100% Estate Tax (a/k/a Levelling the Playing Field)

[thegreekdog]

So, I've been thinking about this for a couple of months based on something a friend said about the post-colonial United States. Essentially, my friend was under the impression that part of the purpose of the United States was that it would not be a feudal society (at least in the sense of people passing their castles down to their sons). However, it is pretty common knowledge that before they die, rich people in the United States can pass their estates to their children (or anyone else) virtually tax free (with proper planning).

Therefore, in order to close the gap between rich and poor, the haves and the have-nots, I propose that we set a no loophole 100% estate tax. When someone dies, 100% of their liquid estate (cash and intangible investments) goes to the government. All tangible personal property and real property can still be passed down except for investment property, which goes to the federal government and is sold at auction with the proceeds going to the federal government.

I suspect that this type of system would rid us of people like the Kardashians and the Hiltons, while providing our government with much needed cash.

Thoughts?

[lgoasklucyl]

I know it's not even remotely feasible, but (hypothetically) how do you feel about max/min salary caps nationwide to even the gap (ie: instead of making 350 billion dollars a month; maximum salaries linger in the low millions (I know... boohoo, who could live on such a measly sum!))?

[Frigidus]

I know it's not even remotely feasible, but (hypothetically) how do you feel about max/min salary caps nationwide to even the gap (ie: instead of making 350 billion dollars a month; maximum salaries linger in the low millions (I know... boohoo, who could live on such a measly sum!))?

I'm on board with that, and on an escalating estate tax. The more you have the higher percentage that is taxed.

[thegreekdog]

I know it's not even remotely feasible, but (hypothetically) how do you feel about max/min salary caps nationwide to even the gap (ie: instead of making 350 billion dollars a month; maximum salaries linger in the low millions (I know... boohoo, who could live on such a measly sum!))?

I completely disagree with government caps on salaries. I find it nauseating that people would even consider that.

[Johnny Rockets]

But your o.k. with handing over to the goverment the sum of my successes over my entire lifetime?

Instead of a salery cap, they should have a personal weath cap of 50 million. No one needs more than that.

Johnny Rockets

[thegreekdog]

But your o.k. with handing over to the goverment the sum of my successes over my entire lifetime?

Instead of a salery cap, they should have a personal weath cap of 50 million. No one needs more than that.

Johnny Rockets

Making money by working/investing is entirely different than getting money by being born. The former is capitalism, the latter is an hereditary system.

The sum of the successes of your entire lifetime are yours, not your childrens'.

[bedub1]

This is the dumbest idea ever. Then the objective will be to completely drain all your accounts buy buying your kids shit before you die. Horrible, horrible idea. Get your hands off other peoples money, and go work for it yourself. The arrogance of people to think that other peoples money is in fact their money, and they deserve it because they don't have as much is just stupid. Why don't you just go steal kids Halloween candy?

[thegreekdog]

Yay... I've never had the privilege of arguing with bedub1 before.

Then the objective will be to completely drain all your accounts buy buying your kids shit before you die.

So? That's a good thing dude. Sales taxes, property taxes, not to mention income tax implications to your kids. All revenue raisers (plus the kid gets the shit).

The arrogance of people to think that other peoples money is in fact their money, and they deserve it because they don't have as much is just stupid. Why don't you just go steal kids Halloween candy?

Since when did Paris Hilton earn any of her daddy's money? This is my entire point. These children (and spouses) didn't actually earn the motherf*cking money, thus they don't deserve it. They can work hard like everyone else to get their own loot.

A 100% tax on estates is the ultimate in capitalism.

[bedub1]

Yay... I've never had the privilege of arguing with bedub1 before.

Then the objective will be to completely drain all your accounts buy buying your kids shit before you die.

So? That's a good thing dude. Sales taxes, property taxes, not to mention income tax implications to your kids. All revenue raisers (plus the kid gets the shit).

The arrogance of people to think that other peoples money is in fact their money, and they deserve it because they don't have as much is just stupid. Why don't you just go steal kids Halloween candy?

Since when did Paris Hilton earn any of her daddy's money? This is my entire point. These children (and spouses) didn't actually earn the motherf*cking money, thus they don't deserve it. They can work hard like everyone else to get their own loot.

A 100% tax on estates is the ultimate in capitalism.

Yes, but her PARENTS earned it, and as it is their money, they can do what they want with it. I've heard of many many very rich families where the parents refuse to give their kids all their money because they know it will ruin them, and instead give it all away to a charity. That is their CHOICE. There is a difference between the government stealing something, and people voluntarily giving it away. I'm for CHOICES, not for forcing people to do something.

And what do you think happens when the kids get the money? I bet they buy stuff, so there you get your sales taxes, property taxes etc...

[2dimes]

So the father who owns the corporations gives their kids a cushy job earning tons of money, you even agreed there can't be a wage cap. Then when dad dies and the assets go to government auction they can afford to buy back the stuff and we try to think of another way to get some of the wealth between shifts at McDonalds.

What changed?

[thegreekdog]

So the father who owns the corporations gives their kids a cushy job earning tons of money, you even agreed there can't be a wage cap. Then when dad dies and the assets go to government auction they can afford to buy back the stuff and we try to think of another way to get some of the wealth between shifts at McDonalds.

What changed?

The government can tax the living sh!t out of the kid's income (and the dad's income). There is no way on Satan's green earth that the government would ever want a cap on incomes. A cap on incomes means a cap on taxes.

