Is this guy the biggest ass in congress?

[Cuyo]

If the government does not own the property, then why does it presume to have a right to it after the owner dies and bequeaths it on to his heirs? It has no valid claim. Inheritance is not income in the traditional meaning of the term.

Hell, why does the government presume to have any claim on the property while the owner is alive?

Because we all belong to a society, and we all use and depend on the commons of that society. We have a representative republic form of government, and our legal framework, starting with the Constitution, allows congress to tax people and other entities to pay for those commons on which we all depend.

The concept of money is meaningless outside of the framework of government. I don't think people realize how inextricably linked they are to a government they apparently hate when they start talking about "MY money." Sorry, but the government prints this stuff, valuates it, disburses it, and takes measures to expand and contract the supply thereof as necessary. Without government, 'YOUR' money would be useless, unless you could find a guy to trade it to who was desperate for kindling at the time.

 

[Skull Pilot]

nice try, but the moment you inherit something it automatically deemed income. because you never had it before thus it is new and can be taxed. you can argue until you are blue in the face but youre still able to grasp any basic concepts.

well lets take your dairy farm for example. well first off in this case, the first $5M is exempt, so you actually wouldnt owe any money on that first $5M. secondly, did you not just inherit $5M? that meant if you sold the business right then and there you had $5M, because that what the value of the asset was. its your choice to keep it or sell it, but at the moment you acquired it, you made $5M, no matter if you realized it or not. how did you come about this $5M? did you earn it through a job (where it was taxed?) or was it just given to you? it was free! just like if you wont the money at a casino. there are no family property right in the united states. just because a family members own something, that does not give you legal entitlement to it. hence why you have to have a will, or a trust or some other legal product in place to limit the liability. the only thing that is currently tax free is life insurance.

unless youre of the 0.3% of people who the estate tax may affect i dont understand why youre so up in arms about this.

So tell me if an increase in net worth is the same thing as in increase in income is a decrease in net worth the same thing as a decrease in income?

No it's not. therefore net worth is not income.

I don't care if I will or won't be affected by the death tax. The point is that it is nothing but theft of assets already bought and taxed . The fucking government wants to take a second bite of the apple and it should not be allowed.

yes it actually is. if you take losses in a year due to investing or business losses, and you realize those losses, you can write down the amount of your income to the federal limit. you can then carry over the rest of the loss to the next tax year if needed. this becomes known as a write-off. thank you for making my point to easy to explain

you still cant prove that inherited assets aren't new income and taxed as such.

You have to realize the loss by selling the depreciated asset. If you don't sell it you can't take the loss.

If you buy stock and the price drops you can't write off the loss unless you sell for less than you bought. If you don't sell your net worth still decreased but your income did not.

If your home value goes down your income does not decrease even though your net worth decreased.

So once again net worth is not income. Just because an inherited asset is taxed does not define the asset as income. If it were income would it not be taxed at income tax rates? As far as I know there is no 55% income tax bracket in this country.

Even though you don't understand the difference between income, assets and net worth, the death tax is nothing but theft and you don't care because the fucking government is not stealing from you.

 

[Big Fitz]

Because we all belong to a society, and we all use and depend on the commons of that society.

that's right. Send me a bill for the military, courts and other essential services of government... but other than that government has expanded beyond it's constitutionally allowed powers and therefore is NOT proper to be given tax monies for. I've no problem paying for those enumerated powers. But 70% of the budget is unconstitutionally beyond that and I don't feel it is my job to pay for that. Therefore, your reasoning is fundamentally flawed.

As for your incorrect understanding of money, you need to take some economics classes. Government's creation of a neutral unit of trade does not give it ownership of that unit of trade. It only facilitates the ability for people to do business with one another. Before the Fed and even the national bank, individual banks and states printed their own currency. Today, corporations create their own currency all the time. Airline miles, coupons, tokens... all these are forms of trade. Of course they convert your money into their currency but it's the same damn thing as currency. They do not 'own' what you've 'earned' in their currency. They are the only ones who will accept it as currency though.

