Estate Taxes (Steinbrenner)

[Fear No Evil]

This from Mr. Anti-abortion. Logic not found

Logic not found? Do you speak english? The rich pay damn near all the taxes in the United States. The poor pay almost none. The people in the middle class who use the most resources and cost society the most (In terms of education of their children, parks, etc.. ) pay very little.. Those in the middle class like myself WITHOUt children pay a damn good amount of their income toward YOUR children.

So since we already soak the rich in income taxes.. we should tax them MORE why again? Because they died? If its GOOD that we tax their inheritance wouldn't it make more sense to tax them while alive? Does anyone really need a net worth of 1 billion? Why not just take 55% while they are alive?

 

[Binarycow]

I take it that means you've got nothing, right?

The only problem I really have with "the rich", as you put it, is the sense of entitlement to something unearned by their offspring, and the hypocrisy attendant to it. Not to mention the manipulation of public opinion that enabled the greatest looting spree in the history of finance, the aftermath of which threatens to engulf the rest of us...

Compared to a family like that of Steinbrenner's, definitely mine has nothing.

My question for you is what gives you the right to hate their offsprings and, as you put it, their unearned wealth? In this free country that everyone, relatively speaking, has a chance to make and earn their worth why don't you invest the time and effort that you put into your hatred towards them into creating your own story of success?

Bill Clinton, Amar Bose, JP Morgan, Bruce Lee, Obama, Sheldon Adelson, Kirk Kerkorian and thousands upon thousands of others coming from poor economic backgrounds siege their opportunity that this nation gives them and make great things out of themselves. What gives you the right to take the fruit of their success from their children?

It's one thing to be envious of their financial successes, however, it's just purely criminal to just come in and rob their estates the way this tax is designed. It's their money, it's their blood and sweat. If they want to leave that to their children or if they want to build a half-finished bridge to the moon, it's their choice. Who the hell are we to rob them of their wealth?

 

[sandorski]

So to you that means it's OK for the government to come in to your family once you have died to take a portion of your hard earned wealth from your children as a tax, assuming you had anything worthwhile for them to do so? or does that only apply to the rich because they are rich and are filthy by default in your eye?

No one's Individual Liberty is being impinged. Dude made his money, he kept most of it until Death, his Kids Inherit his hard work. How does their "Individual Liberty" play into this? Did they make the sacrifice their Father made? No. You advocating Entitlement?

 

[sandorski]

What if their offspring HAVE earned it?

What the Offspring Earned should be in their Bank Accounts or other Value Holding Assets. Also called, Wages/Salaries/Investment Earnings.

 

[sandorski]

Compared to a family like that of Steinbrenner's, definitely mine has nothing.

My question for you is what gives you the right to hate their offsprings and, as you put it, their unearned wealth? In this free country that everyone, relatively speaking, has a chance to make and earn their worth why don't you invest the time and effort that you put into your hatred towards them into creating your own story of success?

Bill Clinton, Amar Bose, JP Morgan, Bruce Lee, Obama, Sheldon Adelson, Kirk Kerkorian and thousands upon thousands of others coming from poor economic backgrounds siege their opportunity that this nation gives them and make great things out of themselves. What gives you the right to take the fruit of their success from their children?

It's one thing to be envious of their financial successes, however, it's just purely criminal to just come in and rob their estates the way this tax is designed. It's their money, it's their blood and sweat. If they want to leave that to their children or if they want to build a half-finished bridge to the moon, it's their choice. Who the hell are we to rob them of their wealth?

Fail. It's not about Hate or Envy. Appeal to Emotion noted.

 

[Craig234]

What have you against the rich? they came pillage your place, ravage your spouse, and ate your first child or what? or is it your mediocrity that's holding you back from doing anything of any worth so you project your inadequacy as hatred onto them?

You're a textbook right-wing ideologue not going to spend the time right now laying it out.

(god, I start to sound like moonbeam)

Ya, like Joe the Plumber sounds like Obama. I.e., not at all.

All right, I am going to say something I'd planned for a later post to one of the many other posts by this guy parroting the same stuff.

Tell me how, in a country like the way South American countries in the 50's or 60's under pure dictators were, with an elite group of rich owning almost all the land/media/business/government/etc., while the masses were struggling for food to eat, with not enough for some of them, the rich blocking any opportunity for the poor and letting them work for just enough to eat seasonally and others not getting enough, that the solution was for the poor work harder, and you can blame 'mediocrity'?

You can't - and that's just a clearer example where that right-wing ideology falls short, the same applied to it falling short here, just not quite as obviously.