Also, if someone is going to pay a dude $300 billion a month to do something, that someone is either a jackass or the dude makes that someone a sh!tload more money. In sum, there's a reason that person gets paid $300 billion a month and you're working at McDonald's.

[alex951]

The arrogance of people to think that other peoples money is in fact their money, and they deserve it because they don't have as much is just stupid. Why don't you just go steal kids Halloween candy?

co-sign

a very stupid idea

[2dimes]

In sum, there's a reason that person gets paid $300 billion a month and you're working at McDonald's.

I agree, it's because someone they are related to gave them a job. Example, Paris Hilton.

Or did you get a job making $300 billion a month based on your education and experience? Congratulations are in order I guess.

[thegreekdog]

In sum, there's a reason that person gets paid $300 billion a month and you're working at McDonald's.

I agree, it's because someone they are related to gave them a job. Example, Paris Hilton.

Or did you get a job making $300 billion a month based on your education and experience? Congratulations are in order I guess.

As I said, there's a rather large difference between daddy paying his little daughter $300 million a month (and the federal government taxing that amount) and daddy bequeathing $300 million to his little daughter (and the federal government taxing $0 because the loot is in a trust or some other estate planning vehicle).

[PLAYER57832]

In sum, there's a reason that person gets paid $300 billion a month and you're working at McDonald's.

I agree, it's because someone they are related to gave them a job. Example, Paris Hilton.

Or did you get a job making $300 billion a month based on your education and experience? Congratulations are in order I guess.

As I said, there's a rather large difference between daddy paying his little daughter $300 million a month (and the federal government taxing that amount) and daddy bequeathing $300 million to his little daughter (and the federal government taxing $0 because the loot is in a trust or some other estate planning vehicle).

Seems what you are objecting to is the tax breaks, not the income.

Bottom line .. no one EARNS $300,000,000.

That said, people are more motivated by being able to do things for their kids and others than for themselves. (true for most people, even if not always apparent... and not true for everyone, of course).

I don't agree with a straight income cap, for a lot of reasons. I do agree with controls to ensure that what people take is ONLY true profit.

[thegreekdog]

Actually, this thread is about a 100% tax on estates, not about a cap on income. If you guys want to start another thread on that, I'd be all for it.

[bedub1]

By the way, this doesn't "Level the playing field". Instead, it is "After the game is over, we take the prize from the winner and distribute it amongst the losers."

[Frigidus]

By the way, this doesn't "Level the playing field". Instead, it is "After the game is over, we take the prize from the winner and distribute it amongst the losers."

More like from the cheaters.

[thegreekdog]

By the way, this doesn't "Level the playing field". Instead, it is "After the game is over, we take the prize from the winner and distribute it amongst the losers."

So what, my friend, is the difference between someone being on welfare and someone living off of dead daddy's money? Doesn't that defeat the purpose? Doesn't that also invalidate you any time you make any comment about "working hard" or "working towards the American dream?"

[bedub1]

By the way, this doesn't "Level the playing field". Instead, it is "After the game is over, we take the prize from the winner and distribute it amongst the losers."

So what, my friend, is the difference between someone being on welfare and someone living off of dead daddy's money? Doesn't that defeat the purpose? Doesn't that also invalidate you any time you make any comment about "working hard" or "working towards the American dream?"

Living off welfare is forcing the entire population to pay your bills. Living off daddy's money is living off money that was willingly and purposefully given to you. Can't you tell the difference?

[Khiva]

I think it's a terrible idea, but if I could ask how would it work? No loopholes sounds like well magic, wouldn't the money just go elsewhere? It seems to me if I were rich, barring accidental death, you still wouldn't get a dime you would just somewhat change how, and where I invest.

[thegreekdog]

By the way, this doesn't "Level the playing field". Instead, it is "After the game is over, we take the prize from the winner and distribute it amongst the losers."

So what, my friend, is the difference between someone being on welfare and someone living off of dead daddy's money? Doesn't that defeat the purpose? Doesn't that also invalidate you any time you make any comment about "working hard" or "working towards the American dream?"

Living off welfare is forcing the entire population to pay your bills. Living off daddy's money is living off money that was willingly and purposefully given to you. Can't you tell the difference?

Nope. It's the same thing to me.

As a person who has to work hard, Paris Hilton and her ilk are offensive to me and offensive to true capitalists everywhere.

[Snorri1234]

A 100% tax on estates is the ultimate in capitalism.

Indeed.

[thegreekdog]

I think it's a terrible idea, but if I could ask how would it work? No loopholes sounds like well magic, wouldn't the money just go elsewhere? It seems to me if I were rich, barring accidental death, you still wouldn't get a dime you would just somewhat change how, and where I invest.

Yeah, I guess they could all move to Bermuda or something. Good point.

[bedub1]

By the way, this doesn't "Level the playing field". Instead, it is "After the game is over, we take the prize from the winner and distribute it amongst the losers."

So what, my friend, is the difference between someone being on welfare and someone living off of dead daddy's money? Doesn't that defeat the purpose? Doesn't that also invalidate you any time you make any comment about "working hard" or "working towards the American dream?"

Living off welfare is forcing the entire population to pay your bills. Living off daddy's money is living off money that was willingly and purposefully given to you. Can't you tell the difference?

Nope. It's the same thing to me.

As a person who has to work hard, Paris Hilton and her ilk are offensive to me and offensive to true capitalists everywhere.

Dear god help us all. If you can't see a difference between stealing money and giving money....I have no way to help you are argue with you. I really do feel sorry for you....