How do you make sure that the rich stay rich?

[CPA]

Originally posted by: MonkeyK

Originally posted by: CPA

Originally posted by: MonkeyK

Originally posted by: Genx87
We have this theory in the United States called private ownership of wealth. Passing on the wealth created\earned in a lifetime is a right the person who died has.

What right do you have to take what somebody else created\earned?

By your tone, it sounds like jealousy is a driving factor.

If that is the case, what is so different about giving one wealth while alive from giving one's wealth after death?

Last I checked, you can only give something like 24K/year tax free to someone. After that it is considered income.

Estate/Death tax, should not be considered that, it should be considered as an income tax on the recipient. It is also crazy that one could give 2 million to one person and not be taxed, but have 3 million to distribute to two people (1.5 million each) which would need to be taxed before distribution

It's not income. Where the heck did you read that? It's taxable to the DONOR, NOT the DONEE. And the gift tax is part of the broader Estate and Gift Tax and uses the same exclusions and limitations. geesh.

geesh yourself. I said should be considered income. I think that it is ridiculous to tax the estate and even agree with others that doing so apears to be taxing the same accumulation twice. What someone recieves from the doner is essentially income, so why not just treat is as such for tax purposes.

Actually you did: "After that it is considered income."

But, in any case reading your response to my response, I understand better your position. I just don't agree with it. I don't think it should be taxed either way.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: wetech

Originally posted by: HombrePequeno

Why should they be able to give it to their greedy mooch-like children? I'd prefer the money actually was put to use rather than give it to Paris Hilton-type children. Shouldn't their family be able to make it on their own rather than get a nice big hand-out and turn into a drain on the economy?

I've never really liked hand-outs and this is no different.

So it's all about distribution of wealth. Punish people for being successful, right? Obviously they don't know what's best to do with their cash, so let the government decide for them.

And yes, their families should be able to make it on their own IF that's what the person wants. If I want to leave my kids a big fat check when I die, it should be my right to do so. I shouldn't lose that right because people like you feel like you could put MY money to "better use."

The kid isn't successful. And yes redistibution of wealth is important. Maybe you want 7 people to own all of the US but most people don't

Redistribution of wealth is one of the biggest lies of modern govt. The left has been busy pushing through legislation to redistribute wealth in this country for the past 80 or so years and really ramped it up in the 1960s. What has been happening? The gap between rich and poor continues to grow. The gap between rich and the middle class has been growing even faster as the oppressive taxation to fund these programs crush the middle class.


Your right we are not redistributing enough wealth lets raise the taxes on the top 1 precent

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: MonkeyK

Originally posted by: Genx87
We have this theory in the United States called private ownership of wealth. Passing on the wealth created\earned in a lifetime is a right the person who died has.

What right do you have to take what somebody else created\earned?

By your tone, it sounds like jealousy is a driving factor.

If that is the case, what is so different about giving one wealth while alive from giving one's wealth after death?

Last I checked, you can only give something like 24K/year tax free to someone. After that it is considered income.

Estate/Death tax, should not be considered that, it should be considered as an income tax on the recipient. It is also crazy that one could give 2 million to one person and not be taxed, but have 3 million to distribute to two people (1.5 million each) which would need to be taxed before distribution

The common misconception among the jealous is after the death of a loved one, the people recieving the estate show up in a room with a lawyer and are handed big fat check they can go cash at the local bank.

The simple fact is most of the estate is tied up in assets such as stocks, bonds, real estate ect. Something you can't simply go down to the IRS and pay them with it.

I wouldnt have a problem with the people recieving the assets to pay the capital gains on the assets profit. After all, if it did appreciate and we do have a tax system that accounts for that. Simply saying you need to pay a % based on the assets recieved puts some people into situations they shouldnt be put in this country imo.

Just because I recieve 3 million in assets from my deceased parents doesnt mean I have 700,000 laying around to pay the IRS with when they want the estate tax paid.

Your right it means yopu have 3 million dollar laying around to pay the estate taxes with.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: wetech

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: wetech

Originally posted by: HombrePequeno

Why should they be able to give it to their greedy mooch-like children? I'd prefer the money actually was put to use rather than give it to Paris Hilton-type children. Shouldn't their family be able to make it on their own rather than get a nice big hand-out and turn into a drain on the economy?

I've never really liked hand-outs and this is no different.

So it's all about distribution of wealth. Punish people for being successful, right? Obviously they don't know what's best to do with their cash, so let the government decide for them.

And yes, their families should be able to make it on their own IF that's what the person wants. If I want to leave my kids a big fat check when I die, it should be my right to do so. I shouldn't lose that right because people like you feel like you could put MY money to "better use."

The kid isn't successful. And yes redistibution of wealth is important. Maybe you want 7 people to own all of the US but most people don't

If you're so against handouts, why do you want to give the money to the government. Aren't most social programs just government handouts?

Where did you get the idea I'm so against handouts?