• 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?

  • There should be no inheritance tax of any amount of money or assets.

    Votes: 64 50.8%

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

    Votes: 20 15.9%

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

    Votes: 10 7.9%

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

    Votes: 18 14.3%

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

    Votes: 7 5.6%

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

    Votes: 1 0.8%

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

    Votes: 6 4.8%
  • Total voters
    126
Status
Not open for further replies.
LaMidRighter said:
Pretty much. For all the lip service Buffet and Gates give to the pro tax side those two are so sheltered from paying any sum that would hurt them fiscally, they will trade off a few mil. here or there and then kick a little to charity while hiding behind cap gains and telling everyone else they feel guilty about paying "too low a rate". All the while they say this they are politically protected from exactly what they advocate because they have enough money and influence to pretty much buy whatever outcomes they want.
Click to expand...



Ever heard the story about the Kennedy trust and FIJI?
 
TurtleDude said:
10,000 fleas all agree that the dog should not wear a flea collar. The dog and his owner disagree
Click to expand...

Your utter contempt for the American people by comparing them to fleas on a dog is duly noted.
 
LaMidRighter said:
Pretty much. For all the lip service Buffet and Gates give to the pro tax side those two are so sheltered from paying any sum that would hurt them fiscally, they will trade off a few mil. here or there and then kick a little to charity while hiding behind cap gains and telling everyone else they feel guilty about paying "too low a rate". All the while they say this they are politically protected from exactly what they advocate because they have enough money and influence to pretty much buy whatever outcomes they want.
Click to expand...

You're right. To erase their advantages, we'd also need to do away with Irrevocable Trusts, as well.
 
haymarket said:
FALSE.

Go back and read my post from this morning where I provided poll after poll describing how the public felt about taxing the wealthy. It is called providing EVIDENCE to build a CASE.
Click to expand...

as I noted, most fleas vote against the dog wearing a flea collar.

I couldn't give a damn that people think OTHERS should pay more taxes. I am not running for office and I note that is a damn good reason why everyone should pay the same tax rate or better yet a consumption tax so dem pimps cannot pander to the average, the below average and the mediocre to buy their votes so as to take more from the best and the brightest
 
evanescence said:
You're right. To erase their advantages, we'd also need to do away with Irrevocable Trusts, as well.
Click to expand...


I would suggest getting rid of a tax code that allows pandering to the baser instincts
 
TurtleDude said:
as I noted, most fleas vote against the dog wearing a flea collar.

I couldn't give a damn that people think OTHERS should pay more taxes. I am not running for office and I note that is a damn good reason why everyone should pay the same tax rate or better yet a consumption tax so dem pimps cannot pander to the average, the below average and the mediocre to buy their votes so as to take more from the best and the brightest
Click to expand...

And as I noted, your utter elitist contempt for your fellow American citizens by comparing them to fleas upon a dog is duly noted.

So how many times is this now where you basically urinate all over those who simply disagree with you by calling them silly names?
 
TurtleDude said:
I would suggest getting rid of a tax code that allows pandering to the baser instincts
Click to expand...

Translation - somebody do something to shut the American people up please before they take away my preferences and privilieges.
 
evanescence said:
It is my belief that the ultra rich are useless individuals who are more parasitic than any poor person could ever be. Those people shouldn't be allowed to exist in their current state of uselessness. Simply accumulating money/resources while being idle is unnatural.
Click to expand...
some are, some aren't. Even though I'm not an Apple fan I very much respect what Steve Jobs accomplished from a tech standpoint, life is a little easier for many working folks because of his vision. Even though I prefer the Windows interface Bill Gates is an "also ran" who happened to market his product correctly, tied into IBM at the right time, and hit big. Think of the Steinbrenner family as well, George was a huge philantropist and it was infectious within the Yankee organization. The uber wealthy Steinbrenner family has created many millionaires in it's existance as the principle owners of the team, Hank and Hal have been working beside their father for years and are committed to his vision, and they were literally a year short of losing the team due to the tax rate of 2011 versus The Boss's passing in 2010.

