Political Twelve Monkeys

[majestic]

 

 

Stop crying over the rich. They are increasing their wealth at a tremendous clip right now while the average tax payer is struggling to make any gains.

So a family with a house and a car is top 1%? You have no idea, as always, what you talk about.

Another example of why US education is tanking.

 

 

What in the world are you talking about? We were discussing million dollar inheritances.

 

3% of homes in the US are worth a million dollars.

 

https://www.trulia.com/blog/trends/million-dollar-homes-2016/

 

You flipped out on Ben because he wanted to tax inheritance properties worth over a million dollars. 

 

This stuff makes me miss WoD.

 

Looking at average or median incomes per country also puts things into perspective. When it takes updwards of 20 years for half of the population to even earn a million dollars before tax the idea that a million dollar exempted inheritance tax hurts anyone suddenly becomes ludicrous.

 

Not that I would agree with a 85% tax rate. Inheritance should be treated like any other income and taxed accordingly. Because that's what it is. Income. The topic is just emotionally charged and almost always boils down to "the government wants to tap poor grandma's life savings" or "the government wants to make poor grandpa's family homeless" as if such edge cases were anything but strawmen. *shrug*

Edited November 19, 2017 by majestic

[aluminiumtrioxid]

Don't insult the Big E that way   That's my wallpaper incidentally, best piece of 40k art I've seen

 

Yeah this meme annoys me to no end, because while canonically the Emperor is by all accounts a horrible father and someone who doesn't really get people in general, he's not an incoherent babbling manchild.

[Hurlshort]

 

 

 

Not that I would agree with a 85% tax rate. 

 

Don't tell Sharpie, but I thought that was a pretty ridiculous number as well. ;-)

[HoonDing]

i've seen so many iterations of that WH40k painting

 

[Volourn]

Look at this. people are still defending the theft of other people's money.  Why at epeople pro Nazi?

 

 

I bet you guys would feel the gov't would be justified to mass murder thes epeople if they refused to give up the money right? I mean,   it is acceptable for the gov't to steal. EVIL.

[Guard Dog]

 

Look at this. people are still defending the theft of other people's money. Why at epeople pro Nazi?

 

 

I bet you guys would feel the gov't would be justified to mass murder thes epeople if they refused to give up the money right? I mean, it is acceptable for the gov't to steal. EVIL.

stealing implies ownership

 

So we don't own what we earn? Not exactly an incentive to work hard is it? Why be an engineer and deal with that stress when I can just pick apples. After all if the pay is the same why work harder?

[Volourn]

"stealing implies ownership"

 

L0L So you believe in slavery?

 

K. Then.    

[HoonDing]

imagine if your boss had right of the first night

[Blodhemn]

 

 

 

"I find it funny that they'd tell a guy who wound up on the street because he lost his job to pull himself up by his bootstraps but millionaires should be coddled or else they'll end up homeless."

 

L0L

 

Because stating that someone shouldn't have the gov't steal 85% of their money is somehow 'coddling'. LMAO

 

 

And, what's this about the guy on the streets/ You are making stuff up again.

 

Only Nazi thieves belief it is okay for the gov't to steal 85% of someone's money. L0L

a dead persons money volo. They’re dead. They don’t care.

 

What makes your existence more important? You'll be joining soon enough. Maybe they "suffered" more in earning those millions than you ever will.

 

Never ceases to amaze how righteous people become when it comes to someone else's money.

 

My existence would be more important simply because I have one while they don’t anymore. Again, they’re dead.

 

It's a very self centered point of view which pretty much kills the altruistic nature of it from the start, never mind the logistics and morality.

[Hurlshort]

So we don't own what we earn? Not exactly an incentive to work hard is it? Why be an engineer and deal with that stress when I can just pick apples. After all if the pay is the same why work harder?

 

 

 

We were talking about inheritances, which aren't really earned in a traditional sense. Although, I suppose I may have worked my way out of my own inheritance by not getting along with my parents. 

 

I don't really have a problem with the top 3% of estates being taxed on inheritances. I think it is actually a pretty conservative idea that you will not be taxed on the first million of inheritance. That is going to allow the vast majority of people to avoid taxes of inheritances. I think 85% after that million is an absurdly high number, but I'd rather start with the concept that 97% of estates will not be taxed and work on that 3% separately.  

 

edit: The ownership we are talking about is the estate of a deceased person. What rights do kin have that estate? We assume that property should be passed down, but where do we draw the line? Should my kids have access to my pension? I do have life insurance options, but they typically have certain costs involved.

