Where on the political spectrum do you lie? (Mods: Please don't move!)

[cigar no baka]

Amanda, I think the rich should pay a fair share of thei INCOME in income tax, but I have to state that the inheritance tax is absolutely ridiculous.

All my life my grandmother and grandfather built themselves up with only one of them having finished high school. They paid taxes on all they earned, raised three kids, had several successful businesses, saved every penny they could, invested it, and paid capital gains taxes on their investment revenue. Their parents were farmers who had minimal education and hardly a pot to piss in.

And when my grandparents die, they CONFISCATED a large amount of the money that was going to the family. How is that right, they paid income taxes, sales taxes and capital gains taxes all their lives, it is double taxation, totally unfair, unjust and indefensible.

[reaganyouth84]

Amanda, I think the rich should pay a fair share of thei INCOME in income tax, but I have to state that the inheritance tax is absolutely ridiculous.

All my life my grandmother and grandfather built themselves up with only one of them having finished high school. They paid taxes on all they earned, raised three kids, had several successful businesses, saved every penny they could, invested it, and paid capital gains taxes on their investment revenue. Their parents were farmers who had minimal education and hardly a pot to piss in.

And when my grandparents die, they CONFISCATED a large amount of the money that was going to the family. How is that right, they paid income taxes, sales taxes and capital gains taxes all their lives, it is double taxation, totally unfair, unjust and indefensible.

I totally agree Cigar NO Baka. The inheritance tax is absolutely ridiculous. For me, the only reason I want to succeed is so that my family can have the things that I never did. So they won't have to work in shitty factories for minimum wage, and so they won't have a care in the world. Implimenting an inheritence tax certainly disheartens me, because knowing I can go out right now and work my fingers to the bone day and night so my family won't have to, but then when I die, the government can come in and take a huge chunck of it is bullshit. It's down right communist is what it is. Pisses me off, liberals on Capitol Hill bitching about how the wealth needs to be spread, well heres an idea....get the lazy bums that support you off their asses and have them work for something instead of wanting a free lunch! 90% of my political views have been formed because of the community I'm from. The county has the highest unemployment rate in the state. Not because there aren't any jobs around, but just because people are deadbeats and would rather get a check from the government. I've seen my dad wake up at 4am almost every morning since first grade, and not come home until well after 8pm. Slaving away at his job, he's a pipefitter(he's a union democrat, but hates liberals). My parents struggle to make ends meet, but we get by the best we can, but the asses down the street that don't even have a job and collect wellfare drive nicer cars than us, have a nicer house, their kids get all of their insurance paid for by the tax payers, their kids don't pay for college, etc, etc, etc. I don't understand why Republicans get such a bad rap for screwing over the working man, when liberals are just as bad, if not worse. Now I myself am off to work to help pay for all these deadbeats around here. Be back later.
-Mike

[Amanda]

cigar_no_baka, I am opposed to what happened to your grandparents. I don't know when that happened, but the laws regarding the estate tax have changed significantly in recent years, with assets as high as $8 million no longer being subjected to the estate tax. The parents who saved all their lives and want to pass on $50,000 to their children no longer have anything to worry about with the estate tax. Neither will most family farms or small businesses be subjected to the tax....and nor should they be.

However, less than 5% of the revenue generated through the estate tax comes from people with estates of $8 million or less. Most of the revenue comes from families like the Rockefellers and the Hiltons, who will now be able to pass on billions of dollars of old money from generation to generation and no longer have it subjected to a penny of taxation. This tax was established by Woodrow Wilson in 1916 to avoid a "French nobility" scenario that was prominent before the French Revolution....where the richest people in society pass on untold wealth to their heirs, wealth that buys them ever-more political influence without having to lift a finger to earn that wealth.

Billionaire investor and unlikely populist Warren Buffett said it best a few years back when denouncing the potential roll back of the estate tax by suggesting how dangerous it is for society to reward those simply for "winning the genetic lottery." For all the talk of work ethic coming from the political right, it strikes me as odd that they're defending the lack of initiative that inevitably comes when a person inherits their fortune rather than earns it. And think of it this way. The government stands to lose out on nearly $500 billion in revenue over the next decade or so by repealing the inheritance tax....and for every penny that Paris Hilton is NOT paying in taxes, the rest of us get to pick up the slack.

[Amanda]

reaganyouth, repealing the inheritance tax increases the number of "lazy bums sitting on their asses" since there's no incentive for the very rich to work if they're simply waiting for daddy's inheritance. If I was waiting on an inheritance check, it's doubtful I'd be running around sweating in a gruelingly hot restaurant four nights a week.

Reading your post, it really struck me what a masterful PR job the Republicans have done in selling the working man on the "death tax" premise and conjuring up the kind of misdirected anger your post arouses. I have to believe that there are 35-year-old heirs and heiresses sitting in the family mansion eating bon-bons laughing hysterically at every drop of sweat that falls from your brow on the factory floor. By lending your emphatic support for the inheritance tax repeal, you are essentially VOLUNTEERING to pay more taxes so that they can pay less.