I just don't think we stop wealth accumulation correctly when we use a catch all such as taxation. If the accumulation is unethical then pass laws against it but don't use multiple taxation. I am not a fan of taxing accumulated and taxed money on the basis that the deceased is no longer in possession.
 
haymarket said:
And as I noted, your utter elitist contempt for your fellow American citizens by comparing them to fleas upon a dog is duly noted.

So how many times is this now where you basically urinate all over those who simply disagree with you by calling them silly names?
Click to expand...

I don't have utter contempt for most people, just the pimp politicians who try to convince these people to blame their troubles on the rich and vote for those pimps so the pimps will punish the wealthy
 
haymarket said:
Translation - somebody do something to shut the American people up please before they take away my preferences and privilieges.
Click to expand...

the preferences and privileges that mean I pay more income taxes than 65 or so million americans combined and get absolutely not one single government provided additional benefit and then i have to listen to Obama and his swarm of toadies claim I am not paying my fair shair
 
evanescence said:
Flat tax, so no tax code needed and no IRS.

But to get rid of the elitist parasites- still no solution. I think they are as inevitable as the poor.
Click to expand...

Yeah they are the ones who tend to want to keep lots of people poor and dependent on the government
 
evanescence said:
Flat tax, so no tax code needed and no IRS.

But to get rid of the elitist parasites- still no solution. I think they are as inevitable as the poor.
Click to expand...
I'm a fan of a simplified tax code, either flat or consumption(fair tax) No hybrids containing a little of each. I actually favor the national sales tax because there is no longer "hidden money" because the taxes must be paid on all new products and services. The wealthy would still pay more obviously as they will consume more but the rates will be lower and they will get value for their taxes in the form of goods and services rather than having to pay for the gains on their labor and investments. Those who earn less will pay the same rate, but would be of the same exact legal standing and have the exact same choices(don't want to pay more taxes, put off purchases for a quarter or two, can't wait, trade off is taxes) as well instead of having to wait for tax returns to use funds within the middle and upper middle brackets those who need to replace goods or have services performed simply pay the tax right there and know what their earnings will be since there wouldn't be an income tax.

As for a flat tax I'm also fine with that but it still has the pitfalls of money being able to be hidden. It's advantage is less hiding will be done and the burden would be fair.
 
LaMidRighter said:
I'm a fan of a simplified tax code, either flat or consumption(fair tax) No hybrids containing a little of each. I actually favor the national sales tax because there is no longer "hidden money" because the taxes must be paid on all new products and services. The wealthy would still pay more obviously as they will consume more but the rates will be lower and they will get value for their taxes in the form of goods and services rather than having to pay for the gains on their labor and investments. Those who earn less will pay the same rate, but would be of the same exact legal standing and have the exact same choices(don't want to pay more taxes, put off purchases for a quarter or two, can't wait, trade off is taxes) as well instead of having to wait for tax returns to use funds within the middle and upper middle brackets those who need to replace goods or have services performed simply pay the tax right there and know what their earnings will be since there wouldn't be an income tax.

As for a flat tax I'm also fine with that but it still has the pitfalls of money being able to be hidden. It's advantage is less hiding will be done and the burden would be fair.
Click to expand...

I favor the consumption tax for several reasons

1) the massive costs of compliance are basically eliminated

2) billions in underground income is taxed

3) the IRS will be greatly diminished

4) the ability of politicians to pit different tax brackets or net tax consumers against net tax payers will be eliminated

5) thrift and saving will not be punished

if the government "needs" more money it will have to raise the tax rate on EVERYONE which will make such actions much tougher than merely telling the masses that tax hikes will be levied on "the rich"
 
TurtleDude said:
I favor the consumption tax for several reasons

1) the massive costs of compliance are basically eliminated

2) billions in underground income is taxed

3) the IRS will be greatly diminished

4) the ability of politicians to pit different tax brackets or net tax consumers against net tax payers will be eliminated

