Inherited wealth. Any justification?

Should inherited wealth exist?

  • Yes

    Votes: 44 78.6%
  • No

    Votes: 1 1.8%
  • Yes, but it should be limited/taxed

    Votes: 11 19.6%

  • Total voters
    56
  • Poll closed .
In a merit-based society, is their any justification for wealth being passed down generationally. And, if so, is there any limit to such justification?

Just askin'

This society is based on private property. Merit is the natural consequence of that.
 
Is that an oblique reference to "the first liberals", i.e., the founding fathers...and the silly internet fad that has people saying (falsely) that today's liberals and yesterday's founding fathers are ideologically the same thing?

Or are you just tooting the crazy horn?

well modern liberals are like those old right winged Federalists. Unfortunately there are no Democratic-Republicans anymore, just people even further right--the feudal spawn of Augusto Pinochet Ugarte :p
 
CaféAuLait;3542199 said:
ORRRR, they can put it toward the debt, so I can reclaim the FICA taxes i've paid out :p

Which would end up benefiting you and you have already said you have not earned such.

I didn't say that. i said "whether or not." Certainly half of that which has been paid into "my account" came out of the fruits of my own labor. Whether the other half has served to adjust my wages downward because my employer has had to compensate for paying them or not is debatable. In any case, I don't understand why Pinochetists believe that I should forfeit them so that the uber-wealthy can perpetuate idleness. Really Un-American!

No, you said you did not earn it and did not deserve it:

Ever witnessed Caroline Kennedy?

CarolineKennedy.jpg


Can you honestly tell me she merits the wealth she has?

Are you thinking that you deserve it more than she?

Immie

Of course not. I haven't done anything to earn it EITHER!
 
Personal Wealth is a PRIVATE issue which the Government should not be involved in at all. It's not about being Fair or Kind or Nice or anything like that. It's about FATE and what you choose to do with it.

IF you think government is supposed to make life fair, then you're already a hopeless congenital nitwit.
 
It isn't about money belonging to government, it is about a society based upon merit. Money is but a medium of recognizing merit, no?

wrong again. Money is a medium of exchange. I'm not going to bother explaining that to you because you will obviously never get it.
 
I don't see the argument for giving anything back to the government when taxes have already been paid.

Ever witnessed Caroline Kennedy?

CarolineKennedy.jpg


Can you honestly tell me she merits the wealth she has?

Absolutely she does. Who the fuck are you,Or anyone else, to say that her Parents and Grand Parents did not deserve to leave their Wealth for her? If you take it away from her, you are not only taking something from her, you are taking something from those who came before her and earned the money to leave her.

Like I said, the fact we are even having this discussion says a whole lot about the state of this country today. What the fuck are they teaching you kids in school? Certainly not the virtues of American Freedom.
 
I like this quote:

“A heavy progressive tax upon a very large fortune is in no way such a tax upon thrift or industry as a like would be on a small fortune. No advantage comes either to the country as a whole or to the individuals inheriting the money by permitting the transmission in their entirety of the enormous fortunes which would be affected by such a tax; and as an incident to its function of revenue raising, such a tax would help to preserve a measurable equality of opportunity for the people of the generations growing to manhood.

Anyone know who said it?

it comes from a pompous arrogant goosestepping windbag.
 
Wow who knew our Society was based on 'merit'...Please tell us what other nations are based on 'merit'

Liberals think the government invented money so it could reward those who excel according to some arbitrary definition of "merit."

You gotta love how utterly clueless and naive they are.
 
CaféAuLait;3542298 said:
CaféAuLait;3542199 said:
Which would end up benefiting you and you have already said you have not earned such.

I didn't say that. i said "whether or not." Certainly half of that which has been paid into "my account" came out of the fruits of my own labor. Whether the other half has served to adjust my wages downward because my employer has had to compensate for paying them or not is debatable. In any case, I don't understand why Pinochetists believe that I should forfeit them so that the uber-wealthy can perpetuate idleness. Really Un-American!

No, you said you did not earn it and did not deserve it:

Are you thinking that you deserve it more than she?

Immie

Of course not. I haven't done anything to earn it EITHER!

