Tweet
How abouit birth taxes?
-
Rethink Refuse Reduce Reuse
Do It Ourselves -
I also find the marriage incentive to be unfair. You can save so much money by being married that it is obscenely unfair against those who are not. It's an additional £300k+ nil band to use up, equivalent to over £120k in taxes.Originally posted by East Street Trader
Currently inheritance tax is very unpopular - because each year house prices have risen far faster than the rate at which the lowest level for inheritance tax has been raised. With the substantial expansion in the number of people who own their own home which has taken place since the war a much greater proportion of people reach the end of their life with the knowledge that their estate is going to pay a hefty chunk of inheritance tax.One day Canada will rule the world, and then we'll all be sorry.Comment
-
If you chose Texas back when you had to list a home state then you have a state sales tax and no state income tax so theres no double taxation for the state there, but if you chose another state that has state income and state sales tax then yea you are paying twice.Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly
Just curious -- I have no dog in this hunt -- isn't paying sales tax on items purchased with my taxed income also double taxation? If so, why is that no problem, but an inheritance tax is?Comment
-
You seem to be amazed by yourself. Interesting.Originally posted by aneeshm
It amazes me how some people think that they are the only ones in possession of some elite knowledge, and have the right, nay, the duty, to ram their vision down the throats of others, by force if necessary. The assumption underlying this is, of course, that they know better than everyone else, and that everyone else's opinions or even rights don't count as much as their vision does, consequences be damned.I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
- Justice Brett KavanaughComment
-
Babies don't have any money to tax. The IRS can't tax you if there isn't any money to tax. They do have some limits to their power.Originally posted by General Ludd
How abouit birth taxes?I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
- Justice Brett KavanaughComment
-
well youre more leftie than me.Originally posted by Odin
The proper term is "Estate Tax." "Death Tax" is a right-wing frame, kind of like "pro-life."
IMO people should be allowed to inherit no more than $1 million. An aristocracy of those who inherited ungodly amounts of wealth is indefensible, immoral, and contrary to democratic and meritocratic principles.
While I can accept the people making judgements about society, the first purpose of a tax is to raise revenue, and a 100% tax will obviously raise littlerevenue (since no one will save a penny for an estate, except by accident)
And I suspect a rate that high WOULD impact saving, entrepreneurial behavior etc. And I dont think everyone with a million dollar estate is really an "aristocrat" anyway. A million just doesnt go that far anymore.
Actually, Im not convinced we need a substantially higher estate tax than we have now. If we were to raise, id suggest raising it slowly, to check for incentive effects and actual revenue raised."A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for.” Martin BuberComment
-
Isn't it why they, or the company they own, pay taxes in the first place? I'm not an anti-tax anarchist, but there should be limits to what the State can or cannot tax. Some forms of taxation are perfectly legitimate, others are theft pure and simple. The way you guys present it, Death tax seems nothing more than the State sponsored theft, IMO.Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
The fact that the infrastructure of society has allowed the rich to accumulate and keep their wealth. We, could, after all, just leave them to their own devices and not give them police protection and have them pay for their own roads to send goods to people (ie, an anarcho-capitalist state). But that wouldn't really work out so well... and probably would lead to some sort of socialist revolution where the rich would be hanging from lampposts and their riches "distributed", as it were. So the rich don't complain all that much.
I also believe that equality is not everything. A responsible government should try to aim for equality AND liberty. Of course, its really hard to balance the two, but, in an ideal world, you shouldn't favor equality at the expense of liberty, nor liberty at the expense of equality.Last edited by Nostromo; August 14, 2007, 15:40.Let us be lazy in everything, except in loving and drinking, except in being lazy – LessingComment
-
What makes a form of taxation legitimate to you Nostromo?...people like to cry a lot... - Pekka
...we just argue without evidence, secure in our own superiority. - SnottyComment
-
Debt is really bad when you are sadled right out of the womb. Welcome to liberal dream landBabies don't have any money to tax. The IRS can't tax you if there isn't any money to tax. They do have some limits to their power.
"The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously.Comment
-
Do the rich somehow use these more than the poor? They just use them more effectively. How dare they be successfulThe fact that the infrastructure of society has allowed the rich to accumulate and keep their wealth. We, could, after all, just leave them to their own devices and not give them police protection and have them pay for their own roads to send goods to people
In fact, the rich probably use these things less...Last edited by Patroklos; August 14, 2007, 16:01."The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously.Comment
-
Very hard question. And I don't have an answer. Maybe I should reread my RawlsWhat makes a form of taxation legitimate to you Nostromo?
But one thing's for sure, you shouldn't introduce a new tax and justify it based only on egalitarian concerns. Equality, yes, but don't disregard or ignore the consequence of your new policy on people's liberty, like Odin and Imran are doing.
Let us be lazy in everything, except in loving and drinking, except in being lazy – LessingComment
-
None of those examples is an example of multiple taxation. Property taxes are, the death tax is, and any kind of wealth tax would be. Why is is necessary to tax multiple times? In the case of wealth and property tax both can be used to produce income, but in that case just tax the income.
Sure it is. Widget part sales + widget sales + corporate profits + capital gains + personal sales is quintuple taxation! There are plenty of examples of multiple taxation in society. Say federal income + state income + sales + excise + property. Teh horror!
And why are two 10% taxes at a fundamental level any worse than one 19% tax? Such a silly objection...
Why do we do it? To incentivize certain behavior (i.e. buy widgets instead of hording huge amounts of money for your heirs to create an aristocratic class) and to place the burden of funding the government on those who can most afford to do so.
Fix 'em both.
Any tax system implemented should not invoke spurious behaviour.
Easier said than done. Tax politics in the US are really ****ed up. A proposal to fix a loophole that allows some of the wealthiest people in the world - hedge fund managers - to treat their income as capital gains recently died in a Senate supposedly controlled by left-wingers (the culprit, for anyone who cares, seems to have been Chuck Schumer)."Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-BokononComment
-
Equality, yes, but don't disregard or ignore the consequence of your new policy on people's liberty, like Odin and Imran are doing.
People who inherit taxable estates have plenty of liberty to spare."Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-BokononComment
-
[QUOTE] Originally posted by Ramo
None of those examples is an example of multiple taxation. Property taxes are, the death tax is, and any kind of wealth tax would be. Why is is necessary to tax multiple times? In the case of wealth and property tax both can be used to produce income, but in that case just tax the income.
Sure it is. Widget part sales + widget sales + corporate profits + capital gains + personal sales is quintuple taxation!
at least in the US sales taxes generally apply to final consumers only, AFAIK. Precisely to avoid the above. In canada and europe they use a value added tax, which imposes the tax at earlier stages, but because its only on Value added, is theoretically not duplicating.
The only issues of double taxation left are corporate income tax (widely noted) and sales taxes per se. Changing corporate profits taxes get into questions about how capital gains are defined and taxed."A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for.” Martin BuberComment
-
If a democratic, meritocratic, egalitarian society isn't protected from plutocrats then you WILL have a bunch of elites shoving their visions down other's throats, regardless.Originally posted by aneeshm
It amazes me how some people think that they are the only ones in possession of some elite knowledge, and have the right, nay, the duty, to ram their vision down the throats of others, by force if necessary. The assumption underlying this is, of course, that they know better than everyone else, and that everyone else's opinions or even rights don't count as much as their vision does, consequences be damned.Comment
Comment