5) thrift and saving will not be punished

if the government "needs" more money it will have to raise the tax rate on EVERYONE which will make such actions much tougher than merely telling the masses that tax hikes will be levied on "the rich"
Click to expand...
Exactly right. A defense contractor wants another turd like the "stealth boat" then they will have to prove it's merit instead of greasing the right politician because the money would now have to be spent wisely, accountability would be automatic at the very instant a consumption tax became law. The best thing would be seeing the same IRS agents who have ruined countless Americans lives having to start from the very bottom again and actually have to answer to people for once.
 
haymarket said:
Perhaps I am wrong, but I see a younger guy in a military uniform and figured that was your current occupation.

Right or wrong?
Click to expand...

If 35 years old is what you would call 'young', sure. An E-4 pay grade isn't going to make one rich. Honestly I make more doing construction on the states.

Please continue.
 
TurtleDude said:
good, support a consumption tax which would allow us to get rid of the IRS and all the time we spend meeting the idiotic requirements of the IRS
Click to expand...

I don't have a problem with switching to a consumption tax per se. I just haven't found a serious proposal yet that I fully agree with. FairTax comes pretty close, but IMO still ups the tax burden on the poorest among us a little too much. With a few tweaks (and a better understanding of how it would impact the incredibly wealthy) it would have my full support.

I'd also support a flat rate income tax with no deductions/credits/loopholes except for a single cost of living deduction based on family size and possibly geographic area.
 
TurtleDude said:
the preferences and privileges that mean I pay more income taxes than 65 or so million americans combined and get absolutely not one single government provided additional benefit and then i have to listen to Obama and his swarm of toadies claim I am not paying my fair shair
Click to expand...

just the opposite

1- the discriminatory preference of taxing your money at 15% because a fancy label is placed on it called 'capital gains' while the same amount of wages is takes at 35%
2- the privilege of being able to exclude millions and millions from the estate tax before a single dollar is taxed

The idea of those discriminatory preferences being extended to you and the wealthy destroy any concept of FAIR SHARE.
 
TurtleDude said:
I favor the consumption tax for several reasons
Click to expand...

Lets cut all the nonsense and get down to the same reason you favor every tax scheme you endorse : it gives you a tax cut.
 
Jerry said:
If 35 years old is what you would call 'young', sure. An E-4 pay grade isn't going to make one rich. Honestly I make more doing construction on the states.

Please continue.
Click to expand...

Thank you for confirming my original evaluation of your economic situation.
 
haymarket said:
Thank you for confirming my original evaluation of your economic situation.
Click to expand...

You're quite welcome.

Did you have a point you wanted to make, or was this just idle curiosity?
 
TurtleDude said:
I don't have utter contempt for most people, just the pimp politicians who try to convince these people to blame their troubles on the rich and vote for those pimps so the pimps will punish the wealthy
Click to expand...

Your posts have made it abundantly clear that you have reserved a special place in your hate and loathing for anyone who attempts to represent the interests of working people against the elite.

Your dog and fleas metaphor only underlines many previous contemptuous statements against the American people and our system of representative democracy. And all in the name of selfishness and greed. Hardly a sound basis for a nation tax policy for 311 million people.
 
haymarket said:
Your posts have made it abundantly clear that you have reserved a special place in your hate and loathing for anyone who attempts to represent the interests of working people against the elite.
Click to expand...
Yes, Turtle, how dare you complain when people attempt to take your stuff and give it to others represent the interest of working people against the elite.

Your dog and fleas metaphor only underlines many previous contemptuous statements against the American people and our system of representative democracy. And all in the name of selfishness and greed. Hardly a sound basis for a nation tax policy for 311 million people.
Click to expand...
Using the power of government to take other people's stuff and give it to others is the epitome of selfishness and greed. Before you go all, "I'm haymarket and I'm righteously indignant" on us, please try to remember who is the one advocating the use of government force to take what belongs to others. Do you really expect your intended victims to smile and thank you? Seriously?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom