Estate Tax

[LegalSmash]

This may be a little too technical a thread, but I felt it could be interesting.

The estate tax is up for repeal in 2010 under current law. There are many positive and negative views of the estate tax, which currently only affects persons with estates in excess of 2 Million as of 2008, although previously, it has been much lower, over the years affecting more individuals.

About 1% of the population in the US control roughly 40% of the wealth in this country.

The tax takes a maximum of about 45% of the aggregate(total) estate of the decedent (dead guy).

What are the good and bad things you see for this estate tax? Should the hyper rich be able to technically create defacto dynasties? Is it good for dynasties to exist and essentially create bottlenecks of wealth within the economy?

Also, do you believe that the Congress, R or D, would allow the estate tax to lapse, considering the amount of revenue it brings in, and the small cross-section of the population it affects, and our current financial situations and "war obligations"?

Discuss.

[Italian Jew]

Well, I do not think it is right for someone to inherit all of the wealth of a deceased family member if they are incredibly wealthy. You would not want some tard of a son to inherit the family wealth and squander it.

Also, it is not like the dead person is going to miss their money if they are dead. If their family is bitching about it, they obviously care more about the money than their deceased "loved one".

The republicans will probably try to repeal it while the Dems will fight to keep it. Whoever is in control of Congress will ultimately decide this because this is typically a Democratic law that Republicans would hate because they believe in more economic privacy, less taxes, and less gov't intervention from what I understand. I do not think they will jump ship to pay for the war with that because they really haven't done anything to raise a lot of money for it now, why would they later?

[zero]

As someone who values freedom, what happens to someones estate after they die (regardless if they have ten dollars or ten million dollars) should remain between the deceased (through a will) and the recipients of that estate as listed in the will. Unless stated in the will, government should not have any right to any of that property regardless if its .01% or 50%.

[Itch]

As someone who values freedom, what happens to someones estate after they die (regardless if they have ten dollars or ten million dollars) should remain between the deceased (through a will) and the recipients of that estate as listed in the will. Unless stated in the will, government should not have any right to any of that property regardless if its .01% or 50%.

I agree with Zero on this. The person who earned the money in the first place was already taxed on it. Should it be taxed every time money changes hands?.. Should my 6 year old be taxed on his allowance?

[Red Tampon]

As someone who values freedom, what happens to someones estate after they die (regardless if they have ten dollars or ten million dollars) should remain between the deceased (through a will) and the recipients of that estate as listed in the will. Unless stated in the will, government should not have any right to any of that property regardless if its .01% or 50%.

:thumbup:

[zero]

Just to add to the conversation. If the government can take a certain percentage of your estate after your die, against your will, isn't that saying that the government owns a portion of your property? Lets say that you want 100% of it to go to your children, nonprofit organizations, or whatever. However, the government will step in and want their share of 40% or whatever the value might be. To me, this means that the government has a certain ownership of your property regardless on what you think.

Thats a step towards Communism, according to the first and third plank of the Communist Manefesto by Karl Marx.

http://www.libertyzone.com/Communist...to-Planks.html

[Italian Jew]

Well the government does have the power of eminent domain...so they can take your property once they pay you for it and you don't have the right to say no.

The deal is that if you have a will and a percentage goes towards non-profits or something like that, the gov't cannot touch it. All it can tax is the stuff that goes towards private items. Personally if there is no will, then the Gov't should be able to tax because the deceased probably did not think his/her heirs were worthy of the property.

But honestly, if you have millions of dollars, are you really going to miss out on a percentage of the property? This prevents the rich from getting too rich by creating dynasties.


And the selfish will always claim communism is evil and bad. LOL, that site is a joke. people get to preoccupied with their own interests to actually know about the issues going on in the world. A little communism doesn't hurt...too much of it does, just as too much democracy, capitalism, freedom, etc. does.

[Slavic]

That money was already tax, what is going to happen when it gets passed down to the heir? It is going to be spend, and thus taxed again. No matter what happens the money is most likely to fluctuate through the economy, although it may not be the US economy.

Personally, I would not leave my money to an heir, I'd rather it be spread out in the local government as opposed to the central. I am against dynastic systems, whether they be plutocratic or feudal, but its not up to me to limit the rights of others even though I am against them. Therefore the government should not.

[zero]

But honestly, if you have millions of dollars, are you really going to miss out on a percentage of the property? This prevents the rich from getting too rich by creating dynasties.

We don't want dynasties to get too powerful, yet, we just shift that power directly the the federal government instead thinking that they would be more legitimate and infalible when it comes to power. Its still we, the people right? Its more like "we, the interest and lobby groups." What’s the difference between the federal government and the mafia? One of them is organized.

I'd also argue that its the government that help create monopolies and dynasties.

And the selfish will always claim communism is evil and bad. LOL, that site is a joke. people get to preoccupied with their own interests to actually know about the issues going on in the world. A little communism doesn't hurt...too much of it does, just as too much democracy, capitalism, freedom, etc. does.

I'm not saying Communism is bad. However, if you believe in that type of socioecomomics, then I suggest supporting the Communist Party of America, or better yet, move to the dozens of other countries that practice Communism. Don't adopt socialism under the guise of liberalism.

[PotshotPolka]

I wish I could be politically conservative and still hate rich Republicans.