Due to estate tax loophole, Texas oil tycoon passes $9b to his children tax-free - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Perfumly;22509025]Imo it would be a lot better for the country if we just increased tax on things like soda/candy/chips/alcohol by a little bit.[/QUOTE] No, that would affect [I]everyone[/I]. A tax on currency conversions however, hardly affects the general population and generates a lot more money.

55% is total bullshit. I wish I had at least a billion...

[QUOTE=bugfix;22509067]No, that would affect [I]everyone[/I].[/QUOTE] Only people who buy soda/chips/candy/alcohol. Am currently too young to buy alcohol, I don't drink soda, I rarely have chips or candy. So I'm mostly in the clear

[QUOTE=Perfumly;22509116]Only people who buy soda/chips/candy/alcohol. Am currently too young to buy alcohol, I don't drink soda, I rarely have chips or candy. So I'm mostly in the clear[/QUOTE] Oh I thought you meant raising the VAT in general.

[QUOTE=bugfix;22509167]Oh I thought you meant raising the VAT in general.[/QUOTE] Nah, just on purchases.

[QUOTE=cecilbdemodded;22503274]Some guy making $50k a year pays whatever, he misses that money. That amount makes an actual difference in his life. Some guy inheriting $9billion, but taxes drop it down to $5billion...it's not exactly as painful, even though the actual amount paid is far, far higher.[/QUOTE] I think it is still painful to know you have lost [B]4 BILIION[B] dollars

[QUOTE=Rotinaj;22504423]You're right, it should be higher.[/QUOTE] You're right. You should get a job <3

[QUOTE=PrismatexV8;22502984]:downsbravo: Good job, Congress and Dubya![/QUOTE] Do you have a problem with inheritance? The guy earned billions. He should be entitled to do what he wants with it. If the government had their way, they would probably take the whole thing. "Sorry, junior, we need this for our White House parties and paying for free healthcare you won't even see for four years."

i think we should have no taxes on the rich at all because one day i will be rich and i dont want to be taxed!!

[QUOTE=Jenkem;22510097]Do you have a problem with inheritance? The guy earned billions. He should be entitled to do what he wants with it. If the government had their way, they would probably take the whole thing. "Sorry, junior, we need this for our White House parties and paying for free healthcare you won't even see for four years."[/QUOTE] Free health care? What are you talking about, the current law is that we are required to invest in a private corporation (gj congress)

55% is bullshit, that's way to much, perhaps if that money was going solely into helping the lower class and people in need of help then it would be a different story.

10%-20% is a more reasonable percentage of money. 55% is huge.

Well, people 'earn' partly due to the society they live in. A stable, law abiding society provides the enviroment and opportunity for you to earn. It does not seem unreasonable to me that someone pay taxes on what they earn as their share of contributing back to society. So the question is how much? Well it does not seem unreasonable to me that the more you earn, the more you can pay. A flat rate, say for instance 10%, sounds good...at first. Someone making $52,000 a year will pay $5,200. That's $433 a month. To someone supporting a household on 52k a year, losing $400+ a month is a hell of a lot. That $400 can be the difference between being able to afford a car and insurance or not, for example. Someone making $260,000 will pay $26,000, around $2100 a month in taxes. For someone making that much, losing $2100 a month is not going to make a major difference in any aspect of their life, even though they are paying much more than the first guy. I see no reason why tax levels can't change. When times are good for everyone, why not lower tax rates? When times are tough, and the government needs revenue to create jobs and such, why not raise them? There is no way people should receive billions of dollars, which is a form of income, and pay ZERO taxes. That's a slap in the face of anyone who pays fees, pays to register their car, pays to park, pays sales tax on everything they buy, pays...well you get my point.

[QUOTE=cecilbdemodded;22512020]Well, people 'earn' partly due to the society they live in. A stable, law abiding society provides the enviroment and opportunity for you to earn. It does not seem unreasonable to me that someone pay taxes on what they earn as their share of contributing back to society. So the question is how much? Well it does not seem unreasonable to me that the more you earn, the more you can pay. A flat rate, say for instance 10%, sounds good...at first. Someone making $52,000 a year will pay $5,200. That's $433 a month. To someone supporting a household on 52k a year, losing $400+ a month is a hell of a lot. That $400 can be the difference between being able to afford a car and insurance or not, for example. Someone making $260,000 will pay $26,000, around $2100 a month in taxes. For someone making that much, losing $2100 a month is not going to make a major difference in any aspect of their life, even though they are paying much more than the first guy. I see no reason why tax levels can't change. When times are good for everyone, why not lower tax rates? When times are tough, and the government needs revenue to create jobs and such, why not raise them? There is no way people should receive billions of dollars, which is a form of income, and pay ZERO taxes. That's a slap in the face of anyone who pays fees, pays to register their car, pays to park, pays sales tax on everything they buy, pays...well you get my point.[/QUOTE] Because the government fails at responsibly spending the tax money that it's getting

i would be happy for the rest of my years with just one billion dollars, i think the current estate tax rate is perfectly fine. the estate tax ensures that the children of wealthy businessmen make at least a half-assed attempt at being successful themselves, otherwise, we'd have more of an aristocratic society than we do now. that is why the laws are the way they are. you'd have families (more, at least) living off the successes of their forefathers for centuries without this. and i wouldn't be crying about the kids, they probably have high level positions in the businesses AND have their own trust funds. businesses also launder a lot of the money, so they probably have offshore bank accounts as well. they'll live wealthy and happy