Pop goes your theory again. Go back to a non-socialist economics course.

 

[Big Fitz]

And another point. If, as you claim, this is income and therefore needs to be taxed on the heir as income... why is it being taxed at a tax bracket separate from the income tax at a time separate from income tax? Should the estate be rolled into the heir's income tax and get the same credits, deductions and brackets as is currently in the income tax system?

Oh yeahhhhh... BECAUSE IT'S NOT INCOME!

Pop.... another lie dies.

 

[Common Sense]

And another point. If, as you claim, this is income and therefore needs to be taxed on the heir as income... why is it being taxed at a tax bracket separate from the income tax at a time separate from income tax? Should the estate be rolled into the heir's income tax and get the same credits, deductions and brackets as is currently in the income tax system?

Oh yeahhhhh... BECAUSE IT'S NOT INCOME!

Pop.... another lie dies.

its being taxed as income on a separate scale. just like investment income is taxed on a separate scale. (which is currently at 15% instead of 25% of 30%) isnt that income? why isnt that rate the same? ohhh thats right, because GWB cut that tax rate to help the top 2%.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

nice try, but the moment you inherit something it automatically deemed income. because you never had it before thus it is new and can be taxed. you can argue until you are blue in the face but youre still able to grasp any basic concepts.

well lets take your dairy farm for example. well first off in this case, the first $5M is exempt, so you actually wouldnt owe any money on that first $5M. secondly, did you not just inherit $5M? that meant if you sold the business right then and there you had $5M, because that what the value of the asset was. its your choice to keep it or sell it, but at the moment you acquired it, you made $5M, no matter if you realized it or not. how did you come about this $5M? did you earn it through a job (where it was taxed?) or was it just given to you? it was free! just like if you wont the money at a casino. there are no family property right in the united states. just because a family members own something, that does not give you legal entitlement to it. hence why you have to have a will, or a trust or some other legal product in place to limit the liability. the only thing that is currently tax free is life insurance.

unless youre of the 0.3% of people who the estate tax may affect i dont understand why youre so up in arms about this.

So tell me if an increase in net worth is the same thing as in increase in income is a decrease in net worth the same thing as a decrease in income?

No it's not. therefore net worth is not income.

I don't care if I will or won't be affected by the death tax. The point is that it is nothing but theft of assets already bought and taxed . The fucking government wants to take a second bite of the apple and it should not be allowed.

yes it actually is. if you take losses in a year due to investing or business losses, and you realize those losses, you can write down the amount of your income to the federal limit. you can then carry over the rest of the loss to the next tax year if needed. this becomes known as a write-off. thank you for making my point to easy to explain

you still cant prove that inherited assets aren't new income and taxed as such.

Inherited assets aren't new assets, hence the term "old money".

 

[Common Sense]

they are new assets to the person who receives them. since the assets were not in their name legally before, they become new once the transfer is completed. try again...

 

[Big Fitz]

And another point. If, as you claim, this is income and therefore needs to be taxed on the heir as income... why is it being taxed at a tax bracket separate from the income tax at a time separate from income tax? Should the estate be rolled into the heir's income tax and get the same credits, deductions and brackets as is currently in the income tax system?

Oh yeahhhhh... BECAUSE IT'S NOT INCOME!

Pop.... another lie dies.

its being taxed as income on a separate scale. just like investment income is taxed on a separate scale. (which is currently at 15% instead of 25% of 30%) isnt that income? why isnt that rate the same? ohhh thats right, because GWB cut that tax rate to help the top 2%.

I see, we've made two scales of income taxation. One for when you're alive and one for when you're dead. Wow, you libs are so generous.

And besides, what the fuck does it matter to you what the upper 2% of wage earners keep? They earned it. Did they take it from you? No. Why? Because economics is not a zero sum game as played over time, only as a snapshot. There is only x amount of dollars at any one moment, but that does not mean that it cannot grow based on work and and exploited resources.

