Death Tax

Burp

Always carry, never tell
Jan 22, 2009
1,133
190
48
I work hard. I take care of my finances. I plan ahead. I invest wisely.

I do all this to leave a legacy to my family when I pass.

However, when I die, the government will take 45 percent of my estate.

Can anybody defend this?
 
I work hard. I take care of my finances. I plan ahead. I invest wisely.

I do all this to leave a legacy to my family when I pass.

However, when I die, the government will take 45 percent of my estate.

Can anybody defend this?


Thomas Jefferson, Teddy Roosevelt, Ben Franklin, FDR, to name a few.


.....the transmission of enormous wealth to young men "does not do them any real service and is of great and genuine detriment to the community at large." T. Roosevelt.

``The transmission from generation to generation of vast fortunes by will, inheritance or gift,'' declared F.D.R., ``is not consistent with the ideals and sentiments of the American people.
Of course, the ideals and sentiments of the American people seem to have changed. Investment, inheritance and interest are now as respected as earning. What a shame.

These worries about whether inheritance is justified at all have their source in a central principle of capitalist societies: the principle that social privileges should be earned, should be a reward for contribution to society, rather than handed out by government leaders or passed down by aristocratic dynasties
Jeff Weintraub: Teddy Roosevelt & Adam Smith on inheritance taxes (Susan Dunn & Sam Fleischacker)


I have to agree, it is the living who should determine their own fate, not the dead.
 
I work hard. I take care of my finances. I plan ahead. I invest wisely.

I do all this to leave a legacy to my family when I pass.

However, when I die, the government will take 45 percent of my estate.

Can anybody defend this?


Tell you what, while you are alive, give what you want. When you're dead, you don't matter much. Do what you need to do NOW.

So my question is, why do so many people wait to die before they disperse their wealth ? To greedy to give in life ?
 
i DOUBT YOU MAKE THAT MUCH THAT YOU SHOULD BE CONCERNED....IF YOU DID YOU WOULDN'T BE ON A DUMBASS MESSAGE BOARD.
 
"The evidence presented indicates that intergenerational transfers account for the vast majority of aggregate U.S. capital formation." - Obama's own top economic advisor, Larry Summers

The government will not get a dime of my money when I pass. I have and will take the proper steps to ensure this is the case.

I am a financial planner. I know the answer to this question. I deal with customers nearly every day who ask me the same thing.

And I show them how to make sure they don't lose a dime.

The death tax is wrong. People work hard for their money and should be able to pass it on to their family (or anyone) without fear of the government taking it.

(oh...an gezztoo, you know how stupid you sound - you don't know a thing about me)
 
"The evidence presented indicates that intergenerational transfers account for the vast majority of aggregate U.S. capital formation." - Obama's own top economic advisor, Larry Summers

The government will not get a dime of my money when I pass. I have and will take the proper steps to ensure this is the case.


Impossible. You'll be dead and you can't do a thing about what happens next. All you can do to KNOW this is give it away before you die. If you have a dime when you die, you'll not be able to do anything about what happens to it. You'll be dead.
 
What a hoot. People who wish to control their money after death really expose themsleves as the control freaks they must be. You guys understand what death entails, right ? If you're worried about your stuff, you'd better do something with it while you're alive. Consume it, give it away, what ever.
 
"The evidence presented indicates that intergenerational transfers account for the vast majority of aggregate U.S. capital formation." - Obama's own top economic advisor, Larry Summers

The government will not get a dime of my money when I pass. I have and will take the proper steps to ensure this is the case.


Impossible. You'll be dead and you can't do a thing about what happens next. All you can do to KNOW this is give it away before you die. If you have a dime when you die, you'll not be able to do anything about what happens to it. You'll be dead.

You have contradicted yourself. I said the government will not get a dime of my money when I pass. You say that is impossible - all I can do is give it away before I die.

That is the point sparky. I will give it all away before I die.
 
What a hoot. People who wish to control their money after death really expose themsleves as the control freaks they must be. You guys understand what death entails, right ? If you're worried about your stuff, you'd better do something with it while you're alive. Consume it, give it away, what ever.

You would rather the government get your money than your family?
 
I'm going to avoid death.

I plan on taking one thing with me when I die.

I plan to be creamated and my ashes poured into a vat of molten metal that will then be used to manufacture Cowbells.

I don't figure on planning anything for death or afterwards. I'll be dead, you see. As much as I don't give a shit now, I care even less then. I'll be dead, you see.
 
"The evidence presented indicates that intergenerational transfers account for the vast majority of aggregate U.S. capital formation." - Obama's own top economic advisor, Larry Summers

Greenwood and Wolff's Changes in wealth in the United States, 1962–1983 appears to validate Summers and Koltikoff.

A simulation model is developed to account for observed changes in mean household wealth both overall and by age cohort over the 1962–1983 period in the United States. There are three major findings. First, capital gains are the major factor explaining overall wealth changes and account for 77% of the simulated growth in wealth over the entire period. Second, for cohorts under age 40, inheritance and inter vivos transfers dominate observed changes in wealth. Indeed, the oldest age groups appear to have transferred sizable amounts of their wealth to younger generations inter vivos, raising the wealth of these younger groups substantially above what it would be based on saving. Third, while differences in portfolio composition favored the younger cohorts over this period, such differences do not explain a large portion of the great variation in real wealth changes by cohort over the two decade period.

But the more important question is why you referred to Summers and Koltikoff. Do you really believe that it's so important for people to receive money that they did not earn? Does the right of a generation to equality of opportunity and its assorted benefits of increased ability to engage in the pursuit of happiness not transcend the right of a dying generation to bequeath massive amounts of wealth earned through state intervention in the primitive accumulation process and protection during the production and circulation processes? The latter won't live to see what's done with their money; what happiness can they thus derive from this?
 
I plan on taking one thing with me when I die.

I plan to be creamated and my ashes poured into a vat of molten metal that will then be used to manufacture Cowbells.

I don't figure on planning anything for death or afterwards. I'll be dead, you see. As much as I don't give a shit now, I care even less then. I'll be dead, you see.

So, do you just want your family leave your body in the exact location that it drops...and just let your corpse rot away to dust?
 
"The evidence presented indicates that intergenerational transfers account for the vast majority of aggregate U.S. capital formation." - Obama's own top economic advisor, Larry Summers

Greenwood and Wolff's Changes in wealth in the United States, 1962–1983 appears to validate Summers and Koltikoff.

A simulation model is developed to account for observed changes in mean household wealth both overall and by age cohort over the 1962–1983 period in the United States. There are three major findings. First, capital gains are the major factor explaining overall wealth changes and account for 77% of the simulated growth in wealth over the entire period. Second, for cohorts under age 40, inheritance and inter vivos transfers dominate observed changes in wealth. Indeed, the oldest age groups appear to have transferred sizable amounts of their wealth to younger generations inter vivos, raising the wealth of these younger groups substantially above what it would be based on saving. Third, while differences in portfolio composition favored the younger cohorts over this period, such differences do not explain a large portion of the great variation in real wealth changes by cohort over the two decade period.

But the more important question is why you referred to Summers and Koltikoff. Do you really believe that it's so important for people to receive money that they did not earn? Does the right of a generation to equality of opportunity and its assorted benefits of increased ability to engage in the pursuit of happiness not transcend the right of a dying generation to bequeath massive amounts of wealth earned through state intervention in the primitive accumulation process and protection during the production and circulation processes? The latter won't live to see what's done with their money; what happiness can they thus derive from this?

I believe that parents want their children to be better off then they are/were. If the parents did their job right, the legacy they pass on to their children will not be abused or squandered.

If I work my entire life to take care of my family, and through hard work and diligence I am able to leave them something to make their lives more comfortable than mine was, then I should be allowed to pass that on - free of the government taking their share.

If I know I have done all this, and my children's lives will be easier; and my grandchildren's life will be easier ( education paid for, etc ), then I will die happy.
 
However, when I die, the government will take 45 percent of my estate.

By estate, do you mean your Cowbell collection?

Cuz I can't imagine there's much else besides your single-wide and your collection of fancy leather suspenders.

:lol:
 
What a hoot. People who wish to control their money after death really expose themsleves as the control freaks they must be. You guys understand what death entails, right ? If you're worried about your stuff, you'd better do something with it while you're alive. Consume it, give it away, what ever.

You would rather the government get your money than your family?


Absolutely. My dad has already, at my request, directed whatever is left that people seem to think should be mine, to the burn center in Chapel Hill. It's not mine, I didn't earn it. Wouldn't have it.

Anyhting I leave will be given to charity and the government can take whatever they will. I'll be dead, you see. I am giving my son what I feel he needs to become a good, productive person while I am alive. I really don't intend to leave much at all behind. I'm going to use everything up while I am living. I do intend to transfer my house to him before I reach 50. Hopefiully I won't die bewtween now and then. But that's all he will get.
 
However, when I die, the government will take 45 percent of my estate.

By estate, do you mean your Cowbell collection?

Cuz I can't imagine there's much else besides your single-wide and your collection of fancy leather suspenders.

:lol:

Double wide, thank you very much.

And some of those suspenders are over 100 years old.

(and you leave my cowbell collection out of this!)
 

Forum List

Back
Top