Wait, wait, wait...seems to me that your line of reasoning all along is that people in the top XXX have EARNED the money that they have so why should I begrudge them that position. If they EARNED that place then cool, I don't begrudge them that. If however, it was gifted to them then that is competely anti-thetical to an egalitarian society. And I'm in favor of egalitarianism. Not in gauranteeing everyone has the same results but at least in gauranteeing that we all have the same opportunities to succeed. If silverspoons start out already way out in front only by virtue of what mom/dad accomplished then that is effectively oligarchy.
Most of the 1% in America owe much of their fortune to the fact that America chose a long time ago to build infrastructure (with tax dollars), provide for a criminal justice system(with tax dollars), provide for consistent commerce laws (with tax dollars). The 1% that we are talking about derive a HUGE benefit from tax dollars. The guys that own Dr. Pepper benefit substantially more from the highways in this nation than I do. He benefits substantially more from consistent commerce laws than I do. He benefits substantially more from local, state and federal law enforcement than I do. He benefits sustantially more from having thousands of educated employees to leverage their minds, their skills to increase his bottom line. So should CEO that benefits dispropotionately from public schools, law enforcement, stable government and quality infrastructure pay a substantial portion of the cost that are incurred to provide these services? YES. Taxes are how these things are provided. Should you be able to provide some future stability to your child by virtue of your hard work? Yes. I work for it everyday. Should your child be able to sit on their *** for the rest of their life drawing an annuity off of inheritance without ever contributing one iota of ingenuity, thought, or effort? NO. I'm not advocating that every dime of inheritance be stripped away. I have my own opinion of what is reasonable. $750K or so. In my mind, that's roughly equal to a family business, a family farm. something of that ilk.
Suppose a man works his whole lifetime while paying taxes every step of the way, and at the time of his death he still manages to have something left over. Obviously the state and it's ever growing legion of wards should have first claim on those resources rather than the poor guy's heirs! Why do you hate poor people and the government?
Why is it so many of you feel the rich have been put upon and it is somehow your place, even your duty to seek fariness for them. Why is this, especially in light of the growing income disparity?
Oh, it's about fairness, just fairness for all. You can't go around wanting to screw people over, just because they have more than you. Because at some point a person with less than you, will want to screw you over. What are you going to say then? "That's not fair!" Can't have it both ways. I don't begrudge any man, woman or child more than me, as long as it's legal. And there are plenty of opportunities out there for those willing to have more than me.
And you should stop disrespecting the greatness of Satchel and change your name to Mantan, it fits your posting style much better.
If I earn my money legally, my Children's grandchildren should be able to sit on their asses if that is what they want to do. If I work hard and save money, why should it go to other people's kids?
Abolish the income tax altogether. Implement a system wherein the only taxes collected are consumer taxes. The more you buy or consume, the more you pay in taxes. There are no loopholes. They wealthy consume more, therefore they would pay more in taxes. Not percentages, just amounts. The middle class and the poor would only be taxed according to consumption. I'm not sure it can get more fair and equitable than that.
What I learned from this thread- There are two responses to income disparity data and wealth disparity (the two are not the same) data- 1. "I better get to work and start saving and investing. There is a hell of an opportunity in this country." 2. "The system is holding me and my fellows down. The heel of justice should be brougt to bear." I take position #1, myself. I am 47, was born and raised poor, and now am in a high quintile of both income and wealth distribution charts. I see plenty of high income people that are not able to gain wealth, due to consumption habits. I see plenty of people of some wealth (many of them are blue collar union workers) with relatively low incomes (they gained wealth by saving heavily and buying inexpensive rent houses around their industrial plant). This makes me think that any attempt to distribute wealth will, in a couple of years, end up with the same people holding a disproportionate share of it. And the same people, no matter what they are given, lacking two pennies to rub together.
Abolishing the tax code will never happen because it would put too many CPAs and controllers out of work.
In the 90s, AT&T replaced its chairmen with someone who was on the job less than a year and he left with 53 million dollars. Not bad work if you can get it.
