WatchI wanted to put this comment in the Obamacare thread, but now I'll try this. This post is in response to a comment using this blog commentary on the website of The Economist: http://www.economist.com/blogs/lexington/2010/10/estate_tax_and_founding_fathers
Interesting aspect of history, this entail and primogeniture. From http://www.conlaw.org/Intergenerational-II-2-4.htm:
"Entail and primogeniture imposed potentially perpetual restraints on the alienation of land, and could result in useful agricultural land being tied up indefinitely."
The laws of primogeniture and entail were laws that fostered perpetual inheritance according to the will of the state, which would be for the benefit of those actually in power. That is quite different than an inheritance determined by the deceased with no transfer of conditions upon further inheritance of the same property. Letting the individual decide for a single instance of estate disposal does not appear to be what Adam Smith or Thomas Jefferson were against. Would Jefferson agree with FDR? I am not sure I would trust an editorial in the Economist that equates opposition to entail as support for an estate tax. The Economist seems to be controlled by the Rothschild banking family of England (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Economist_Group). They only copied from a blog by Stephen Budiansky. According to wikipedia, Budiansky went to Harvard and Yale, like the political elites often do, and was editor of U.S. News & World Report. Yah.
Jefferson did support the rich being taxed more than the poor (http://etext.virginia.edu/jefferson/quotations/jeff1330.htm). A flat tax does that. I know you want a progressive tax. Jefferson seems to have at least pondered the possibility.
From (http://etext.virginia.edu/jefferson/quotations/jeff1330.htm): "Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions of property in geometrical progression as they rise." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1785. ME 19:18, Papers 8:682
As for family inheritance itself, Jefferson was not against it. Thomas Jefferson wrote (http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem/mtj:@field%28DOCID+@lit%28tj010010%29%29):
"As the law of Descents, & the criminal law fell of course within my portion, I wished the commee to settle the leading principles of these, as a guide for me in framing them. And with respect to the first, I proposed to abolish the law of primogeniture, and to make real estate descendible in parcenary to the next of kin, as personal property is by the statute of distribution. Mr. Pendleton wished to preserve the right of primogeniture, but seeing at once that that could not prevail, he proposed we should adopt the Hebrew principle, and give a double portion to the elder son. I observed that if the eldest son could eat twice as much, or do double work, it might be a natural evidence of his right to a double portion; but being on a par in his powers & wants, with his brothers and sisters, he should be on a par also in the partition of the patrimony, and such was the decision of the other members."
Although inconclusive as to his feelings on the estate tax, Jefferson seems to have no problem with a law of family inheritance in parcenary, meaning received undivided and in common by family coheirs. Moving on....
Here is a list of the biggest U.S. land owners: http://www.landreport.com/americas-100-largest-landowners/ It says Ted Turner is number one with a little over 2 million acres.
Biggest in the world? Do I think Queen Elizabeth II can use 6.6 billion acres? Not really. That's one sixth of the world's land. Do you think the estate tax is getting her? More about the world's biggest land owners (http://www.whoownstheworld.com/about-the-book/largest-landowner/):
"She is the world’s largest landowner by a significant margin. The next largest landowner is the Russian state, with an overall ownership of 4,219 million acres, and a direct ownership comparable with the Queen’s land holding of 2,447 million acres. The 3rd largest landowner is the Chinese state, which claims all of Chinese land, about 2,365 million acres. The 4th largest landowner on earth is the Federal Government of the United States, which owns about one third of the land of the USA, 760 million acres. The fifth largest landowner on earth is the King of Saudi Arabia with 553 million acres."
ACTUALLY, THE BIGGEST OWNER OF U.S. LAND IS THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT! From http://www.nationalatlas.gov/printable/fedlands.html we have: "The Federal Government owns nearly 650 million acres of land - almost 30 percent of the land area of the United States." I know parks and government facilities are needed, but 30% of the whole friggin' country? Is government big enough for you yet? The estate tax will stop the aristocracy? Would you please stop hating the so-called rich and aspire to be one yourself? If you earn it, you help us all. Politically speaking, $10 million is not rich. I said 'politically speaking'.