Edited November 20, 2017 by Hurlshot

[redneckdevil]

The problem is that what's the point of inheritance then if not to leave behind something that helps benefit ur next generation IF instead it's going into politicians funds and bigger government?

U don't actually think this will benefit the other people around us when we still allow tax money to fund businesses, private parties, golf, vacations, etc.

With inheritance u can chose who gets what u leave behind, with this it's instead MAINLY going to rich politicians and hopefully some will fall off onto other citizens but most likely no one who that person knew would benefit.

Edited November 20, 2017 by redneckdevil

[213374U]

The problem is that what's the point of inheritance then if not to leave behind something that helps benefit ur next generation IF instead it's going into politicians funds and bigger government?

 

So the complaint is that corrupted crooks in government will pocket the money? I can understand the concern.

 

Would you be more open to tax exemptions on inheritance in the case of donations to non-profits? Say... starting at 85% of the estate's worth beyond the first million.

[Darkpriest]

Late to the fun, but an inheritance of 1mil is nothing spectacular... I mean, average middle class family has that much of net worth... couple cars, 3-4 bedroom (parents and 2-3 kids) house made of decent materials instead of wicker and cheapest wood, with some garden - some savings and other assets

 

Now obviously if you'd like to split between each kid, that might not exceed 1mil per head, but still, it might not be that uncommon. A ****ty shack in Vancouver in Canada costs 500k.

Edited November 20, 2017 by Darkpriest

[Gfted1]

Not that I would agree with a 85% tax rate. Inheritance should be treated like any other income and taxed accordingly. Because that's what it is. Income.

That "income" has already been taxed on the original earner. Now it should be taxed again because it was given to another? If I spot you a $20 for lunch, should you be taxed on it? Its "income" after all.

[Guard Dog]

 

So we don't own what we earn? Not exactly an incentive to work hard is it? Why be an engineer and deal with that stress when I can just pick apples. After all if the pay is the same why work harder?

 

 

 

We were talking about inheritances, which aren't really earned in a traditional sense. Although, I suppose I may have worked my way out of my own inheritance by not getting along with my parents. 

 

I don't really have a problem with the top 3% of estates being taxed on inheritances. I think it is actually a pretty conservative idea that you will not be taxed on the first million of inheritance. That is going to allow the vast majority of people to avoid taxes of inheritances. I think 85% after that million is an absurdly high number, but I'd rather start with the concept that 97% of estates will not be taxed and work on that 3% separately.  

 

edit: The ownership we are talking about is the estate of a deceased person. What rights do kin have that estate? We assume that property should be passed down, but where do we draw the line? Should my kids have access to my pension? I do have life insurance options, but they typically have certain costs involved.

 

Doh! Sorry Ben. Here I go jumping into the middle of a conversation without reading what came before!

[Guard Dog]

Taxation of any kind is theft. Legalized, maybe even necessary but still theft. You are taking away money from the people who earned it for the greater benefit of people who didn't. If we can't get around it as a method of funding the government there are surely things we can do to make it more fair. If I left my children a multi-million dollar estate that I worked my whole life to build, earned the money that built it, paid taxes on the income and on the real assets all along the way what standing does anyone have to come in and say it's not all mine to dispose as I please? This notion I'm hearing "you don't need that much money", who are you to say that? You don't know them. Its a notion rooted in the same base emotion that drives the appeal of collectivists economics: envy. Tom has something that **** and Harry don't and it's.... not.... FAIR! So **** & Harry elect a government that will take away what Tom has.

 

It amazes me that people will overlook the worst kind of abuses of power, corruption, and intrusions on their life and property from their governments. They gladly hand their children over to fight in wars that were never declared but never end. They pay more than half of the money they earned  and "rent" the house they own and the car they bought to a government that only demands more and all because we think there is no other way to build our roads and secure our defense.

[213374U]

This notion I'm hearing "you don't need that much money", who are you to say that? You don't know them. Its a notion rooted in the same base emotion that drives the appeal of collectivists economics: envy. Tom has something that **** and Harry don't and it's.... not.... FAIR! So **** & Harry elect a government that will take away what Tom has.

Yeah. I can very much say that you don't need that much money, with 100% certainty. You may want it, you may feel entitled to it, you may even think you deserve it. But need? No, you don't need it, and the proof is hundreds of millions of your fellow countrymen survive with far less than that.

