Quote:
|
Originally Posted by lookout123
the spouse is exempt depending upon titling of assets.
|
Ok, title the assets in a way that makes it work for the result you're seeking...Just curious, would that be Joint tenancy with rights of survivorship?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by lookout123
why in the world would you support this redistribution of wealth? someone works hard and becomes successful so now the government is entitled to 40%? how do you figure?
|
*RED HERRING ALERT*
Are we talking about what is or what should be? In the case of what is, I'll defer to your more recent exposure to the facts and the laws and accept your conclusion that the government is "entitled" (loaded word) to the taxes owed in this case. If we're talking about what should be, then who in your example is the hard worker? The dead man? Are you arguing against an inheritance tax? Or is this an example of someone still alive, and we're talking about an income tax? 40% income tax seems way high, I agree. But if you're talking about an estate, then I have some questions. Would you include this kind of transfer of assets as income? How does that jive with your position of flatly taxing all income over $30,000?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by lookout123
if i work hard, save, invest, and mix in a little luck i should be able to pass what i make on to my son without regard to how much or little i made. it is mine. i worked for it. when i die, if i so desire, he should get it.
so, because people are envious of the ultra wealthy; everyday successful people you come into contact with have to hire attorneys to build a well structured trust for investments and a second trust for insurance policies so that they can stay under the estate tax limits.
|
Who benefits under this structure I wonder? But hey, it's yours as you point out. When you transfer it to someone else, it's not yours, by definition. If I am on the ball enough to plan my estate, then I should plan accordingly to include the impact of such forces, like estate taxes. It's really a matter of planning well or poorly. I could keep all my money in the mattress, and realize some advantages and disadvantages, but I shouldn't complain about the results of my own informed choices.
Not that I don't make mistakes in my choices, and still complain. And I sure have a lot of company in this. But that's the way it is. I deal with it. My life is the sum of my choices.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by lookout123
you can harp on about fears of an aristocracy, but you are being dishonest if you don't think normal everyday people are getting skewered by the estate tax laws.
|
Skewered? I agree that people are people, and only the conclusions we jump to when we associate the things that money can do with those people do differences come up. Look in the other direction of the linear scale you imagined. Look downward. Do you not see many many more people less well off than the ones you described as skewered? It's a matter of perspective.
Speaking of perspective, this family you describe, is their glass half full or half empty? Or 60% full and 40% empty? Can we focus a moment on the volume that the 60% represents? Is it enough? It may be missing a honkin' chunk but what remains is still bigger than many others, and still big enough to do many things. I once heard money described as stored choice. That kind of estate represents plenty of choices.
It's only when the focus shifts to the missing part that the loss is felt. That's when it feels like taking. Count your blessings is good advice. Striving and earning and the fruits of a capitalist society are all Good Things. But striving for the sake of striving is not a good thing. What about contentment. What about the concept of enough. When is it enough. And when I have enough, *I* believe the excess *should* be shared. Shared with my family, with my community, and with the rest of humanity.