Perhaps we need a gift tax to stop landlordism too? When does the paranoid taxation stop? There is no landlordism without government coercion. The estate tax does not stop government coercion; it is government coercion that mainly benefits elitists, some of whom, like the Kennedys, are part of the dynasties supposedly to be dismantled. Why don't we destroy Harley-Davidson? Why don't we destroy Campbell's soup? I liked it better when the Bancroft family owned the Wall Street Journal. Is it better that WSJ is owned by Rupert Murdoch? I don't think people with several million dollars are aristocrats. They are not able to compete with George Soros or Bill Gates unless they stand united in the distribution of power. If they are numerous, they provide some safety to the rest of us. The freedom we once had in America can trace its heritage to the Magna Carta, when barons limited the king's power. That is the greatness of British heritage: limited government.
Thomas Jefferson also wrote this (Thomas Jefferson to Pierre S. Dupont de Nemours, April 15, 1811; see loc.gov Jefferson digital collection):
"Another great field of political experiment is opening in our neighborhood, in Spanish America. I fear the degrading ignorance into which their priests and kings have sunk them, has disqualified them from the maintenance or even knowledge of their rights, and that much blood may be shed for little improvement in their condition. Should their new rulers honestly lay their shoulders to remove the great obstacles of ignorance, and press the remedies of education and information, they will still be in jeopardy until another generation comes into place, and what may happen in the interval cannot be predicted, nor shall you or I live to see it. In these cases I console myself with the reflection that those who will come after us will be as wise as we are, and as able to take care of themselves as we have been. I hope you continue to preserve your health, and that you may long continue to do so in happiness, is the prayer of yours affectionately."
Are you wise enough to deserve freedom?
Follow
Befriend (3)
15 threads
5,606 comments
RayAmerica says
Ray. Why do you keep avoiding the question. Simple yes or no. Does extreme wealth inequality affect the overall economy.
Please no anecdotal evidence. No stories about other countries. Just a yes or no. And perhaps some explanation as to why you believe it does or doesn't.
Follow
Befriend (9)
120 threads
2,591 comments
Burbank, CA
tatupu70 says
I'll play along too. You just don't seem to get it (or you are playing, which is it?). When Bill Gates worked alone (while he was poor) experimenting with the PC ... he wasn't employeeing anyone. It was only after he started his business (Microsoft) that he began hiring employees. IMO, you and the Duck need to go back to school and get edukated.
Follow
Befriend (9)
120 threads
2,591 comments
Burbank, CA
tatupu70 says
Would adding water to the Duckie Dude's Pond "effect" his paddle? I don't know for sure, but it would probably cause the pond to rise. I hope this makes sense.
Follow
Befriend (3)
15 threads
5,606 comments
RayAmerica says
Your argument is beyond ridiculous. I'm not even sure what you are trying to say. Starting Microsoft wasn't the job creation event?
Follow
Befriend
12 threads
495 comments
antifeminist says
The moon is made of cheese. The Apollo program was filmed in my backyard. The Texas Nation Guard shot Kennedy. A crack group of marines blew up the levy in New Orleans. Bush ordered the planes to fly into the twin towers and doubled down by pre-wiring the buildings with explosives. I have helmet head. The secret rulers of the world decided it was time to take down the US by selling toxic loans and high-fructose corn syrup. Obama blew up the Deep Water Horizon to get his poll numbers up. Ted Kennedy didn't drink alcohol but was afflicted with chronic lyme disease. If we all just sat in a circle singing Kum Ba Ya, things would be better. Nero and his great-great-great ... great-great ... great-great grandson Obama are the anti-christ. The democrats want to us to be the USSR V2. Joe Biden does NOT have hair plugs.
Did I miss anything?
Follow
Befriend (1)
3 threads
36 comments
WEALTH INEQUALITY CAN BE GOOD OR BAD.