Our economy is hardwired for there to be only a tiny number of ultra rich people, (even if things are better for the masses than those South American countries), and for the vast majority not to be, whoever they are. So the whole 'everyone can be a billionare if they are not mediocre and lazy' is wrong, and a lousy theory for policy, falsely saying any concentration of wealth is the masses' own fault, leading us to banana republic. The real risk is a lot more about the ultra rich preventing opportunity.

It's you little ideologues for whom 'a little knowledge is dangerous', as you are determined to enforce your misguided ideology without regard for how the effects are of it.

You're like the old doctors using leeches and draining blood for whatever the problem is, and when the patient is killed, proscribe you didn't take enough blood.

Oh look at that, after we shifted taxes off the rich and removed any barriers to their owning everything and the middle class is destroyed, well the problem was the middle class didn't want to be rich like the rich did, it's their own fault and so there's no problem that it was destroyed. You don't get a thing about economics except a few simple dogmatic rule - taking blood is good for the patient, letting the rich drain the society is good for society.

 

[Craig234]

Fail. It's not about Hate or Envy. Appeal to Emotion noted.

Everything to prevent the society becoming one of extreme oligarchy to these idiots is 'jealousy of the rich'. They have no clue about what a middle class is or why it's a good idea.

'But the rich incomes went up ten times while ours are all flat!' 'You are jealous'

'But two third of all our hospitals are closed and the services at the remaining ones slashed and lines for hours with crowded lines' 'You are jealous of the rich's healthcare'

'But 90% of all business is owned by just 0.01% of the economy, including the banks - no one can get any chance to build their own business' 'You are jealous of the rich'

'But every member of Congress serves that 0.01% because the system has been rigged for only those who get the rich's backing to have a shot' 'You are jealous of the rich'

There's nothing the society can do to turn into an oligarchy that their answer isn't 'the masses fault, and they're jealous of the rich'.

It's a brainless propaganda phrase for them to explain away ANY policies for society to have the masses do better.

A minimum wage to prevent the society from having a power imbalance (people need to eat and will take less rather than nothing driving wages near zero) cause a society of economic slavery becomes 'welfare for the workers and theft by the government' to these idiotlogues (I just coined that, but boy is it right on). Policies that help the destitute be a little better off are the return of Stalin to them. Prohibiting 6 year olds from 16 hour days in factories is the same as the state taking the factory and executing the owner.

They really are idiots and ideologues. Many people in Russia did AND DO support Stalin. Some in China did AND DO support Mao. And some here are supporting of oligarchy policy.

Just as all you had to do in the USSR was call something 'imperialist', and there was some truth to some bad behavior by the 'other side', all you have to do is call something 'socialist' to get these idiotlogues screaming against it and for the oligarchy, making analogies of how reigning the biggest robber barons is keeping a mother from feeding her children.

They're idiots of an incredible degree reinforced by their being enough of them not to see it - just as was the case in the USSR, when the Stalinists were many in number.

Everything for these idiotlogues is about their mythical 'welfare' people, just as everything for Stalinists was about their mythical 'imperialist robber baron capitalist' exaggerations.

Here, the worker with slave wages is to blame for their poverty and any policy to reduce the imbalance of power was Stalinism; in Stalin's USSR, the smallest mom and pop shop for profit was a capitalist robber baron trying to let greed enslave his fellow citizens and had to be prevented.

Before Social Security, elders had a 90% poverty rate - they want them to have it again by destroying the program, with a few lies about how it won't happen but mostly platitudes about blaming the elders if it does, they should have saved. Before Medicare there was a large part of the population who did not get medical care; they want to return to that condition and again blame the citizens. This is idiotology, the sticking to a dogma with terrible results without concern for the results, only the dogma.

It's amazing that so many people fall for this stuff, but they do. It shows the power of a lie that serves the powerful, polished by them and repeated as 'the big lie'.

It worked to get many supporters for terrible policies in the USSR, and it works here today for the right wing (whose founders often used the PR methods of Stalin and Goebbels).

Indeed, before the PR techniques of today selling the public to support the policies for oligarchy, despite people being uneducated they often realized the problems of oligarchy and organized against them. Today, the myths of the oligarchy propaganda have many citizens supporting the oligarchy. As the nation has shifted towards oligarchy far more since Reagan, the people demand more of the same policies that did it, and reject the policies that did the opposite starting with FDR (and even his cousin Theodore).

It is a massive failure of the citizenry to not fall to the poisonous ideology of oligarchy, enslaving their own children economically and their own economy for the benefit of a few.