I do deserve to reclaim what i have been forced to contribute to the SS "trust fund" out of the fruits of my own labors. I do not deserve to inherit a bunch of bootlegging money so that I can live a life of frivolity. The one does not equal the other :cuckoo:
 
Last edited:
Well, that is how capitalism is justifiable, no? It is certainly the only reason I support it

ROFL! Sorry, you couldn't be more wrong. Capitalism is based on the premise you are entitled to the fruits of your labor, that includes passing them on to whomever you please. No one has ever managed to disprove it.
 
my belief on the subject can be summed up in a quote of Locke's

"Though the earth, and all inferior creatures, be common to all men, yet every man has a property in his own person: this no body has any right to but himself. The labour of his body, and the work of his hands, we may say, are properly his. Whatsoever then he removes out of the state that nature hath provided, and left it in, he hath mixed his labour with, and joined to it something that is his own, and thereby makes it his property. It being by him removed from the common state nature hath placed it in, it hath by this labour something annexed to it, that excludes the common right of other men: for this labour being the unquestionable property of the labourer, no man but he can have a right to what that is once joined to, at least where there is enough, and as good, left in common for others."

How dos that justify taxing away inheritances?
 
What about the Gotti Estate or any "Soprano" estate? How about if the taxes weren't paid, such as they have it off-shore in tax shelters?
Wealth should be passed-on, but I support the current policy of only taxing wealth over $2.5m so that family farms and upper middle class folks aren't hurt.

That sounds @ right to me. How much unearned income does a child need to be comfortable?

Of what relevance is that? When did "how much you need to be comfortable" become a moral principle?
 
Then why did our founders believe--as the 1776 Constitution of N.C. put it "That perpetuities and monopolies are contrary to the genius of a free State, and ought not to be allowed." o_0

In those days, the conception of "monopoly" meant only a government granted and government enforced monopoly. The conception "natural monopoly" didn't exist. That was dreamed up later by fascist "economists."
 
No problem with inheriting wealth

The problem comes when you are born on third base and you act like you hit a triple

What problem is that, your envy?

Most of us are born in the bullpin, and with some rigor manage to get on base. We are aware that were we to have bowed to cronyism we could certainly have STOLEN second, but believing in the basic principal of the market--MERIT--have held ourselves back.

The lot of you really betray this charade of yours. I wonder if a politician were to admit to such principals, would they have any chance of being elected :lol:
 
CaféAuLait;3542298 said:
I didn't say that. i said "whether or not." Certainly half of that which has been paid into "my account" came out of the fruits of my own labor. Whether the other half has served to adjust my wages downward because my employer has had to compensate for paying them or not is debatable. In any case, I don't understand why Pinochetists believe that I should forfeit them so that the uber-wealthy can perpetuate idleness. Really Un-American!

No, you said you did not earn it and did not deserve it:

Of course not. I haven't done anything to earn it EITHER!

I do deserve to reclaim what i have been forced to contribute to the SS "trust fund" out of the fruits of my own labors. I do not deserve to inherit a bunch of bootlegging money so that I can live a life of frivolity. The one does not equal the other :cuckoo:

Ahhh so what you are saying is that YOU have a right to money returned to you which was grabbed from another person who was unfortunate enough to DIE. You suggested that the money from such be used to pay off the debt and then you could then get your taxes back.

It would not be YOUR tax money now would it? You want to benefit from another’s money which you HAVE NOT earned and have clearly stated such above.

So it seems your argument that the middle class kids are only waiting around for Mom and Dad to die to pay of their “Hummer and their McMansion” in reality is YOU waiting around for some rich guy to die so he can pay YOUR taxes. I see how you have projected your wants onto others.
 
Even worse than the movement against estate taxes, is the elimination of the Rule Against Perpetuities in so many of the states by the Pinochetist menace. Even in Virginia--FOR SHAME!


Can you provide an example of a state legalizing "perpetuities?"
 
In a merit-based society, is their any justification for wealth being passed down generationally. And, if so, is there any limit to such justification?

Just askin'

Merit based society? How fucking stupid are you anyway?

Well that is the theory behind "The American Dream." I'm not actually stupid enough to believe that such actually exists :p

"The American Dream" is a slogan coined by 20th century politicians. it has no connection with anything the Founding Fathers endorsed.
 

Forum List

Back
Top