WEALTH EQUALITY IS ALWAYS BAD.
Some people are inferior athletes, inferior models, inferior thinkers, and some are inferior supporters of civilization. Giving wealth to inept persons causes consumption without creation and consolidates power without responsibility, the economy shrinks, and poverty and cruelty expand. It has been proven by economic research, duh! Equality can only happen at the lowest level of quality. You feminized bleeding hearts won't make derelicts or yourselves more; you may only strip quality people from realizing their potential and overshadowing you.
Here is a chance for some of you to read something intelligent from wikipedia for a change:
The ugly truth is that nature recycles all of us, but inferior individuals are meant to go first. If they don't, the whole of society must go. That's the way it is. Sorry, mental wusses.
Follow
Befriend (3)
15 threads
5,606 comments
antifeminist says
So, mental wusses comment aside, what exactly are you arguing? Your research suggests that extreme wealth inequality is harmful to an economy, right?
Follow
Befriend (1)
3 threads
36 comments
EightBall says
This is from NASA, EightBall:
Titan's Surface Organics Surpass Oil Reserves on Earth
Saturn's orange moon Titan has hundreds of times more liquid hydrocarbons than all the known oil and natural gas reserves on Earth, according to new data from NASA's Cassini spacecraft. The hydrocarbons rain from the sky, collecting in vast deposits that form lakes and dunes.
Source: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/cassini/media/cassini-20080213.html
If anyone wants an intelligent opinion, do some actual research or ask me first. Oh, I know, there were dinosaurs on Titan until 65 million years ago. I think you missed that, 8ball.
Follow
Befriend (48)
272 threads
12,446 comments
47 male
Lafayette, CA
Premium
Can this place possibly get more bizarre?
Why are extreme screwballs almost always from the right?
Follow
Befriend
12 threads
495 comments
antifeminist says
How can you believe NASA when they faked the moon landings? Huh? Tell me some of THAT! They just make cool video games and spend all of our money on donuts and Red Bull. Perhaps you want to go to Titan and bring some of that hydro-carbon back so I can put it in my gas tank and generate some more global warming?
Follow
Befriend (1)
3 threads
36 comments
iwog says
Hilter was from the left (National Socialists = Nazi). Lenin and Trotsky were from the left (Communists). They facilitated the slaughter of more than 12 million people. Maybe you are a screwball?
Follow
Befriend (1)
3 threads
36 comments
EightBall says
I'm not here for Troll patrol. Your vacuous intellect is rather boring and sad.
Follow
Befriend (48)
272 threads
12,446 comments
47 male
Lafayette, CA
Premium
antifeminist says
I'm talking about the screwballs inhabiting this little website. Your belief in inorganic synthesis of fossil fuels on earth is fringe nonsense that is rejected by every scientific journal in the world.
Not because of scientific bigotry, but because the science is SO BAD that it would be torn to shreds and would discredit the journal.
I'm not really surprised you've swallowed it however.
Follow
Befriend
35 threads
5,700 comments
Bellingham, WA
>Hilter was from the left (National Socialists = Nazi)
Your understanding of the history of early 20th century Germany leaves a lot to be desired. The actual Left in Germany tried their hardest to fight against the Nazis, banning the NSDAP outright for a while. The communist party had been banned in turn by the time the Enabling Act of 1933 came up to a vote, and it was left to the SDP (German Socialist Party) to vote against it. The centrist party (Zentrum) gave the Nazis the votes they needed to erect the fascist state.
Otto Wels, leader of the SDP speaking in the Assembly:
"At this historic hour, we German Social Democrats pledge ourselves to the principles of humanity and justice, of freedom and Socialism. No Enabling Law can give you the power to destroy ideas which are eternal and indestructible ... From this new persecution too German Social Democracy can draw new strength. We send greetings to the persecuted and oppressed. We greet our friends in the Reich. Their steadfastness and loyalty deserve admiration. The courage with which they maintain their convictions and their unbroken confidence guarantee a brighter future."