So why are you so keen that those who employ most of the world, the top 2% of wage earners are unable to continue? What hurt to them makes your life better? Talk about shadenfreude... which ironically seems to be the basis of all liberal economics. Steal from those that have and produce give those who don't deserve and cannot produce.

 

[Common Sense]

not all of the top 2% of wage earners are small business owners or business owners.

CEO's, Bankers, Professional Athletes, Lawyers and Doctors are not small business or business owners, but they all help make up the top 2% of earners.

 

[Big Fitz]

not all of the top 2% of wage earners are small business owners or business owners.

Doesn't matter if they're the president of GE or the heir to J.J. Astor. They still earn their money, and your envy does not give you rights to it.

 

[Rozman]

Actually it was Alan Grayson until this douche nozzle went off like this.

 

[Common Sense]

"So why are you so keen that those who employ most of the world, the top 2% of wage earners are unable to continue?"

your exact words Fitz. You implied that the top 2% or earners employ most of the world. I simply showed that to be untrue.

most small business owners, who actually create 80% of all new jobs are not affected by the estate tax. and like ive said many times before, if you are part of the .05% of people who would be affected by the estate tax, simply hiring a tax attorney will solve all of your problems.

as it is currently written in law, when assets in an estate change hands they are seen as new income to the recipient. they did not own them before, and no one here has been able to show that they had ownership. Everyone here who is against the estate tax wants the ability to pass anything to family tax free. once that door is opened, any individual can then simply pass on any asset and avoid paying taxes on them to begin with. i could make a huge profit through investing and to simply avoid paying any taxes on them, i could pass those assets on to a family member instead of taking ownership of them.

the other issue at hand is that if the estate tax is eliminated you have pushed approximately $500 billion over the next ten years back on to the middle and lower classes. (as per the CBO:http://www.floridaprobatetrustlaw.c...-how-much-revenue-does-the-estate-tax-raise/:

 

[Skull Pilot]

"So why are you so keen that those who employ most of the world, the top 2% of wage earners are unable to continue?"

your exact words Fitz. You implied that the top 2% or earners employ most of the world. I simply showed that to be untrue.

most small business owners, who actually create 80% of all new jobs are not affected by the estate tax. and like ive said many times before, if you are part of the .05% of people who would be affected by the estate tax, simply hiring a tax attorney will solve all of your problems.

If the law is so easily thwarted then why waste any time on it at all?

as it is currently written in law, when assets in an estate change hands they are seen as new income to the recipient. they did not own them before, and no one here has been able to show that they had ownership. Everyone here who is against the estate tax wants the ability to pass anything to family tax free. once that door is opened, any individual can then simply pass on any asset and avoid paying taxes on them to begin with. i could make a huge profit through investing and to simply avoid paying any taxes on them, i could pass those assets on to a family member instead of taking ownership of them.

If you give something to someone while you're alive it's subject to gift taxes. You would have to die to leave an inheritance to an heir which then would be subject to estate taxes.

Ans so what if a person can leave something he already bought and most likely paid taxes on already to a family member? Shit if we have it your way, we should be claiming every gift we get from anyone as income.

the other issue at hand is that if the estate tax is eliminated you have pushed approximately $500 billion over the next ten years back on to the middle and lower classes. (as per the CBO:http://www.floridaprobatetrustlaw.c...-how-much-revenue-does-the-estate-tax-raise/:

500 billion is a pittance compared to the waste in government. Why don't you worry about getting the fucking government's house in order instead of being obsessed with more taxes?

 

[Rozman]

"So why are you so keen that those who employ most of the world, the top 2% of wage earners are unable to continue?"

your exact words Fitz. You implied that the top 2% or earners employ most of the world. I simply showed that to be untrue.

most small business owners, who actually create 80% of all new jobs are not affected by the estate tax. and like ive said many times before, if you are part of the .05% of people who would be affected by the estate tax, simply hiring a tax attorney will solve all of your problems.

