Is this guy the biggest ass in congress?

[The T]

its not being taxed a 2nd time, since the money is new money for the new owner.

now i agree there are instances like the one you just described that are unfair to some families. But i also have to say that it is the responsibility of the business owner to plan ahead if he wanted to pass the business on to his/her family. many times the children do not want to take over the business, or the business owner does not want to pass it on. (look at warren buffet for example, most of this estates is being donated to charity upon his death, it is not being given to his children)
FORTUNE Magazine: Warren Buffett gives away his fortune - Jun. 25, 2006

understand that one of the purposes of the estate tax is make sure that people can not use their business as a tax shelter. i.e. putting all of their assets into the business and lowering the individuals estate value and thus tax liability.

but like anything, with proper planning, much of the estate tax can be avoided.

You're full of shit. The same money is being taxed twice. Period.

No, like he said, it's new money for the new owner. Bolded Period.

BULLSHIT. It's a ploy to TAX that which has alredy been taxed and payed for. It's fucking GREED of politicians.

 

[Dr Grump]

No, like he said, it's new money for the new owner. Bolded Period.

I disagree Cuyo. That money was earned by a member of the family. Once that wealth has entered the family unit, it is up to them on how it is distributed.

Hands up here - anybody - who when slaving away, making money, paying off the mortgage, says to themselves while lying on their death bed, "Well, I'm glad I put in all those hours so 35% of my hard-earned cash goes to the govt".

Anybody have those thoughts?

I sure as shit don't....I begrudingly give the govt up to 30 percent of my current salary and I'm not too happy how they spend the majority of it as it is, let alone what they do with any they take from me after I die.

Tell me, if the govt is so willing to take my hard earned cash after I die, are they willing to reimburse me, if say, my stocks start losing money? They want me to take the risk while I'm alive, and if I lose money, tough shit. But when I die, they have their hand out saying "Thanks very much."...

..they can get lost.

And going back to the OP, yes Weiner looks like a turd hound. Not so much his demeanour, but I hate the way Pollies are asked a simple question, yet refuse to answer it. He does look a tad worse with his sophmorish pouting....

 

[Cuyo]

You're full of shit. The same money is being taxed twice. Period.

No, like he said, it's new money for the new owner. Bolded Period.

BULLSHIT. It's a ploy to TAX that which has alredy been taxed and payed for. It's fucking GREED of politicians.

Yes I know, everything's a conspiracy. You realize politicians' pay is guaranteed regardless of tax collected, right? You do know they don't keep the money, right?

 

[Big Fitz]

its not being taxed a 2nd time, since the money is new money for the new owner.

now i agree there are instances like the one you just described that are unfair to some families. But i also have to say that it is the responsibility of the business owner to plan ahead if he wanted to pass the business on to his/her family. many times the children do not want to take over the business, or the business owner does not want to pass it on. (look at warren buffet for example, most of this estates is being donated to charity upon his death, it is not being given to his children)
FORTUNE Magazine: Warren Buffett gives away his fortune - Jun. 25, 2006

understand that one of the purposes of the estate tax is make sure that people can not use their business as a tax shelter. i.e. putting all of their assets into the business and lowering the individuals estate value and thus tax liability.

but like anything, with proper planning, much of the estate tax can be avoided.

You're full of shit. The same money is being taxed twice. Period.

No, like he said, it's new money for the new owner. Bolded Period.

No. It is not. If the person had not died, it could not have been taxed again. The fact that they are no longer able to be taxed, does not give the government ownership of it, or the right to any more of it after they have taken their share. You're trying to make a VAT out of the movement of money. For every person it goes to, you seem to think you deserve a piece of it just for being the government.

This is why liberals should never be given power. They too quickly forget they are not nobles. That form of government is long obsolete.

 

[The T]

No, like he said, it's new money for the new owner. Bolded Period.

BULLSHIT. It's a ploy to TAX that which has alredy been taxed and payed for. It's fucking GREED of politicians.

Yes I know, everything's a conspiracy. You realize politicians' pay is guaranteed regardless of tax collected, right? You do know they don't keep the money, right?

However they seek more to redistribute to lazy fucks that didn't EARN it...for thie vote-buying schemes for POWER.

FAIL.(As usual).

 

[The T]

I'd be willing to bet that MOST of the idiots applauding the Estate TAX are unemployed assholes living off the Government DOLE...Broodmares...and welfare IDIOTS with no life that love stealing from others for legalized theft from the Gubmint.

That or just plain fucking stupid and have no regard for thier own Liberty...and are too stupid to be voting.

 

[Cuyo]

No, like he said, it's new money for the new owner. Bolded Period.