For you to think Hitler was a leftist is just indicative of how much of a fucktard you really are. The NSDAP was basically a coopting of the Leftist movement, and Hitler had to do the Night of the Long Knives in 1934 to purge the remnants of the social left from the NSDAP.
Follow
Befriend (1)
3 threads
36 comments
So what your saying is that Hitler was on the left, but he wasn't your guy on the left. Socialism is on the left. Duh.
Follow
Befriend
35 threads
5,700 comments
Bellingham, WA
No, Hitler was in bed with the Right in Germany. The FAR RIGHT that owned the country and the conservative militarists. He was never a leftist in practice whatever bullshit he was talking about socialism. Hitler actually banned the actual political left in Germany as one of his first acts of unchecked executive power, even before he was made Fuehrer in 1934.
The one exception to this is the KdF http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strength_Through_Joy programs. These were by any definition socialist, but were very small in the scheme of things.
> Duh
That's about all you got.
Follow
Befriend (48)
272 threads
12,446 comments
47 male
Lafayette, CA
Premium
antifeminist says
I get it now! What you NAME your government means EVERYTHING while what the government actually DOES isn't important at all.
How silly of me antifeministbigot! I was so confused. It's obvious that the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (North Korea) is both Democratic AND a Republic, and is therefore a shining example to the rest of the world of democracy in action.
Phew! For a minute there you almost sounded crazy.
Follow
Befriend
40 threads
2,652 comments
Bill Gates was never poor; his father was a wealthy lawyer. It's a really terrible argument. Almost as dumb as saying that the nazis were leftists.
Follow
Befriend
12 threads
495 comments
antifeminist says
So why are you here? I only threw out the bait - you took it hook...line...and sinker with your "oil-isn't-fossil-fuel" comments. It was blatantly obvious to everyone but you that I was poking fun at your comments yet you felt it your duty to correct me and show everyone how much smarter you are than the rest of the world. Did you have to search wikipedia for your answer or do you have that one bookmarked? The Hitler comments were to be expected from someone who is obviously a long time member of Mensa. I'm surprised that someone with such a high intellect hasn't brought up his insights as to why Obama shouldn't be president because he wasn't born in Hawaii.
Follow
Befriend (41)
91 threads
1,806 comments
Back to the topic: "Is the Estate Tax a Just Policy"? Stealing from the dead, or the dead's heirs, is not an upright and honest thing to do. Its not a just, fitting or proper activety for busybody politicians to be engaged in. Am I the only one who wonders how those political creeps can sleep at night? Ugh.
Follow
Befriend (9)
120 threads
2,591 comments
Burbank, CA
Honest Abe says
Elitists never have trouble sleeping because their consciences have been seared with a hot iron. Furthermore, why should we surprised when they want to rob the dead? Maybe they feel the dead owe them something being they continue to allow them to vote?
Follow
Befriend
12 threads
495 comments
Honest Abe says
Lunesta
Honest Abe says
I agree with you, but the average Joe doesn't pay inheritance taxes. Old people spend all their money on health care and bingo. What sucks is when a small business is involved. While it might be worth a lot on paper, the taxes can put it out of business. That is just wrong.
Follow
Befriend (3)
15 threads
5,606 comments
RayAmerica says
So you value the dead more than the living? Because those are your two choices for collecting taxes. If I'm a politician, it's an easy decision--the dead don't vote. (except in Chicago, anyway)
Follow
Befriend (48)
272 threads
12,446 comments
47 male
Lafayette, CA
Premium
Honest Abe says
So what......we steal from dead people and they are going to wake up from the dead and hunt us and eat our brains?
I think the estate tax is the most ethical tax there is. What a more fitting tribute than to reward the nation that allowed you to accumulate so much wealth? Do you really think that someone born in a 3rd world nation has the same opportunities and protects as someone born here? You don't think that at the end of your life you might owe something back?
