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 70 of 195 FirstFirst ... 2060686970717280120170 ... LastLast
Results 691 to 700 of 1947

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

  1. #691
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:33 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    90,006

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Centinel View Post
    They are both money coming into someone's pocket, which by your own words is income. You have stated that all money coming into someone's pocket should count as income. Would you like to retract this rule?
    Perhaps you an I have different outlooks on how the word RULE is being used? I am using it in the way we do in the state legislature when we write language for legislation. We try to establish the basic principles and rules we want to follow and structure a law which does pretty much that. Along the way you construct practical language which allows for variance and what most would consider practical considerations.

    It seems that perhaps you are using the word RULE to mean an hard and fast law which can never allow for any change or variance. Removable Mind just pointed out one such exception that could be implemented with gifts below a certain level.

    For example: We have a law which says you cannot take the life of other people. That is the law and rule that was followed is that human life is sacred and nobody can take the life of another. That is the rule. However, the law itself allows for variances and practical considerations that still follow the basic rule but allow for normal exceptions such as the obvious issue of self defense. That is the way laws work and how they are written and the tax changes I am proposing are no different.
    __________________________________________________ _
    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. #692
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:33 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    90,006

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Centinel View Post
    You said that there is a difference between inheritance and parents giving things to their children.
    And you yourself do not understand that difference?
    __________________________________________________ _
    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. #693
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Goldsboro,PA
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 04:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,596
    Blog Entries
    1

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

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    And you yourself do not understand that difference?
    The end result is the same, BUT, unless the granter is very careful, all sort of problems can arise..however the problem are soluable..
    Its human nature to have "favorite sons" - and creates many problems...worse when the granter no longer has anything to say..
    I am with Luna, more or less...Lets have no tax, at all levels on any inheritance.
    This is a simpler way of doing things.

  4. #694
    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 Centinel View Post
    Yet you continue to claim there is a difference, but refuse to tell us exactly why they are different. Why are you afraid to clearly articulate what, in your opinion, makes them different?

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    No. What I strong suspect is that if you already do not see it, nobody including myself could explain to you the difference in a parent buying a bowl of oatmeal or a book for their child and an inheritance of millions of dollars.
    If you are incapable of explaining the difference, maybe the difference is not as obvious as you make it out to be. In both cases, a person receives something they didn't have before. So what's the difference?

  5. #695
    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
    There is no confusion on my part Turtle. My position is very clear and easy to understand if one wants to approach the subject with an open mind.

    Let us take three people all of whom place a nice even ONE MILLION DOLLARS into their pocket during the year.

    case #1 is Richard Dillard, a professional record producer. He earned his million in wages and salary and his hard work and talent took him to the upper ranks of his profession. He is in the 35% tax bracket and will pay a federal income tax bill of $350,000.00.

    case #2 is Wanda Phillips, an investor. She made her million off long term capital gains. Her tax bracket is the preferential 15%. She will pay a federal income tax bill of $150,000.00.

    case #3 is Ned Sykes, who does not work or invest. He got his million through inheritance. Because the first 5 million is exempt, he pays nothing - zero percent. His federal income tax bill is $0.00.

    All three DID NOT have the one million at the start of the year. All three got their one million during the year. It all spends the same. If you took each of their money and placed it in three stacks of one million dollars each, nobody on the planet could tell you with any accuracy time after time in a test which pile of money came from which source.

    But the government knows whose million belongs to who because they put a big label on each and apply preferences and favoritism towards one over the other.

    Now Turtle, La, Centinel, Thrilla, and anyone else who can - tell Richard Dillard why he should be happy to pay a tax bill of $350,000.00 on the same amount of money that Wanda Phillips only pays $150,000.00 on and Ned Sykes pays nothing on. And feel free to use the word FAIR all you want in your explaination.
    No. What I strongly suspect is that if you already do not see it, nobody including myself could explain to you the difference between earning a million dollars and inheriting a million of dollars. Everybody knows there's a big difference between the two.
    Last edited by Centinel; 02-04-12 at 11:42 AM.

  6. #696
    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 Centinel View Post
    You said that there is a difference between inheritance and parents giving things to their children.
    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    And you yourself do not understand that difference?
    No, could you please explain it to me? In both cases the recipient now has wealth that they didn't previously have. That's income, no?

  7. #697
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:33 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    90,006

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Centinel View Post
    No. What I strong suspect is that if you already do not see it, nobody including myself could explain to you the difference between earning a million dollars and inheriting a million of dollars. Everybody knows there's a big difference between the two.
    Sure I do. The difference is that the person who earns it actually works for it. The person who inherits it simply lucks out from an accident of birth and did nor work for it.

    And that is a big difference between the two.

    Perhaps understanding that difference, we should then actually tax that sort of inheritance money at a much HIGHER rate than the same amount in wages or salary? Is that the case you are trying to make?

    I am happy simply to not have a lower rate or a higher rate on inherited money than compared to wages or salary. I want to keep it equal and the same. But then, that is just the sort of humanitarian that I am. If you want the inheritance rate HIGHER because the person failed to actually work for it, that is an interesting idea and I would welcome reading your case for that change.
    __________________________________________________ _
    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

  8. #698
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:33 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    90,006

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Centinel View Post
    If you are incapable of explaining the difference, maybe the difference is not as obvious as you make it out to be. In both cases, a person receives something they didn't have before. So what's the difference?
    I just explained to you how the rule is followed with variances for exceptions. But you ignored that and are now back to your hard and fast RULE AS UNBREAKABLE LAW position which is only designed by you to paint me into a corner.

    Your tactic did not work then. It does not work now. It will not work in the future.
    __________________________________________________ _
    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

  9. #699
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Goldsboro,PA
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 04:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,596
    Blog Entries
    1

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

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    false being something that slaps your desire to bleed more money from people and give it to a wasteful bloated government
    And you think the "American Public" is not wasteful and bloated ?
    Just look around a little, the money for drugs and cigarettes.....
    The money to be given and totally wasted to the political PACs.
    I feel that our government, in truth, is rather lean and efficient...but ,IMO, not as lean and they should be.
    I think that the trouble is, the conservatives do not think, they just accept Limbaugh's propaganda as Gospel.

  10. #700
    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
    Sure I do. The difference is that the person who earns it actually works for it. The person who inherits it simply lucks out from an accident of birth and did nor work for it.

    And that is a big difference between the two.
    Great. Now we're getting somewhere. So there IS a difference between wages and inheritance. Wages are payments to factors of production, and are counted as income in national accounting. Inheritance is simply a transfer of wealth from parent to child, and is not income. So despite the fact that they both result in the recipient having wealth they did not previously own, we can make a logical distinction between the two things.

    The general rule of acquiring wealth one did not previously own CAN have well thought out exceptions. It seems right to make an exception for a parent giving things to their children.

    Perhaps understanding that difference, we should then actually tax that sort of inheritance money at a much HIGHER rate than the same amount in wages or salary? Is that the case you are trying to make?
    Not really, because the inheritance is a particular kind of wealth transfer that is an exception to the general rule. It is not considered income in national accounting number, as it is not payment for a factor of production. It is simply a parent giving to his child. Which everybody knows is different than payment for factors of production.

    I am happy simply to not have a lower rate or a higher rate on inherited money than compared to wages or salary. I want to keep it equal and the same. But then, that is just the sort of humanitarian that I am. If you want the inheritance rate HIGHER because the person failed to actually work for it, that is an interesting idea and I would welcome reading your case for that change.
    I'd argue that because it is not really income but is an exception to the general rule, that it ought not to be taxed at all as income.

Posting Permissions

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