I disagree Cuyo. That money was earned by a member of the family. Once that wealth has entered the family unit, it is up to them on how it is distributed.

Hands up here - anybody - who when slaving away, making money, paying off the mortgage, says to themselves while lying on their death bed, "Well, I'm glad I put in all those hours so 35% of my hard-earned cash goes to the govt".

Anybody have those thoughts?

I sure as shit don't....I begrudingly give the govt up to 30 percent of my current salary and I'm not too happy how they spend the majority of it as it is, let alone what they do with any they take from me after I die.

Tell me, if the govt is so willing to take my hard earned cash after I die, are they willing to reimburse me, if say, my stocks start losing money? They want me to take the risk while I'm alive, and if I lose money, tough shit. But when I die, they have their hand out saying "Thanks very much."...

..they can get lost.

And going back to the OP, yes Weiner looks like a turd hound. Not so much his demeanour, but I hate the way Pollies are asked a simple question, yet refuse to answer it. He does look a tad worse with his sophmorish pouting....

It is literally mathematically impossible that the estate is taxed at 35%. We're talking about 35% after a very generous free ticket - That 0.3% of Americans who pay any estate tax at all is a statistic that bears repeating - But that's not the point.

The government needs money to function. This is paid for through taxation. I don't see an estate tax as double taxation, but it is taxation nonetheless. It's also a very important impediment to the establishment of an aristocracy or "Ruling class" (As Winston Churchill once argued, "a certain corrective against the development of a race of idle rich"). The establishments of such ruling classes are often cause for revolution and societal collapse.

I must say I'm shocked to see you on this side of the argument. And FYI, if you're dabbling in stocks, yes you should be able to carry a loss forward to offset taxes on future gains. Talk to your tax preparer.

 

[Cuyo]

I'd be willing to bet that MOST of the idiots applauding the Estate TAX are unemployed assholes living off the Government DOLE...Broodmares...and welfare IDIOTS with no life that love stealing from others for legalized theft from the Gubmint.

That or just plain fucking stupid and have no regard for thier own Liberty...and are too stupid to be voting.

Nope, not unemployed. Employed, and an employer to boot. And much, much smarter than you.

 

[jillian]

I'd be willing to bet that MOST of the idiots applauding the Estate TAX are unemployed assholes living off the Government DOLE...Broodmares...and welfare IDIOTS with no life that love stealing from others for legalized theft from the Gubmint.

That or just plain fucking stupid and have no regard for thier own Liberty...and are too stupid to be voting.

really? if that's what you'd bet, you'd lose your money.

but then again, you're clearly not very bright.

 

[The T]

I'd be willing to bet that MOST of the idiots applauding the Estate TAX are unemployed assholes living off the Government DOLE...Broodmares...and welfare IDIOTS with no life that love stealing from others for legalized theft from the Gubmint.

That or just plain fucking stupid and have no regard for thier own Liberty...and are too stupid to be voting.

really? if that's what you'd bet, you'd lose your money.

but then again, you're clearly not very bright.

That's EXACTLY what I bet...and judging from the MIDTERMS?

I'd say I was right on the Money.

YOU are dismissed.

 

[The T]

I'd be willing to bet that MOST of the idiots applauding the Estate TAX are unemployed assholes living off the Government DOLE...Broodmares...and welfare IDIOTS with no life that love stealing from others for legalized theft from the Gubmint.

That or just plain fucking stupid and have no regard for thier own Liberty...and are too stupid to be voting.

Nope, not unemployed. Employed, and an employer to boot. And much, much smarter than you.

Then when the FUCK SAKES are you gonna portray it?

 

[Dr Grump]

It is literally mathematically impossible that the estate is taxed at 35%. We're talking about 35% after a very generous free ticket - That 0.3% of Americans who pay any estate tax at all is a statistic that bears repeating - But that's not the point.

The government needs money to function. This is paid for through taxation. I don't see an estate tax as double taxation, but it is taxation nonetheless. It's also a very important impediment to the establishment of an aristocracy or "Ruling class" (As Winston Churchill once argued, "a certain corrective against the development of a race of idle rich"). The establishments of such ruling classes are often cause for revolution and societal collapse.

I must say I'm shocked to see you on this side of the argument. And FYI, if you're dabbling in stocks, yes you should be able to carry a loss forward to offset taxes on future gains. Talk to your tax preparer.

I object more to the govt getting it more than the tax itself. If there was a law that said you should give 25 percent or whatever to a charity or charities of your choice, I could live with that.

However, in saying that, there is something inherently ...(hmmm, not too sure of the word) - unsatisfactory maybe? - that the money already earned within, and behalf of, a family unit -whether the person who earned the money dies or not - is now open to be taxed by the govt.

Let me put it this way...let's say I start a company. I work on a deal that take two years to put together - a very, very risky deal - but all the stars are aligned and I make just over $40 million. Huge sigh of relief. The day the money arrives I put aside 35 % for tax (not too sure what the tax rate in US is, but it's around about that here - and notwithstanding deductibles), which equates to about $14 million, leaving me $26 million. Let's say the next day I drop dead. So the govt taxes me another 30 percent on the $26 million. That is about another $7.8 million. So my original $40 million has gone down to $18.2 million. Is it fair for the govt to receive $21.8 million of my money at no risk to them? I don't think so...

 

[Common Sense]

No, like he said, it's new money for the new owner. Bolded Period.

I disagree Cuyo. That money was earned by a member of the family. Once that wealth has entered the family unit, it is up to them on how it is distributed.

Hands up here - anybody - who when slaving away, making money, paying off the mortgage, says to themselves while lying on their death bed, "Well, I'm glad I put in all those hours so 35% of my hard-earned cash goes to the govt".

Anybody have those thoughts?

I sure as shit don't....I begrudingly give the govt up to 30 percent of my current salary and I'm not too happy how they spend the majority of it as it is, let alone what they do with any they take from me after I die.

Tell me, if the govt is so willing to take my hard earned cash after I die, are they willing to reimburse me, if say, my stocks start losing money? They want me to take the risk while I'm alive, and if I lose money, tough shit. But when I die, they have their hand out saying "Thanks very much."...

..they can get lost.

And going back to the OP, yes Weiner looks like a turd hound. Not so much his demeanour, but I hate the way Pollies are asked a simple question, yet refuse to answer it. He does look a tad worse with his sophmorish pouting....

you still fail to recognize that when the $ is transferred to the heir, it is still new income to the heir. you try to make the argument that it is family $. but then you fail to see that families can you use inheritance as a tax shelter and hide it from paying any taxes. (which you probably think is a good thing as well.) thus since it is new income, it is taxable. now i have already stated several times that there are many ways to legally transfer businesses and money and be able to avoid the estate tax. this is how the wealthy transfer estates to the children generation after generation. if you read or listen to warren buffet you would also understand more of why the estate tax is a necessity. Buffett backs estate tax, decries wealth gap | Reuters. if we repeal the estate tax, that lost tax revenue must be recovered in some other manner. which will ultimately lead to higher taxes on the middle class. something which you obviously support if you want to once again shift the tax burden off the 0.3% of people who are hit with the estate tax.

you also complain about paying taxes, but you probably enjoy many of the benefits of taxation. such as roads, schools and parks. should we just become a pay as you go society? lets pay for each individual use of everything. then we can make all schools private and all roads toll roads. what about national parks? lets just close them all and let them be run by private corporation. then they can become like disneyland and charge a hundred bucks a person, let corporations advertise on their lands, and sell the rights to the wildlife and natural resources until they are depleted. if youre unhappy with the amount of taxes you pay why dont you go abroad and see what the tax rate and quality of life is like.

England has a top tax rate of 40%
France has a top tax rate of 52%
Germany has a top tax rate of 45%
Australis has a top tax rate of 45%
Spain is also 45%

The US has a top income tax rate of 35% currently, and we dont even provide universal health care. we are not overtaxed as a nation.

 

[Sallow]

you still fail to recognize that when the $ is transferred to the heir, it is still new income to the heir. you try to make the argument that it is family $. but then you fail to see that families can you use inheritance as a tax shelter and hide it from paying any taxes. (which you probably think is a good thing as well.) thus since it is new income, it is taxable. now i have already stated several times that there are many ways to legally transfer businesses and money and be able to avoid the estate tax. this is how the wealthy transfer estates to the children generation after generation. if you read or listen to warren buffet you would also understand more of why the estate tax is a necessity. Buffett backs estate tax, decries wealth gap | Reuters. if we repeal the estate tax, that lost tax revenue must be recovered in some other manner. which will ultimately lead to higher taxes on the middle class. something which you obviously support if you want to once again shift the tax burden off the 0.3% of people who are hit with the estate tax.

you also complain about paying taxes, but you probably enjoy many of the benefits of taxation. such as roads, schools and parks. should we just become a pay as you go society? lets pay for each individual use of everything. then we can make all schools private and all roads toll roads. what about national parks? lets just close them all and let them be run by private corporation. then they can become like disneyland and charge a hundred bucks a person, let corporations advertise on their lands, and sell the rights to the wildlife and natural resources until they are depleted. if youre unhappy with the amount of taxes you pay why dont you go abroad and see what the tax rate and quality of life is like.