Sure are a lot of socialist coming out of the wood work. Let us see I start a business save 10 mill and my family gets 750k and the gov gets 9.25 mill to put in its coffers. Why not just take it all, talk about a disinsentive to save. Of course the author of this suggestion probably is on some gov program.
"when they don't need it" is just one of the idiotic statements commonly thrown around by the Left. So, how much of your 100k plus salary do you need PharmD? I am sure the lowest paid tech in your pharmacy makes a little more than minimum wage and they "get by." Maybe CEO's decided during high school that they would study harder? Maybe the same CEO's decided they would work and borrow money to go to college? Maybe they then studied harder and made great grades so they could go to graduate school? When they got out, maybe they started working 70 hour per week jobs? Maybe they then worked harder and continued towards professional certifications? Now, they work 16-18 hours a day under extreme stress only to be told, "hey, you do not need to make so much because you need to supplement those who decided a long time ago to just suck on someone else's tit." So please, give us all a break when telling others what "they need" as long as you make anything more than someone else...
You took that in a whole new direction huh? I never said I favor giving rich people's money to the poor. On the contrary, I think there should be a lifetime cap on welfare or unemployment payments to any one individual. We'll help you over a bump or two but if you're a perpetual lazy *** then sorry for you. I don't even favor higher tax rates on the current high income earners. As someone eluded to earlier, income mobility is the greatest gift we have. The ability to start poor and make good choices is the greatness of capitalism. The **** side of capitalism is that wealth can be so hugely transferred from one generation down to multiple successive generations and those 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th gens haven't done anything to have earned it. I simply believe we all should have earn our way in the world. No one, whether through government program or the mommy/daddy program should be able to sit comfotably on their butts their whole lives without having done something productive to be there. I have kids and want to give them a great start also but I also believe that a country must have income to do its business. In my opinion an inheritance tax is the best place to tax because it allows people the income mobility (that in turn spurs their individual efforts) during their lifetime. And it gives every generation the incentive to produce something. I prefer inheritance tax over increased capital gains tax, and over increasing the top rate on the upper bracket. But I also prefer a cleaner tax code that doesn't allow corporations and CEOs to deduct their yacht as a second home, it doesn't allow them to put 50 cows on their country estate and get an ag exemption.
But the lottery winner risked their own money (not mom and dads inheritance) to win. As I said before, I don't begrudge the Gates and Buffets of the world. That is exactly the type we need more of and our system should be structured to encourage this behavior. But I do begrudge the Bush/Kennedy/Rockefellar types who arrive in life already annointed with wealth, power well beyond what they have EARNED. Starting life out with $750K inheritance is a damned sight better than the vast majority of Americans will ever get. If they can't use that to build something for themselves then they probably aren't worth much anyway. Note: my 750K is the number for the recipient, not the giver. So if my family business is worth 10 mil, then it would need to be split between some other entities. And yes, I get that could effect the control of some businesses. So what, make a plan for that. You're probably right about the ag exemption but I don't really care if gets other people too. Hell, I bought a truck five years ago taking advantage of some crazy tax law that let me deduct it on my business. That may sound hypocritical but I will gladly admit that as an individual I will seek my advantage in most cases. But that's the point, there are certain incentives that we have to do away with based on an acknowledgment that it is better for the country as opposed to better for my personal pocketbook. If my truck incentive goes away I can live with it (so long as it goes away for everyone). I feel that government should be very limited. I think we spend too much. I think there should be a basic income tax rate that is lower than it is now for everyone. I think that there should be a sales tax that effects everyone the same. But there should also be an inheritance tax that doesn't allow people to receive so much money that they never have to get out of bed. And maybe my $750K is not the right number. I really couldn't tell you what the average family farm, or family business is worth. But the underlying sentiment is that no one should get a complete pass in life. Everyone needs to do something productive. That, IMHO, is the essence of this country. You work hard and make good decisions. You reap the benefits. I think massive inheritance is a perversion of that idea.
Surely you realize that many people save so their kids can have a better way of life. What exactly would you do with the other peoples money? Why would anyone save more than 750k under your draconian plan? I would go over seas and spend it all just to screw your kind of thinking people.