I personally believe that a flat out 10% sales tax with nothing else could completely sustain our country, while forcing everyone to contribute to the government the same amount. I hate when people think that because someone has accumulated more money that they should be force into giving away more than another person because of it.

[QUOTE=siberpredaht;22514261]i would be happy for the rest of my years with just one billion dollars, i think the current estate tax rate is perfectly fine. the estate tax ensures that the children of wealthy businessmen make at least a half-assed attempt at being successful themselves, otherwise, we'd have more of an aristocratic society than we do now. that is why the laws are the way they are. you'd have families (more, at least) living off the successes of their forefathers for centuries without this. and i wouldn't be crying about the kids, they probably have high level positions in the businesses AND have their own trust funds. businesses also launder a lot of the money, so they probably have offshore bank accounts as well. they'll live wealthy and happy[/QUOTE] Exactly. It was in fact Thomas Jefferson who first argued for an estate tax, hoping to prevent the US from gaining the same aristocracy that much of Europe had at the time.

[QUOTE=Perfumly;22513539]Because the government fails at responsibly spending the tax money that it's getting[/QUOTE] no man they spend it on hilarious commercials like this [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NDPLjxcbwBs&feature=related[/media]

[QUOTE=Libertas;22503249]I see nothing wrong with this. His money, his damn decision.[/QUOTE] Yeah but his children probably don't deserve any of it.

[QUOTE=Wakka;22514386]Yeah but his children probably don't deserve any of it.[/QUOTE] who are you to say that

[QUOTE=Wakka;22514386]Yeah but his children probably don't deserve any of it.[/QUOTE] Because that's totally the point

what the fuck are you even going to spend 9 billion dollars on? if I got that money, I'd build a castle on a mountain and donate the rest to charity. Maybe randomly distribute it to people on the street. But there's no way I'd be able to spend all of it. Jesus.

just kidding it's not the point [editline]07:42PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;22514469]what the fuck are you even going to spend 9 billion dollars on? [/QUOTE] Who gives a shit he earned it

To all of the people going around saying "hurf 55% is huge on this type of money" it's designed to be. The estate tax is in place to prevent the evolution of an aristocracy in America; we take that money back in order to prevent a new family like the Rockefellers (who largely influenced our politics for generations, controlling huge portions of both the oil and transportation industries) from coming up. The estate tax is absolutely necessary to prevent us from becoming like European nations; we've historically got better national cohesiveness because we've got considerably fewer social boundaries in America, allowing people to move through social strata. aka people in Europe tend to stay in their economic and social strata, people in America often change their social strata (usually up) it's in place to prevent our social boundaries from becoming rigid so quiet down and give big brother your money [editline]03:43PM[/editline] i say that last bit facetiously, this estate tax effects about .01 percent of the goddamn population

yeah, it's called the gilded age; google it

[QUOTE=Perfumly;22514470]just kidding it's not the point [editline]07:42PM[/editline] Who gives a shit he earned it[/QUOTE] Yeah, maybe he did, but his kids didn't. When you just give that kind of shit to people, it ruins our private sector. All of the executive jobs end up being run by fuckwits and there goes efficiency out the door.

and about a quarter of them (including the big man himself, Bill Gates and Bill Gates sr. who co founded an organization of economic elites that support the estate tax) support this [editline]03:47PM[/editline] [QUOTE=siberpredaht;22514522]yeah, it's called the gilded age; google it[/QUOTE] i'm aware of the gilded age what of it

I would be more okay with this if the government wasn't completely pants on head retarded with spending

also 55% is laughably low; CT is somewhere in the neighborhood of 80% at that level I believe [editline]03:52PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Perfumly;22514608]I would be more okay with this if the government wasn't completely pants on head retarded with spending[/QUOTE] i'd rather they be retarded with spending than allow the development of massive family run monopolies that have the effect of creating massive cleavages in the social population yeah that's kind of a huge issue but they do need to get their shit together

[QUOTE=Perfumly;22514608]I would be more okay with this if the government wasn't completely pants on head retarded with spending[/QUOTE] Neutral incompetence is better than viscous malevolence.