England has a top tax rate of 40%
France has a top tax rate of 52%
Germany has a top tax rate of 45%
Australis has a top tax rate of 45%
Spain is also 45%

The US has a top income tax rate of 35% currently, and we dont even provide universal health care. we are not overtaxed as a nation.

All those countries provide much more in terms of service to their citizens and have a tiny fraction of the military bill..we have.

 

[beowolfe]

IMO, the dude's right. When the person who earned the money was alive, if he/she gave the money to their kids, the kids would have to pay taxes, it's call a 'gift tax'. I don't see the logic changing simply because the person who earned the money dies. An inheritence is still a 'gift' and should be taxed accordingly. IMO, I think wages should have the lowest taxes of all of the various types of income.

 

[Skull Pilot]

No, like he said, it's new money for the new owner. Bolded Period.

I disagree Cuyo. That money was earned by a member of the family. Once that wealth has entered the family unit, it is up to them on how it is distributed.

Hands up here - anybody - who when slaving away, making money, paying off the mortgage, says to themselves while lying on their death bed, "Well, I'm glad I put in all those hours so 35% of my hard-earned cash goes to the govt".

Anybody have those thoughts?

I sure as shit don't....I begrudingly give the govt up to 30 percent of my current salary and I'm not too happy how they spend the majority of it as it is, let alone what they do with any they take from me after I die.

Tell me, if the govt is so willing to take my hard earned cash after I die, are they willing to reimburse me, if say, my stocks start losing money? They want me to take the risk while I'm alive, and if I lose money, tough shit. But when I die, they have their hand out saying "Thanks very much."...

..they can get lost.

And going back to the OP, yes Weiner looks like a turd hound. Not so much his demeanour, but I hate the way Pollies are asked a simple question, yet refuse to answer it. He does look a tad worse with his sophmorish pouting....

you still fail to recognize that when the $ is transferred to the heir, it is still new income to the heir. you try to make the argument that it is family $. but then you fail to see that families can you use inheritance as a tax shelter and hide it from paying any taxes. (which you probably think is a good thing as well.) thus since it is new income, it is taxable. now i have already stated several times that there are many ways to legally transfer businesses and money and be able to avoid the estate tax. this is how the wealthy transfer estates to the children generation after generation. if you read or listen to warren buffet you would also understand more of why the estate tax is a necessity. Buffett backs estate tax, decries wealth gap | Reuters. if we repeal the estate tax, that lost tax revenue must be recovered in some other manner. which will ultimately lead to higher taxes on the middle class. something which you obviously support if you want to once again shift the tax burden off the 0.3% of people who are hit with the estate tax.

you also complain about paying taxes, but you probably enjoy many of the benefits of taxation. such as roads, schools and parks. should we just become a pay as you go society? lets pay for each individual use of everything. then we can make all schools private and all roads toll roads. what about national parks? lets just close them all and let them be run by private corporation. then they can become like disneyland and charge a hundred bucks a person, let corporations advertise on their lands, and sell the rights to the wildlife and natural resources until they are depleted. if youre unhappy with the amount of taxes you pay why dont you go abroad and see what the tax rate and quality of life is like.

England has a top tax rate of 40%
France has a top tax rate of 52%
Germany has a top tax rate of 45%
Australis has a top tax rate of 45%
Spain is also 45%

The US has a top income tax rate of 35% currently, and we dont even provide universal health care. we are not overtaxed as a nation.

A house or property is not income, a stock portfolio is not income, a business is not income.

they are assets that may produce income but they themselves are not income.

 

[Sallow]

I disagree Cuyo. That money was earned by a member of the family. Once that wealth has entered the family unit, it is up to them on how it is distributed.

Hands up here - anybody - who when slaving away, making money, paying off the mortgage, says to themselves while lying on their death bed, "Well, I'm glad I put in all those hours so 35% of my hard-earned cash goes to the govt".

Anybody have those thoughts?

I sure as shit don't....I begrudingly give the govt up to 30 percent of my current salary and I'm not too happy how they spend the majority of it as it is, let alone what they do with any they take from me after I die.

Tell me, if the govt is so willing to take my hard earned cash after I die, are they willing to reimburse me, if say, my stocks start losing money? They want me to take the risk while I'm alive, and if I lose money, tough shit. But when I die, they have their hand out saying "Thanks very much."...

..they can get lost.