(save234)

 

[Jhhnn]

Who the hell are we to rob them of their wealth?
Binarycow is online now Report Post

Gawd, but you're obtuse in the extreme, coming right back to the same erroneous meme.

Estates aren't people. The people who left them behind are dead. *Dead*, get it? Nobody can take anything from them, by definition. No matter how you look at it, they're free of the cares of this world, immune to life's vagaries, shuffled off their mortal coil, suffering the torments of hell or luxuriating in God's radiance- put it in whatever terms you want.

You're leaning on a lot of attributions and presumptions to create your personal opinion wrt my life, particularly the hatred bit.

What gives me the right? What gives anybody the right to unearned wealth beyond what we all share, what was created by the generations before us?

I can certainly appreciate the idea of familial wealth at a reasonable level, that parents want to provide for their children's futures, so I support the idea of exempting portions of wealth from estate taxes, with the details being established by democratic and lawful processes. I even support the idea of restructuring the whole thing into an inheritance tax, so that multiple inheritors of lesser estates may each receive more than they do under the current system, and progressive rates beyond that, with most of the current loopholes abolished. OTOH, I'll never feel sorry for people who've inherited millions in free money and assets simply because they didn't get more, which is what your own arguments are based upon.

I don't oppose wealth per se, at all, but I recognize that excess concentration of it into the hands of a very few is deleterious to the economic welfare of our nation as a whole, and to the very idea of egalitarian democracy itself. That sort of concentration is possible only on a generational level, and simply must be denied if we're to remain a free society.

 

[Zebo]

From a fellow New Yorker..guess she was right all along

We don't pay taxes. Only the little people pay taxes. -Leona Helmsley

 

[ichy]

I personally don't think people should be required to pay a tax to pass things on to their children. I don't think the gov't thinks its legitimate either or else why would they have to vote on it every 'x' number of years?

Ideally I don't think that people should be taxed on income that they earn, however seeing as how I like having roads, law enforcement, national defense, etc I recognize that taxes are a necessary evil. Taxing the inheritances of the ultra-wealthy is less unfair than taxing the income of people who actually had to work to get that money. I'd rather see the estate tax reinstated and the money from that tax used to cut income taxes across the board (yes, I believe the wealthy deserve income tax cuts as well.)

 

[Fear No Evil]

Ideally I don't think that people should be taxed on income that they earn, however seeing as how I like having roads, law enforcement, national defense, etc I recognize that taxes are a necessary evil. Taxing the inheritances of the ultra-wealthy is less unfair than taxing the income of people who actually had to work to get that money. I'd rather see the estate tax reinstated and the money from that tax used to cut income taxes across the board (yes, I believe the wealthy deserve income tax cuts as well.)

You do realize the estate tax brings in very little money in the grand scheme of things right? And once again I need to point out for the 9 trillionth time that someone has said inheritance is unearned. Many children make significant sacrifices for their parents in their later years.. just as parents did for their kids. Just as we give a child tax credit to 'reward' parents, I look at inheritance as a way for parents to reward their kids. After all, if the kids are that useless the parent could just choose to donate it to charity?

 

[desy]

The kids are still rewarded . Steinbrenner inherited money from his father, Henry Steinbrenner, who was a shipping magnate. So he was a silver spoon who perpetuated the family wealth and there are just as many stories of those who squander it.

The construct of a capitalist democratic society is what allows people to build fantastic amounts of wealth. I have several rich uncles who have said after while the money just makes their money in investments. The poor, whom everyone in here loves to bash for some reason? 80% of banrupticies are due to medical problems. The value of income declines with the amount of income (the last $100 of income of a family living near poverty being considerably more valuable than the last $100 of income of a millionaire)
These are people who are supposed to hire accountants and get state governments help fund their private ventures? Sorry they are spending on food clothing and shelter

Paying back into a system that is setup for the opportunity to achieve such success seems a small price and if it means so little to the coffers of gov't I guess by the same token it should mean so little to the very rich as well, these kids aren't going to have to go to the bread line once dad dies. . . .

 

[Binarycow]

You're a textbook right-wing ideologue not going to spend the time right now laying it out.



Ya, like Joe the Plumber sounds like Obama. I.e., not at all.

All right, I am going to say something I'd planned for a later post to one of the many other posts by this guy parroting the same stuff.

Tell me how, in a country like the way South American countries in the 50's or 60's under pure dictators were, with an elite group of rich owning almost all the land/media/business/government/etc., while the masses were struggling for food to eat, with not enough for some of them, the rich blocking any opportunity for the poor and letting them work for just enough to eat seasonally and others not getting enough, that the solution was for the poor work harder, and you can blame 'mediocrity'?

