people consider as income regardless of the law?

    Is that something you can even understand?
    I love this crap about intent and discrimination

    the rich are discriminated against

    not only do they pay the highest amount of tax dollars they pay the highest effective rates

    they pay the surcharge known as the death or estate taxes

    Your beloved obama claims that the rich don't sacrifice when government spending is cut-meaning he doesn't see government spending as benefitting the rich

    but he sees it as benefitting everyone else because that same Clown claims that others will sacrifice when government spending is cut

    that is how that ass justifies demanding the rich pay more because the rich don't suffer when government spending is cut so to offset the sacrifice everyone else makes if spending is cut, the rich-who don't benefit from government spending-have to pay more taxes

  9. #619
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:03 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,878

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

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    :selfish tax cut=me still paying hundreds of thousands more than the average person

    I pay too much Haymarket

    I pay too much compared to

    1) what I get in return

    2) compared to others

    and you have the nerve to call me selfish when it is you who constantly demands that others pay more and more and more taxes to a government you worship and think needs more and more and more money
    How much you pay is irrelevant. How much you get back in services is irrelevant. This is NOT a discussion of COSTCO shopping.

    The issue here is what motivates you in your positions on the issue of taxation. Your own words in post after post after post show beyond any doubt that you state a principle of belief only to completely reverse that position to its opposite belief and the only common glue holding it together is that in each of your positions - no matter how contradictory they actually are - you get a tax cut.

    I do not need NERVE to call your position SELFISH. Your own posts and your own reversals of your own self proclaimed 'principles' provide that characterization of your views for you.
    Last edited by haymarket; 02-02-12 at 11:58 PM.
    __________________________________________________ _
    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

  10. #620
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:03 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,878

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

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    I love this crap about intent and discrimination

    the rich are discriminated against

    not only do they pay the highest amount of tax dollars they pay the highest effective rates

    they pay the surcharge known as the death or estate taxes

    Your beloved obama claims that the rich don't sacrifice when government spending is cut-meaning he doesn't see government spending as benefitting the rich

    but he sees it as benefitting everyone else because that same Clown claims that others will sacrifice when government spending is cut

    that is how that ass justifies demanding the rich pay more because the rich don't suffer when government spending is cut so to offset the sacrifice everyone else makes if spending is cut, the rich-who don't benefit from government spending-have to pay more taxes
    The discriminatory laws that allow them
    1 - to pay 60% lower rates on capital gains compared to normal wages at the same high level, and
    2- the healthy and generous exemptions for the estate tax

    prove conclusively that the wealthy are the beneficiaries of discriminatory preferences by the current tax code.
    __________________________________________________ _
    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
  •