And going back to the OP, yes Weiner looks like a turd hound. Not so much his demeanour, but I hate the way Pollies are asked a simple question, yet refuse to answer it. He does look a tad worse with his sophmorish pouting....

you still fail to recognize that when the $ is transferred to the heir, it is still new income to the heir. you try to make the argument that it is family $. but then you fail to see that families can you use inheritance as a tax shelter and hide it from paying any taxes. (which you probably think is a good thing as well.) thus since it is new income, it is taxable. now i have already stated several times that there are many ways to legally transfer businesses and money and be able to avoid the estate tax. this is how the wealthy transfer estates to the children generation after generation. if you read or listen to warren buffet you would also understand more of why the estate tax is a necessity. Buffett backs estate tax, decries wealth gap | Reuters. if we repeal the estate tax, that lost tax revenue must be recovered in some other manner. which will ultimately lead to higher taxes on the middle class. something which you obviously support if you want to once again shift the tax burden off the 0.3% of people who are hit with the estate tax.

you also complain about paying taxes, but you probably enjoy many of the benefits of taxation. such as roads, schools and parks. should we just become a pay as you go society? lets pay for each individual use of everything. then we can make all schools private and all roads toll roads. what about national parks? lets just close them all and let them be run by private corporation. then they can become like disneyland and charge a hundred bucks a person, let corporations advertise on their lands, and sell the rights to the wildlife and natural resources until they are depleted. if youre unhappy with the amount of taxes you pay why dont you go abroad and see what the tax rate and quality of life is like.

England has a top tax rate of 40%
France has a top tax rate of 52%
Germany has a top tax rate of 45%
Australis has a top tax rate of 45%
Spain is also 45%

The US has a top income tax rate of 35% currently, and we dont even provide universal health care. we are not overtaxed as a nation.

A house or property is not income, a stock portfolio is not income, a business is not income.

they are assets that may produce income but they themselves are not income.

That's some mighty fine linquistic gymnastics.

 

[Common Sense]

seeing as how a house has value, it can be perceived as income. same with a stock portfolio and a business. its basically free money. just like you get taxed at 55% if you win the lottery. maybe you dont want to see that money taxes either.

 

[Skull Pilot]

you still fail to recognize that when the $ is transferred to the heir, it is still new income to the heir. you try to make the argument that it is family $. but then you fail to see that families can you use inheritance as a tax shelter and hide it from paying any taxes. (which you probably think is a good thing as well.) thus since it is new income, it is taxable. now i have already stated several times that there are many ways to legally transfer businesses and money and be able to avoid the estate tax. this is how the wealthy transfer estates to the children generation after generation. if you read or listen to warren buffet you would also understand more of why the estate tax is a necessity. Buffett backs estate tax, decries wealth gap | Reuters. if we repeal the estate tax, that lost tax revenue must be recovered in some other manner. which will ultimately lead to higher taxes on the middle class. something which you obviously support if you want to once again shift the tax burden off the 0.3% of people who are hit with the estate tax.

you also complain about paying taxes, but you probably enjoy many of the benefits of taxation. such as roads, schools and parks. should we just become a pay as you go society? lets pay for each individual use of everything. then we can make all schools private and all roads toll roads. what about national parks? lets just close them all and let them be run by private corporation. then they can become like disneyland and charge a hundred bucks a person, let corporations advertise on their lands, and sell the rights to the wildlife and natural resources until they are depleted. if youre unhappy with the amount of taxes you pay why dont you go abroad and see what the tax rate and quality of life is like.

England has a top tax rate of 40%
France has a top tax rate of 52%
Germany has a top tax rate of 45%
Australis has a top tax rate of 45%
Spain is also 45%

The US has a top income tax rate of 35% currently, and we dont even provide universal health care. we are not overtaxed as a nation.

A house or property is not income, a stock portfolio is not income, a business is not income.

they are assets that may produce income but they themselves are not income.

That's some mighty fine linquistic gymnastics.

Yes I can see how definitions may seem confusing to you.

Let me ask you this, your rich uncle leaves you a house, you move into that house, how did your income go up?

Your rich relative leaves you a business, you close the business and let the equipment sit in a warehouse, did your income increase?

You inherit 100 acres of land, you put the deed in a safe and forget about it, how much did your income go up because of the land?

 

[Skull Pilot]

seeing as how a house has value, it can be perceived as income. same with a stock portfolio and a business. its basically free money. just like you get taxed at 55% if you win the lottery. maybe you dont want to see that money taxes either.

It is not income. It is an asset of the estate. Income is the gain realized by a business or property not the business or property itself.

The last time I checked a business wasn't money it is something that may or may not produce income. Your lottery example is income because it is the gain derived from gambling. You can also deduct the money spent on all your losing lottery tickets from your winnings.