Nissan 370Z Tech Forums banner

61 - 71 of 71 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,866 Posts
Smooth kicked this off by posting an article that ostensibly was about the concentration of wealth, which is a topic I find fairly interesting from an historical and political standpoint. It now has devolved into a discussion about taxation schemes, a topic I have very little interest in.

As far as you being disappointed goes...
You're still young, you have plenty of time to get used to disappointment. :lol:

-Ronin Z
So what is your take on the estate tax? It only affects the "wealthy" and is supposedly designed to keep the concentration of wealth from remaining in a family which would allow the family survivors to create even more wealth, even though the survivors did nothing to accumulate it - at least that is one major argument for it. Yea, or nay?
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
4,328 Posts
So what is your take on the estate tax? It only affects the "wealthy" and is supposedly designed to keep the concentration of wealth from remaining in a family which would allow the family survivors to create even more wealth, even though the survivors did nothing to accumulate it - at least that is one major argument for it. Yea, or nay?
Historically speaking, you are correct. The estate tax (death tax to conservatives, Paris Hilton tax to me:lol:)was conceived to prevent concentrations of wealth and the formation of dynastic families. Back in the founding days of this country, land and wealth were synonymous. That being the case, every single one of the original colonies forbid in their constitutions the creation of laws of entail or primogeniture. Primogeniture is the age old tradition that all of your property automatically went to your oldest male child upon death. And "entail" is basically leaving somebody land with strings attached. Strings like you can never sell it, or give it away, or that it must remain in the family forever... and so on. North Carolina passed a law in 1784 that began: "And whereas entails of estates tends only to raise the wealth and importance of particular families and individuals, giving them an unequal and undue influence in a republic, and prove in manifold instances the source of great contention and injustice." This was way radical stuff in it's day.

So has it worked? Doesn't seem so to me. It's just an additional revenue stream now. And that's really all I can say about the estate tax. It doesn't effect me, or 95% of Americans. Nor does it effect the vast majority of "family farms", like the talking points want you to believe. As I've said before, taxation is not my preferred subject.

-Ronin Z
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,866 Posts
Hard to argue against a Paris Hilton tax. In her case, it is better that it affects her father.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
35,304 Posts
Discussion Starter #64
You know, I thought this thread was about the top 1% earners in this country and how money seems to be a motivating factor in life now. Please don't make this into a tax issue and what's fair or not. The tax issue is too complicated. On that we can agree.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,254 Posts
I've never understood why people on forums are so against a thread evolving.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,254 Posts
For sure, I just thought that this thread was going well. :dunno:

In this day and age, I don't think you can discuss income disparity without getting into taxation. That's why I didn't think it was a hijack. Anyway...carry on...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,866 Posts
For sure, I just thought that this thread was going well. :dunno:

In this day and age, I don't think you can discuss income disparity without getting into taxation. That's why I didn't think it was a hijack. Anyway...carry on...
I too thought that is what it generally comes down to - the wealthy not paying their fair share. But if this is only about the unfairness of others being able to achieve super wealth, then those who are proposing that will never get my vote. Not only is it fair to allow folks to become stinking rich, it is part of the American Way.
My apologies for contributing to the hijack......
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,469 Posts

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

...found this on another political forum.


160.7 BILLION PROFIT

5 TRILLION BAILOUT

5 BILLION TAX CREDITS AND REFUNDS

ALMOST ZERO TAXES PAID

Many of the coments posted echoed "compaines too big to fail" and "accountants would see nothing wrong with this".

Technically I guess finding and using tax loopholes is legal. To me, the intent seems criminal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,254 Posts

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

...found this on another political forum.


160.7 BILLION PROFIT

5 TRILLION BAILOUT

5 BILLION TAX CREDITS AND REFUNDS

ALMOST ZERO TAXES PAID

Many of the coments posted echoed "compaines too big to fail" and "accountants would see nothing wrong with this".

Technically I guess finding and using tax loopholes is legal. To me, the intent seems criminal.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
35,304 Posts
Discussion Starter #71
:jerry:

I'm with Kenny and Steve and Brent.... nothing wrong with working hard to have a comfortable life and buy yourself some toys. If it can be done, then go for it.

My original point is that a lot of people seem intent on becoming filthy rich at any cost because they are succumbing to the idea that being filthy rich is important and is a status symbol that must be flaunted, i.e. Donald 'Douchebag' Trump.
 
61 - 71 of 71 Posts
Top