Tax the rich!!!

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Dauphin
FWIW it can be considered to be a tax at a 0% banding.

Then it can in the case that you have $2000 in the bank when you die, too

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
No, you become rich by getting others to work hard for you.

How is being an effective manager not a useful skill, even in some State-run system? Don't you want people who are effective at getting others to perform their tasks well?

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by GePap
You won't pay income taxes, you will pay payroll taxes.

If you die and leave no estate-there is no tax, ergho, and this should be obvious even to you, its not a "death tax".

If you have income but not enough, there is no tax (besides the payroll tax), so clearly it's not an "income" tax, since it doesn't always happen even when you have income.

[KrazyHorse]

That's the most idiotic argument I've ever heard you make, skywalker.

The estate tax is based entirely on the amount of estate you leave, just like the income tax is based entirely on how much income you have. Just because you are taxed at 0% on the first X dollars of income and are taxed at 0% on the first Y dollars of estate doesn't mean that they aren't income taxes and estate taxes respectively.

Calling the estate tax a death tax is like calling the income tax a head tax.

Normal person: It's an income tax because it's based entirely around the amount of income you have

Idiot: But they don't take anything away from the first 3000$ so it can't be an income tax. I think it's a head tax because only people with heads are taxed. Down with headless tyranny.

Normal person:

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
How is being an effective manager not a useful skill,

That's not what you said. You said getting rich was a result of working hard. It's not.

[Arrian]

Originally posted by Kidicious


Oh it's broken?


Let me save you all some trouble. I never said that I would punish dissent. I said I would punish those who obstucted the govt as it commandeered the means of production. There is a difference between dissent and obstruction.

That's not what I was searching for. I was searching for the posts you made about how capitalists were lazy and evil exploiters who did nothing but get rich off the work of others. Vel was the one who was on about dissent.

I actually searched through 300 pages of OT archive. I found several of our commie/capitalist threads, but I'm tired of it now and I still hadn't gone back far enough to find the original thread where you, Vel and I had our first big debate. That's where your hatred of the rich was crystal clear. Now that I know I can start at page 300 and go back, I can find it more easily if I want to bother this afternoon.

For now, I'll give you a post from a much more recent thread (around page 100 of the archive):

This country was built on hard work and the land was stolen. Capitalists didn't do any of it. The sat on their fat asses. - 21-10-2003 23:31

That's mild compared to the original thread, if my memory doesn't deceive me. Your basic starting premise was that capitalists (business owners, etc) were lazy, did no REAL work, and just got fat off of the labor of others. Hence my mocking post several pages ago, to which you got all defensive.

I really don't see why you're pretending you aren't "classist" - you're a communist! Communism is about class struggle! For a commie, being classist is a good thing, isn't it??

-Arrian

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


How is being an effective manager not a useful skill, even in some State-run system? Don't you want people who are effective at getting others to perform their tasks well?

As usual you haven't argued against his point.

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by GePap


You won't pay income taxes, you will pay payroll taxes.

If you die and leave no estate-there is no tax, ergho, and this should be obvious even to you, its not a "death tax".

I think that a semantic argument. If you don't earn money you don't pay income tax, if you don't sell anything you don't owe sales tax, if you don't make a capital gain you don't pay capital gains tax. If you don't die you don't get your estate taxed. Obviously you'll die eventually and leave things to your family and friends, but if you gift most of it several years before death you don't pay estate tax. Sure you may owe gift taxes, but that is not a death estate tax and is calculated in a different manner. For one, threshold limits and exemptions are different.

Of course, as its purely semantic (imho) I don't really care if people call it a death tax, or estate tax, or *insert the blank* tax, it just reveals their view of the tax.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Arrian
For now, I'll give you a post from a much more recent thread (around page 100 of the archive):

I need the link so that I can defend myself.

Originally posted by Arrian
Your basic starting premise was that capitalists (business owners, etc) were lazy, did no REAL work, and just got fat off of the labor of others.

Owning a business or sitting around deciding how to invest money is not hard work. That was my point. I didn't mean to say that just because you own some capital you are lazy.