We have to ask ourselves whether society is better served by inheritance or productivity. Is it fair that you and I pay taxes on the money we sweat to earn while Paris Hilton pays no taxes on the money she received because she was passed through the loins of nobility when she was born? Not in my book.

[Kenyth]

Don't fall into all the hype of "inheritance tax" killing the average Joe. I think what you're referring to is the fact that an inheritance is also considered income (I think. Tell me if I'm wrong), and subject to an immediate income tax in a higher bracket. %20 or more of the inheritance is still a large chunk. Many people could confuse this as an inheritance tax I think.

Talking about it being double taxing is also incorrect. Double taxing is when you are charged a tax on money already spent on taxes. Every time money changes hands it gets taxed. That's the only way it works. Determining which points in the cycle it gets taxed is the hard part. Both your employer AND you are taxed on the income you earn. That wage is paid by the businesse's income, which was taxed when they earned it also. It's taxed yet again as it's spent by you. Then again as the receiver of the cash earns it as income.

[joshua]

Heres some facts about the estate tax http://www.factcheck.org/article328.html

[cigar no baka]

Don't fall into all the hype of "inheritance tax" killing the average Joe. I think what you're referring to is the fact that an inheritance is also considered income (I think. Tell me if I'm wrong), and subject to an immediate income tax in a higher bracket. %20 or more of the inheritance is still a large chunk. Many people could confuse this as an inheritance tax I think.

Talking about it being double taxing is also incorrect. Double taxing is when you are charged a tax on money already spent on taxes. Every time money changes hands it gets taxed. That's the only way it works. Determining which points in the cycle it gets taxed is the hard part. Both your employer AND you are taxed on the income you earn. That wage is paid by the businesse's income, which was taxed when they earned it also. It's taxed yet again as it's spent by you. Then again as the receiver of the cash earns it as income.

Sorry it IS double taxation. Money changing hands between family members should be NO business of the government's or society. Taxing INCOME is OK in my book, but taxing money COMING FROM YOUR FAMILY THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN TAXED OUT THE WAZOO IS NOT INCOME, ITS YOUR BIRTHRIGHT!!! Anything else is dangerously socialist in thinkiing. Why not just each according to his abilities, each according to his needs?

[Kenyth]

Hey, it may well be an unfair tax to some. I'm just saying that it's not "double" taxing. Also, if you can't tax income given from a family member, does this mean that business transactions between family are untaxable? Significant monetary gifts between family members are untaxable? Are game show prizes considered income? Remember, any loophole will be exploited. It's a sticky situation. Generally, any money that comes into your possession is considered income.

Another area that people get mad about is medical bills/nursing home bills. Any medical bills, like nursing home care for instance (which adds up quick!), will come out of the estate (including the home and vehicles) before medicare will cover it. A persons estate can be completely wiped out in short order!

[Amanda]

Joshua, thanks for the link showing us some specific numbers.

I've always been confused by the whole "double taxation" argument used to defend gutting taxes on inheritances and stock dividends. The backpack I have taken to classes for the past three years is starting to shred. Before September, I'll have to buy a new one. When I do, I can expect to pay a tax....on the same income I already paid taxes on. Two days ago, I sent in my phone bill and there was a tax charge on that as well....on top of the taxes I already had withheld from paycheck. With the exception of food items, a tax is incurred every time there is a transfer of ownership. Perhaps that is unfair. But should we accept the premise that the only transfer of ownership that should NOT be subject to taxation is when multi-millionaires shift their assets to heirs and heiresses?

If only half as much indignation that is given to the "death tax" (which affects a few hundred heirs and heiresses) could be given to the "birth tax"....the nearly $20,000 bill every newborn receives as their share of the national debt.

[cigar no baka]

Joshua, thanks for the link showing us some specific numbers.

I've always been confused by the whole "double taxation" argument used to defend gutting taxes on inheritances and stock dividends. The backpack I have taken to classes for the past three years is starting to shred. Before September, I'll have to buy a new one. When I do, I can expect to pay a tax....on the same income I already paid taxes on. Two days ago, I sent in my phone bill and there was a tax charge on that as well....on top of the taxes I already had withheld from paycheck. With the exception of food items, a tax is incurred every time there is a transfer of ownership. Perhaps that is unfair. But should we accept the premise that the only transfer of ownership that should NOT be subject to taxation is when multi-millionaires shift their assets to heirs and heiresses?

If only half as much indignation that is given to the "death tax" (which affects a few hundred heirs and heiresses) could be given to the "birth tax"....the nearly $20,000 bill every newborn receives as their share of the national debt.

Your argument is specious in my situation. The inhertiance came before the changes in the law so a huge chunk of it was STOLEN by the federal government. That's my stance and I'm sticking to it.