 

It's also unsurprising that it always comes down to assuming envy. You probably also assume laziness, right? Perhaps consider that, for others, material riches may not hold anywhere near as much appeal as they do to you.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

Taxation of any kind is theft. Legalized, maybe even necessary but still theft. You are taking away money from the people who earned it for the greater benefit of people who didn't. If we can't get around it as a method of funding the government there are surely things we can do to make it more fair. If I left my children a multi-million dollar estate that I worked my whole life to build, earned the money that built it, paid taxes on the income and on the real assets all along the way what standing does anyone have to come in and say it's not all mine to dispose as I please? This notion I'm hearing "you don't need that much money", who are you to say that? You don't know them. Its a notion rooted in the same base emotion that drives the appeal of collectivists economics: envy. Tom has something that **** and Harry don't and it's.... not.... FAIR! So **** & Harry elect a government that will take away what Tom has.

 

It amazes me that people will overlook the worst kind of abuses of power, corruption, and intrusions on their life and property from their governments. They gladly hand their children over to fight in wars that were never declared but never end. They pay more than half of the money they earned  and "rent" the house they own and the car they bought to a government that only demands more and all because we think there is no other way to build our roads and secure our defense.

 

 

Honestly, at this point I just silently pray that someday people can realize their dreams of creating an objectivist utopia out there on the high seas or in orbit where they can establish whatever tax policy they want to.

[redneckdevil]

 

 

 

Look at this. people are still defending the theft of other people's money. Why at epeople pro Nazi?

 

 

I bet you guys would feel the gov't would be justified to mass murder thes epeople if they refused to give up the money right? I mean, it is acceptable for the gov't to steal. EVIL.

stealing implies ownership

So we don't own what we earn? Not exactly an incentive to work hard is it? Why be an engineer and deal with that stress when I can just pick apples. After all if the pay is the same why work harder?

A dead! person doesn’t own anything

Correct BUT also a dead person cannot set up an inheritance either. If they are alive, then they have that right do they not? If I am alive and I chose to give my son 20 dollars and someone comes by and snatches the 20 outta my hand we call that stealing, but if I told my son that 20 will be his when I am dead and I have it in legal writing and someone comes by and takes the 20....that's okay?

Time to go raid museums and time to go grab me some environmental protected lands. Guess we can't say **** about the govt retaking our native American lands either.

Edited November 20, 2017 by redneckdevil

[Blarghagh]

Taxation of any kind is theft. Legalized, maybe even necessary but still theft. You are taking away money from the people who earned it for the greater benefit of people who didn't. If we can't get around it as a method of funding the government there are surely things we can do to make it more fair.

If governed society and monetary regulation stops working then all that green paper you worked so hard for doesn't mean anything. The value of money exists because society makes it exists and therefore society is responsible for the problems it causes. Accepting the value of your hard earned money is a tacit agreement to support the way society works and the issues that come with this society-wide agreement to define worth in paper and numbers become at least to an extent your responsibility as a participant of that society. Don't like it, go live in the woods and trade acorns for toilet paper.

[213374U]

Also:

When a person dies, all of their property becomes owned, as a matter of law, by a fictitious person known as the “estate” of the deceased person. This fictitious person exists as a matter of law for as long as is required to wrap up the affairs of the departed individual; once that is done, the fictitious person of the estate ceases to exist.

In situations where there is no ambiguity, the estate may not be created, because all property interests either terminated at death or transferred unequivocally to other persons (usually, to a spouse).

Wow, you really know your stuff!

 

Oh, wait. Not really.

[Hurlshort]

Maybe Sharpie is Kelly Kinkade?

Edited November 20, 2017 by Hurlshot

[213374U]

More likely she works for him and so he's entitled to 85% of what she writes.

[redneckdevil]

You know, I could get behind 85% of inheritance being taxed by the govt IF when a person of the govt (weither still or has stopped) dies, 85% if thier money, bonds, business, and items is given to the Citizens tax free. Like how the native Americans do it with the casinos.

Tic for tat

Edited November 20, 2017 by redneckdevil

[Pidesco]

You know, I could get behind 85% of inheritance being taxed by the govt IF when a person of the govt (weither still or has stopped) dies, 85% if thier money, bonds, business, and items is given to the Citizens tax free. Like how the native Americans do it with the casinos.

Tic for tat

 

Getting a tattoo that's paid in Tic Tacs seems to me like a risky proposition.

 

Wasn't the 85% number applicable only above 1 million bucks? What's wrong with that?