If the law is so easily thwarted then why waste any time on it at all?

as it is currently written in law, when assets in an estate change hands they are seen as new income to the recipient. they did not own them before, and no one here has been able to show that they had ownership. Everyone here who is against the estate tax wants the ability to pass anything to family tax free. once that door is opened, any individual can then simply pass on any asset and avoid paying taxes on them to begin with. i could make a huge profit through investing and to simply avoid paying any taxes on them, i could pass those assets on to a family member instead of taking ownership of them.

If you give something to someone while you're alive it's subject to gift taxes. You would have to die to leave an inheritance to an heir which then would be subject to estate taxes.

Ans so what if a person can leave something he already bought and most likely paid taxes on already to a family member? Shit if we have it your way, we should be claiming every gift we get from anyone as income.

the other issue at hand is that if the estate tax is eliminated you have pushed approximately $500 billion over the next ten years back on to the middle and lower classes. (as per the CBO:http://www.floridaprobatetrustlaw.c...-how-much-revenue-does-the-estate-tax-raise/:

500 billion is a pittance compared to the waste in government. Why don't you worry about getting the fucking government's house in order instead of being obsessed with more taxes?

It goes against the DNA genetic code of a liberal democrat to have low taxes and small government.

 

[Big Fitz]

your exact words Fitz. You implied that the top 2% or earners employ most of the world. I simply showed that to be untrue.

Two things here you are forgetting, but not surprising really.

1. The top two wage earners invest in things that employ people. They may not be the boss directly, but their money works for them by making it possible for jobs to exist.

2. It is irrelevant how they earn their money. You are still not entitled to the vast majority of it. Oh a little nibble as a part of paying for the constitutional powers of the government, not distorted by the misused of the commerce clause and public good misinterpretations, yes. Just as every citizen should pay. But to assume that because it costs so little of their capital to have an 'average' life, you are entitled to the rest is just evil greed on your part.

most small business owners, who actually create 80% of all new jobs are not affected by the estate tax.

Unless they retire or die. Then they or their heirs are ruined by the taxation. Secondly, where did they get the capital to start up? Institutions making the money from the richest 2% among others work for interest. Or do loans come from Obama's Stash or thin air in the bank vaults?

if you are part of the .05% of people who would be affected by the estate tax, simply hiring a tax attorney will solve all of your problems.

Then you are quibbling over a trifle since they can easily escape the law and you create only hardship for those who cannot afford the tax attorneys and accountants who are less financially sound and doomed to be fucked over by your overzealous sense of entitlement. Yeah.. that's the way to do it.

as it is currently written in law, when assets in an estate change hands they are seen as new income to the recipient. they did not own them before, and no one here has been able to show that they had ownership.

Really? Is that so? Explain the generational family farm which is consistently destroyed by this philosophy. Grandfather to father to son to grandson. It never makes it past this current generation because the tax man shows up, assesses the property and decides the family which has never left the land and nothing has changed owes 12 million so they can continue doing what they did for 4 generations on the same spot. All to satisfy your selfish jealousy and greed.

Everyone here who is against the estate tax wants the ability to pass anything to family tax free.

You're goddamned right. I can tell you don't stand to inherit anything and your jealousy clouds your judgment. Or you're just stupid.

any individual can then simply pass on any asset and avoid paying taxes on them to begin with.

So? I fail to see this as a bad thing. Ain't yours. Ain't the government's.

i could make a huge profit through investing and to simply avoid paying any taxes on them, i could pass those assets on to a family member instead of taking ownership of them.

Umm... dumbass, you only die once.

the other issue at hand is that if the estate tax is eliminated you have pushed approximately $500 billion over the next ten years back on to the middle and lower classes. (as per the CBO:http://www.floridaprobatetrustlaw.co...te-tax-raise/:

Really? My, I guess they'll just have to cut 500 billion in spending. We don't have the money. Oh damn.

Tax cuts are free. Spending is not. If you do not have the income, you cannot spend on new toys or bigger ones. Cut spendng and your problems go away. Why are you so blind to the solution that is soon to be rammed down your throat by economic reality regardless of the tax rate?