Heirs were not responsible for earning the money, therefore allowing them to receive 50% is more than generous. I can't imagine any argument that tries to assert the estate tax is unfair to someone who is already dead. I think it's silly.
Follow
Befriend (41)
91 threads
1,806 comments
Iwog..."the death tax is the most ethical tax there is", you said that, right? Well, that says a lot about you. The opposite of slavery is freedom. The freedom to work, the freedom to earn, the freedom to keep what one earns (other than the cost of police, teachers, firemen, and a limited amount of etc.) To take what one earned through their own labor is the same as taking away their freedom...which you've never had a problem with.
If the heirs are not entitled to the money, why would a stranger, or group of strangers, be MORE ENTITLED to receive the same money? You're one screwed up dude. Your neurosis is evident by your claims of entitlement. You rant against economic freedom and have an arrogant contempt for morality. While pretending to be self-righteous, you and your liberal buddies continue your aggressive assault on freedom and liberty, slowly tearing our country apart. You have a psychotic obsession of using government force against others. I'm sorry for your childhood failures and problems, whatever they were, which have turned you into such a cold, selfish and bitter person.
Follow
Befriend (8)
203 threads
4,403 comments
Davis, CA
Honest Abe says
Do dead people work in your world?
Reminds me of people claiming how infinite copyright terms spurred artists. How motivated is Dickens to write a new story right now?
Follow
Befriend (48)
272 threads
12,446 comments
47 male
Lafayette, CA
Premium
Honest Abe says
The United States of America is not a group of strangers. It is the nation that made it possible for him to make the money in the first place. Ethical rich people like Warren Buffett talk about this all the time.
You think heirs are ENTITLED to receive money they didn't work for? Why? Because you think the genetic lottery trumps all? I think Heirs should be allowed to receive whatever money the dead person willed them to receive AFTER 50% has been deducted for the public good. To protect a small family business, (which is almost always administered before death so nearly a moot point) I also agree with the $1 million exclusion.
The $7 billion left to heirs in Texas, MOST of which consisted of capital gains and was never taxed at all, is an abomination that should make any patriotic American wretch. Here's a man who made a huge fortune by employing Americans, selling to Americans, and being protected by Americans. It is OUTRAGEOUS that he never paid a cent in taxes on most of it.
How does a Monopoly game end Abe? You avoided the question before, so please answer it now.
Follow
Befriend (48)
272 threads
12,446 comments
47 male
Lafayette, CA
Premium
Honest Abe says
Desperate to make the conversation about me? (again)
Follow
Befriend
4 threads
2,095 comments
The $7 billion left to heirs in Texas, MOST of which consisted of capital gains and was never taxed at all, is an abomination that should make any patriotic American wretch.
Easy ducky. Just because you got to step up the basis of you know what (AND keep the old tax basis) doesn't mean that it's still the law of the land. Carry-over basis (with a limited exemption amount) now rules the roost in the land of no death taxes . See this:
But as a trade-off for what lawmakers presumed would be a repealed estate tax, heirs this year face a very different set of rules, known as carry-over basis. Now, they will have to pay capital gains tax on the difference between their sale price and the asset’s value when the decedent acquired it. Long term capital gains at 15% -- okay, I'm wretching...
Follow
Befriend (1)
104 threads
2,851 comments
Honest Abe says
That was a sweet rant. My favorite part was where he accused Iwog and his imaginary "buddies" of assaulting freedom. Paris Hilton appreciates all you do for her. You can donate to via her fan website to help ease her pain.
It's become impossible for me to take this website seriously anymore. It's almost entirely wingnuts, moonbats, and birthers.
Follow
Befriend (5)
166 threads
5,053 comments
Nomograph says
I agree. Way too busy and too tired to be the slightest bit amused by our very own world class ________ .
Follow
Befriend (5)
166 threads
5,053 comments
I now have Ray, Abe and anti-intelligence on ignore. And if a thread has them in it, and they are suckering someone in to arguing with them, I'm just going to tune it out. I'm sure as the midterms get closer, Ray is going to up his posts to 5 a day or something. Good, I hope he and his anger have fun.