You can't - and that's just a clearer example where that right-wing ideology falls short, the same applied to it falling short here, just not quite as obviously.

Our economy is hardwired for there to be only a tiny number of ultra rich people, (even if things are better for the masses than those South American countries), and for the vast majority not to be, whoever they are. So the whole 'everyone can be a billionare if they are not mediocre and lazy' is wrong, and a lousy theory for policy, falsely saying any concentration of wealth is the masses' own fault, leading us to banana republic. The real risk is a lot more about the ultra rich preventing opportunity.

It's you little ideologues for whom 'a little knowledge is dangerous', as you are determined to enforce your misguided ideology without regard for how the effects are of it.

You're like the old doctors using leeches and draining blood for whatever the problem is, and when the patient is killed, proscribe you didn't take enough blood.

Oh look at that, after we shifted taxes off the rich and removed any barriers to their owning everything and the middle class is destroyed, well the problem was the middle class didn't want to be rich like the rich did, it's their own fault and so there's no problem that it was destroyed. You don't get a thing about economics except a few simple dogmatic rule - taking blood is good for the patient, letting the rich drain the society is good for society.

Comparing the U.S. to South Africa. You need to get out more dude. We always have one thing they didn't have, it's called social mobility. It's a very basic sociological idea. Someone like you who likes justifying robbing others with flowery words and theories should know such a basic idea.

Answer me, who's stopping you from becoming successful like Steinbrenner did? People like you who have an inflated sense of self-worth while in reality possibly haven't made anything worthwhile for themselves due to their inability to reconciliate ideology and reality always find someone else to blame for their abject failure in life, especially in the financial aspect.

My point in my last few posts is this, put your time and effort into building your own personal success/fortune, however you look at it, instead of being envious of others and promoting robbing them of what they have worked for all their life. It's an idea that many Americans have followed to create their own stories (hint: Steinbrenner was one of them)

 

[sandorski]

Everything to prevent the society becoming one of extreme oligarchy to these idiots is 'jealousy of the rich'. They have no clue about what a middle class is or why it's a good idea.

'But the rich incomes went up ten times while ours are all flat!' 'You are jealous'

'But two third of all our hospitals are closed and the services at the remaining ones slashed and lines for hours with crowded lines' 'You are jealous of the rich's healthcare'

'But 90% of all business is owned by just 0.01% of the economy, including the banks - no one can get any chance to build their own business' 'You are jealous of the rich'

'But every member of Congress serves that 0.01% because the system has been rigged for only those who get the rich's backing to have a shot' 'You are jealous of the rich'

There's nothing the society can do to turn into an oligarchy that their answer isn't 'the masses fault, and they're jealous of the rich'.

It's a brainless propaganda phrase for them to explain away ANY policies for society to have the masses do better.

A minimum wage to prevent the society from having a power imbalance (people need to eat and will take less rather than nothing driving wages near zero) cause a society of economic slavery becomes 'welfare for the workers and theft by the government' to these idiotlogues (I just coined that, but boy is it right on). Policies that help the destitute be a little better off are the return of Stalin to them. Prohibiting 6 year olds from 16 hour days in factories is the same as the state taking the factory and executing the owner.

They really are idiots and ideologues. Many people in Russia did AND DO support Stalin. Some in China did AND DO support Mao. And some here are supporting of oligarchy policy.

Just as all you had to do in the USSR was call something 'imperialist', and there was some truth to some bad behavior by the 'other side', all you have to do is call something 'socialist' to get these idiotlogues screaming against it and for the oligarchy, making analogies of how reigning the biggest robber barons is keeping a mother from feeding her children.

They're idiots of an incredible degree reinforced by their being enough of them not to see it - just as was the case in the USSR, when the Stalinists were many in number.

Everything for these idiotlogues is about their mythical 'welfare' people, just as everything for Stalinists was about their mythical 'imperialist robber baron capitalist' exaggerations.

Here, the worker with slave wages is to blame for their poverty and any policy to reduce the imbalance of power was Stalinism; in Stalin's USSR, the smallest mom and pop shop for profit was a capitalist robber baron trying to let greed enslave his fellow citizens and had to be prevented.

Before Social Security, elders had a 90% poverty rate - they want them to have it again by destroying the program, with a few lies about how it won't happen but mostly platitudes about blaming the elders if it does, they should have saved. Before Medicare there was a large part of the population who did not get medical care; they want to return to that condition and again blame the citizens. This is idiotology, the sticking to a dogma with terrible results without concern for the results, only the dogma.

It's amazing that so many people fall for this stuff, but they do. It shows the power of a lie that serves the powerful, polished by them and repeated as 'the big lie'.