[Arrian]

If and when I find the thread I was actually looking for, I'll be sure to copy the link and paste it here. I'm NOT going back to find the link for the quote I posted above, simply because it's not worth the effort. Feel free to ignore it, then. Or, if you're up for some not-so-hard (but time consuming) work, go find it yourself. It's around page 100 of the archive. It was your "profit is unfair tax" thread.

-Arrian

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
Calling the estate tax a death tax is like calling the income tax a head tax.

Or, its also like calling a tax on profits a corporation tax.

There are quite a few taxes that are misnomers, sometimes you need to ignore what its called.

[KrazyHorse]

Yes, calling the tax on corporate profits a corporate tax is a misnomer.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by GePap


why is it so hard for you to understand some basic truths?

The dead are not being taxed-their estate is being taxed, since it is a transfer of wealth, and transfer of wealth are taxed. Insofar as estates are taxed, only by far the biggest estates are taxed-no one who ever gets money from a estate that actually had to pay the estate tax will go hungry, specially if they are the sole recipients. This is doen based on a policy decision that would rpefer to avoid the mass accumulation of extreme wealth in a few small hands without simply prohibiting the passing on of money.

So stop misconstruing the tax. Its an ESTATE tax, not a tax on dying. If you die with $2000 in the bank, not a penny of that will be taxed. So it most obviously is NOt a tax on dying. Stop lying.

Since you quoted me, I'll respond even though I doubt you read what you quoted. I didn't call it a "death tax" or a "estate tax ' in that quote and frankly I don't care what you call it. Nomenclature is irrelevent; its the purpose and effect that matter.

With all tax, I accept that I have to pay my "fair share" ( whatever the heck that means". I always thought flat taxes where everyone paid the same proportion were fair but I can accept that the higher income earners should shoulder a bit more of the burden . . . so a bit of grauation in the rates is ok by me but when they start taking close to 50% of every additional dollar thats too much-- Why is it too much for me?? Thats my personal; threshold where it becomes not worth the work and effort to work more . I just find higher rates offensive to the ideas that effort get rerwarded.


As I said before, I don't care that I am dead when a tax on wealth accumulation (whatever you call it) is applied. Currently my wealth ( such as it is) would be used to support my wife and child. If I died 10 minutes from now, their need for that support would be undiminished. Insurance helps but they also have to cope with the loss of my incomewhich they had hoped to have for 20 more years. Quite frankly a high tax would put them in a hard way. And I assume all along we have been talking a high tax since most of the proponent's arguments and justifications make no sense if we are talking just a little 1% tax or something. Note that rates along ther lines of 0.4% were applied in many Canadian jurisdictions for years as "probate fees" by the courts

So I'm dead and I shouldn't care what you do to my estate?? What planet are you guys on? I work hard for my family and you tell me that its ok to take my stuff since my wife and child haven't earned it themselves. . .. that this is fine since the person that earned the wealth is dead? .. . BULLCRAP!!!

I also just don't think these types of taxes work that well in the real world . The bottom line on these taxes is the truly rich will move the bulk of their wealth to another jurisdiction, have corporations own their homes that remain in the taxing jurisdiction, and place some value in higly liquid and untraceable forms like gems and place those in other jurisdictions. Thats not even going into structures like trusts where millions can be held but not form part of any individual's personal wealth. I'm not a tax expert but I can think of many many ways to avoid a tax on wealth

[KrazyHorse]

However, at least the "corporate tax" is actually called that. By saying it I'm not seeking to relabel it. Those who call the estate tax the "death tax" are seeking to relabel it and thus must have a compelling reason for doing so (other than the fact that they dislike the tax)

If this had been an argument about calling it the "corporate profit tax" then I would have been agnostic...

[JohnT]

Originally posted by Kidicious
Owning a business or sitting around deciding how to invest money is not hard work. That was my point. I didn't mean to say that just because you own some capital you are lazy.

I'm having my first day off since June 27th, and even today I've fielded 7 phone calls about various subjects and made a run to the bank. Clue in to the real world for once, Kid.