Ray and Abe are great, no scratch that, truly awesome Americans.
Follow
Befriend (25)
413 threads
6,976 comments
Saint George, UT
elliemae's website
marcus says
...who should get a room.
Follow
Befriend
40 threads
2,652 comments
RayAmerica says
Do you even know what the term "elitist" means?
EightBall says
So incorporate and avoid the problem.
Wealthy families do this all the time. You'd be surprised who is listed as the owner of various personal assets of rich people.
Follow
Befriend
12 threads
495 comments
Kevin says
True there are ways around it - first-gens don't normally think that far ahead though and this is where the sob stories generally come into play. If there weren't so many loopholes (or none at all), the rate could probably be dropped to 15% or something less obscene and the revenue would be higher (pure conjecture here). I'm sure the poster-child Paris Hilton won't be paying much in taxes ... the low end doesn't pay any taxes at all ... and the people in the middle once again get clobbered.
Also, a small business in Miami, OH would probably be valued differently (hence taxed differently) than in Miami, FL. I see the same problem with progressive income tax rates being "national" but the cost of living is drastically different from state to state, county to county, and city to city.
Follow
Befriend (41)
91 threads
1,806 comments
Throwing money at a problem is rarely the solution. Stealing from the dead won't help the poor. It will just give more money to politicans so they can squander it. Money the politicans didn't earn. The whole concept is dirty. Why not live within a budget, and not do any grave-robbing? Or is that too honorable for politicans?
Follow
Befriend
2 threads
2,495 comments
EightBall says
This is a load of crap. Small business don't have over a million of dollars (the exemption amount in 2011 without a change in the law) in NET worth laying around to be taxed on the death of the owner. What small business owner leaves that kind of money sitting in the business doing nothing? It can be invested in growing the business further or taken out and invested. Very few owners of small businesses work until the day they die. The business is almost always passed on in an orderly (or not depending on the family) manner to family members or sold long before it becomes an estate issue.
This issue is just a lot of political posturing by congresscritters who are getting massive campaign contributions from people who will save huge amounts of money with the repeal of the estate tax. Studies have been done and the fact is that the estate tax is not stripping away family farms and businesses.
Not that facts matter to the idealogues who only have an emotional response to everything but factcheck has a pretty good, although somewhat out of date, analysis of the issue:
http://www.factcheck.org/article328.html
Follow
Befriend (41)
91 threads
1,806 comments
Bob2468 - based on your comment "What small business owner leaves that kind of money sitting around doing nothing?", I must conclude you are not a business owner. Am I right?
Follow
Befriend (48)
272 threads
12,446 comments
47 male
Lafayette, CA
Premium
Honest Abe says
I'm a business owner and I can honestly say that a $1 million exemption would save nearly every small business in town. You'd have entire city blocks that would not be touched.
Bob is absolutely correct. Not only would most businesses be 100% protected for the heirs, but in the case of a company that is worth more than $1 million, there would be plenty of buyers who would simply buy the company out of probate and continue to run it with all the jobs intact.
Furthermore a small business worth over $1 million and NOT incorporated is almost unheard of. Certainly no attorney or CPA is going to advise an operation with $10 million in gross sales (typical $1 million operation) be run as a sole proprietorship. The entire argument is disingenuous and absurd.
Nearly every argument supporting the estate tax repeal is a lie.
Follow
Befriend
2 threads
2,495 comments
Honest Abe says
I have been a business owner, I sold a very nice going computer business many years ago (enough years ago that we were selling wordstar and cpm) to just do just do freelance work. Lifestyle choice. I certainly wouldn't leave a over a million dollars in assets sitting in the company. I have had hundreds of small business clients over the years. I have never seen one that had a NET value high enough to crack the million dollar exemption.
Are you saying that you really have over a million dollars in free and clear assets sitting in your family business or are you just busting my stones?