 

[Big Fitz]

"So why are you so keen that those who employ most of the world, the top 2% of wage earners are unable to continue?"

your exact words Fitz. You implied that the top 2% or earners employ most of the world. I simply showed that to be untrue.

most small business owners, who actually create 80% of all new jobs are not affected by the estate tax. and like ive said many times before, if you are part of the .05% of people who would be affected by the estate tax, simply hiring a tax attorney will solve all of your problems.

If the law is so easily thwarted then why waste any time on it at all?



If you give something to someone while you're alive it's subject to gift taxes. You would have to die to leave an inheritance to an heir which then would be subject to estate taxes.

Ans so what if a person can leave something he already bought and most likely paid taxes on already to a family member? Shit if we have it your way, we should be claiming every gift we get from anyone as income.

the other issue at hand is that if the estate tax is eliminated you have pushed approximately $500 billion over the next ten years back on to the middle and lower classes. (as per the CBO:http://www.floridaprobatetrustlaw.c...-how-much-revenue-does-the-estate-tax-raise/:

500 billion is a pittance compared to the waste in government. Why don't you worry about getting the fucking government's house in order instead of being obsessed with more taxes?

It goes against the DNA genetic code of a liberal democrat to have low taxes and small government.

Of course. They feel the call of charity on their heart and so they steal from another who does not to help someone they should be paying for themselves.

 

[Jroc]

the other issue at hand is that if the estate tax is eliminated you have pushed approximately $500 billion over the next ten years back on to the middle and lower classes. (as per the CBO:http://www.floridaprobatetrustlaw.co...te-tax-raise/:

You've got to love how the libs fudge the numbers and don't take into account when this money is left in the private sector, it is used creates jobs and spurs economic growth but that’s the mind of a liberal demagogue. 500 billion?..


How Much Revenue Does the Estate
Tax Bring In, and How Much Does It
Scare Away?

Even though federal estate tax rates were falling throughout the decade, and the exemption level was rising, revenue held steady at about $25 billion each year between 2001 and 2009. Receipts were as high as $28 billion when the economy was strong and the stock market up, and as low as $23 billion when the economy weakened, as it did in 2008 and 2009.

The one-year repeal of the federal estate tax in 2010 drives down the U.S. Budget’s predicted revenue from transfer taxes to $17 billion this year, and then revenue rebounds in 2011 and beyond in anticipation of the law’s reinstatement. The U.S. economy has become soThe U.S. economy has become so dynamic that a constant turnover occurs among the wealthiest people.

Instead of the same few families staying at the top of the heap for generations, new American entrepreneurs constantly emerge and soar past older fortunes. But is this the whole revenue story? No, even though the estate tax has been reporting approximately $25 billion a year in revenue, much of that has been diverted from other reasury accounts.

For example, capital gains revenue would be much higher over time without the estate tax. Regular come tax revenue would be higher, too. Estate Tax Repeal Boosts Capital Gains.Tax Revenue To prevent assets in estates from being doubletaxed by both the estate tax and the capital gains tax, the so-called step-up in basis was,
until 2010, part of estate tax law. By that rule,assets to be transferred were valued at their current market value on the date of death – “stepped up” from the original purchase price – leaving the heir with no taxable gain if he sold the inherited asset for an amount that equaled the value on the date he inherited it. The estate tax is complex to the point of absurdity, to the point where even a savvy lawyer or accountant would be a fool to plan his own estate if he had substantial wealth.


http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/sr179.pdf

 

[007]

"it's not you're money you're dead" :roll: I feel like snapping his little pencil neck "

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MXGo8EsBT0

I would get GREAT PLEASURE in BEATING LIVING DOG SHIT otta that CONDESCENDING LITTLE LIBERAL SOCIALIST SHIT STAIN.... maybe twice.

 

[Synthaholic]

1. The top two wage earners invest in things that employ people.

Where is your evidence that they are investing in THIS country, employing Americans?

 

[Big Fitz]

1. The top two wage earners invest in things that employ people.

Where is your evidence that they are investing in THIS country, employing Americans?

Who's fault is it for making this nation a bad investment risk?