need more info
Yes 75%
No but 50% is okay
No estate tax is good
Holy hell no. If I'm sick, I'd rather my last few days on earth are spent spending time with my family, not worrying about what is going to happen to them once the government takes all of the money away from them.
Ah I see what your problem is, you are effectively illiterate, otherwise you would not be mischaracterising my position like this based on my past posts. Well either that, or you are arguing in bad faith and setting up another logical fallacy.
- - - Updated - - -
Yes I realise everyone to the right of Lenin is likely a right winger to you, but try to contain that nonsense to yourself.
High taxes discourage wealth creation. The government won't collect nearly as much as it thinks. Faced with a 75% death tax, the wealthy will simply gift, donate and spend excess wealth. Also the wealthy are mobile and will just move to someplace that has low estate taxes.
President Ronald Reagan said many years ago that when the top tax rate was 90%, he would basically work half a year and then stop working and instead go ride horses on his ranch for the rest of the year. As soon as every additional dollar he earned was taxed at the 90% rate, he decided it wasn't worth it to work. That was one of the things that woke him up to the negative and unintended consequences of high taxes -- a reduction in wealth creation and productivity.
“I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: ‘O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous.’ And God granted it.” -- Voltaire
"He who awaits much can expect little" -- Gabriel Garcia Marquez
“I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: ‘O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous.’ And God granted it.” -- Voltaire
"He who awaits much can expect little" -- Gabriel Garcia Marquez
the estate tax doesn't kick in until 5-10 million dollars in value, it doesn't stop you from giving your business or home to your kids. what it attempts to stop is mass generational wealth, where one family just keeps passing on billions of dollars over the years and just accumulating more and more wealth.
Who wants to get rich by redistribution? Well other than the current system of redistributing public largess to the rich.
Mostly people want this money to fund shit like education and healthcare, so they dont become bankrupted by lack of either. Not rich, or even the opposite of rich.
Just take yourself and your own family out of the equation for one second, how many examples are there that you can find of inherited wealth being a benefit to society? How many trust fund kids are out there who are just so goddamned brilliant that they make the best possible use of all the resources they are handed?
except why would you EVER work harder to provide for your children after you die if it's taken away when you kick it?
you'll just work enough and then get rid of all your money one way or another before you die
it's money you already paid taxes on, so yeah it is effectively double taxation
the whole point of being wealthy is that you can spend it on your children
Last edited by shaunika123; 2017-07-19 at 09:45 PM.
Ah yeah, the myth of "work harder and you'll get rich". Never heard of a factory worker becoming millionnaire because he was dedicated.
Regardless, if what your children receives is taxed up to 75 % (which would require an already pretty huge amount anyway), it means that 25 % would end up as pocket money. Which means if you get more, they will get more, just not all.
I thought that was grade-school level of math here
No it's not. Read what I just wrote.it's money you already paid taxes on, so yeah it is effectively double taxation
That sounds like a pretty transparent excuse to disguise greed under the pretext of generosity. Not very convincing.the whole point of being wealthy is that you can spend it on your children