It worked to get many supporters for terrible policies in the USSR, and it works here today for the right wing (whose founders often used the PR methods of Stalin and Goebbels).

Indeed, before the PR techniques of today selling the public to support the policies for oligarchy, despite people being uneducated they often realized the problems of oligarchy and organized against them. Today, the myths of the oligarchy propaganda have many citizens supporting the oligarchy. As the nation has shifted towards oligarchy far more since Reagan, the people demand more of the same policies that did it, and reject the policies that did the opposite starting with FDR (and even his cousin Theodore).

It is a massive failure of the citizenry to not fall to the poisonous ideology of oligarchy, enslaving their own children economically and their own economy for the benefit of a few.

(save234)

Indeed. Well said.

 

[sandorski]

Comparing the U.S. to South Africa. You need to get out more dude. We always have one thing they didn't have, it's called social mobility. It's a very basic sociological idea. Someone like you who likes justifying robbing others with flowery words and theories should know such a basic idea.

Answer me, who's stopping you from becoming successful like Steinbrenner did? People like you who have an inflated sense of self-worth while in reality possibly haven't made anything worthwhile for themselves due to their inability to reconciliate ideology and reality always find someone else to blame for their abject failure in life, especially in the financial aspect.

My point in my last few posts is this, put your time and effort into building your own personal success/fortune, however you look at it, instead of being envious of others and promoting robbing them of what they have worked for all their life. It's an idea that many Americans have followed to create their own stories (hint: Steinbrenner was one of them)

Fail.

 

[Binarycow]

Fail.

man, you're a Canadian. Go worry about your own government. If that's how they do things up there and you like it then good, just stay up there. This thread is about a U.S. tax law, what do you care?

 

[sandorski]

man, you're a Canadian. Go worry about your own government. If that's how they do things up there and you like it then good, just stay up there. This thread is about a U.S. tax law, what do you care?

Taxes are a Universal thing. Sorry, to pwnt you so.

 

[Craig234]

Comparing the U.S. to South Africa.

South America is not South Africa.

 

[HendrixFan]

You seem to be arguing against your own example. You are suggesting that the dead person who gave your friend's boyfriend the money should not have had the right to make that determination. The government should have immediately taken 55% of it.. hell, 100% of it. THat person's dead, why should they get to decide what happens to their estate?

Hell, your example seems to be a GREAT example as to why we SHOULD NOT have the inheritance tax because often these 'worthless children' are the ones taking care of their parents in their final years.

Your last statement is pretty damning on where your opinion comes from. Government knows how to spend your money better than you do. Just allow government to take anything of yours and redistribute it as they see fit.

I was showing that even though his inheritance was far below the minimum for an estate tax, he was still able to utilize it to not work for the rest of his life. If you get a large inheritance and can't make it then you absolutely fail and don't deserve to have any ownership stake in it. Nowhere did I say that there shouldn't be a such thing as an inheritance. I just think it is moronic and against the principles of our country to not have it taxed at all. The rates and minimums and cutoffs are all up for debate, but there should be some sort of estate tax.

My final statement was an echo of Thomas Jefferson. I don't know if that should be considered "damning". It takes a special person to think that someone who inherits over $1B and is unable to stay afloat has earned the right to not pay taxes, while people who work hard to earn money pay taxes.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Why should there be an estate tax - the value has already been taxed at least once by the Federal Government and probably by the State as well when it was accumulated

 

[HendrixFan]

Why should there be an estate tax - the value has already been taxed at least once by the Federal Government and probably by the State as well when it was accumulated

Because the "new" owner hasn't paid taxes on it. You pay taxes on income for money that was taxed when your company earned it. When you buy something, the company that receives your money pays taxes on it. It is the transfer of monetary value that is taxed. When the estate is transferred to another party, it is no different.

As to the theoretical "why", because the founding fathers don't want this country to be an aristocracy. They want it to be a meritocracy.

 

[Pens1566]

Why should there be an estate tax - the value has already been taxed at least once by the Federal Government and probably by the State as well when it was accumulated

You're not keeping up with the topic of this thread. The growth in value of the yankees franchise has not been taxed.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Value increase should not be taxed excessively. Just like a company issuing dividends.

Value is an investment that grows. Why punish growth?

 

[HendrixFan]

Value increase should not be taxed excessively. Just like a company issuing dividends.

Value is an investment that grows. Why punish growth?

Inheritance isn't growth.

 

[Kanalua]

Hey look, more soak the rich posts! how do you encourage people to be self sufficient and productive, by punishing them to the tune of 55% for their hard work!