 |
| |
|
|
Geronimo
|
|
st cloud USA
Jan 1970
time: 05:33
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MRT144
as for the inheritance or estate tax, (death tax is silly because its not like the person is taxed when he dies. Imagine the scene: "well willy just kicked off, thatll be 1000 dollars. Oh he died of a gunshot wound...very sorry, its now 10000." It really is a tax on what you inherit and pass along. dolts.) im against it. what you do with your money after youre is your business. however, while youre alive, you i believe that a part of your income needs to go programs that benefit a large group of people.
forced alrtuism is far from the worst thing in the world. |
wow, if this isn't a troll you an I appear to have exactly the opposite priority with respect to income tax vs. estate tax. Please explain why you think stealing someones hard work is a good thing while using money that used to belong to someone who is now dead and is being given to someone else who didn't work for it at all is bad. This should be interesting if nothing else.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Berzerker
|
 |
topeka, kansas,USA
May 1999
time: 23:33
|
|
Let's look at this from a non-ideological pragmatic approach:
Everyone in a community starts out with $100. Some people, being more inventive, more hard working, etc., figure out ways to turn that $100 into $1000 while others squander what they have. Now the people who squandered their money ask those who did not for help. The "rich" say, "sure, I've figured out a way to make farming more productive with this machine and I need help making machines". So they hire the less inventive who've squandered their money. Result: the "rich" get richer and their employees regain what they lost and more in addition to a better sense of hard work and responsibility.
Liberals come along and say that's unfair. We need to take what the "rich" person has and spread it among those who've squandered their wealth. Result: the "rich" person loses the capital they've worked to build up in preparation for expanding their business accompanied by the loss of jobs they would have created and the squanderers lose their jobs and their ticket to a better life all for a temporary, unsustainable gain.
Imagine how life would be if someone kept coming along every year to even out wealth. The productive would lose their production and lose their motivation to produce and the non-productive would sit back waiting for their yearly check and never learn the traits of the productive. What's the saying? Give a man a fish and he eats for a day, teach him to fish and he eats for a lifetime.
There's a reason Japan has been in the doldrums, they have a corporate welfare economy. The politicians prop up more inefficient businesses by taking from consumers and more efficient businesses. Look at what happened to Jaguar Motors when Hatcher ended their welfare. Jaguar had to improve or die, and they improved.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MRT144
|
|
Seattle Washington
Oct 2002
time: 21:33
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Geronimo
wow, if this isn't a troll you an I appear to have exactly the opposite priority with respect to income tax vs. estate tax. Please explain why you think stealing someones hard work is a good thing while using money that used to belong to someone who is now dead and is being given to someone else who didn't work for it at all is bad. This should be interesting if nothing else. |
you have nothing to offer and contribute to society when youre dead.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MRT144
|
|
Seattle Washington
Oct 2002
time: 21:33
|
|
also...
berzerker, look at europe. they have a better than average welfare system. sure they arent economically impressive as the US, but i think it stands to reason they enjoy a better quality of life because they arent so focused on a rat race of money. Their governments provide the essentials so they can focus on more important things, like family, football, food, and fun.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Geronimo
|
|
st cloud USA
Jan 1970
time: 05:33
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MRT144
also...
berzerker, look at europe. they have a better than average welfare system. sure they arent economically impressive as the US, but i think it stands to reason they enjoy a better quality of life because they arent so focused on a rat race of money. Their governments provide the essentials so they can focus on more important things, like family, football, food, and fun. |
Explain why it is not possible to enjoy these things without a welfare state. Assuming government provides services less efficiently than the private sector (and so far this appears to almost always be the case) then the greater efficiency of the economy of the non-welfare state should allow it to provide the same or greater free time at even lower cost.
Don't forget that the same people who you claim are bennefitting from their governments provision of their basic essnetials are also the same ones who will have to pay for it and who will have to labor to provide those essentials.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Geronimo
|
|
st cloud USA
Jan 1970
time: 05:33
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MRT144
there are no garuntees that at the end of the life, there will be taxable income. |
Oh well. there is also no guarentee that in the middle of life there will be any income to tax. Dang. fortunately the government can budget based on the average.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Berzerker
|
|
topeka, kansas,USA
May 1999
time: 23:33
|
|
Kid - quote:
And conservatives want to take a little at a time, everytime he decides to work or buy something. |
I'm not a conservative, but I'd have to ask: which of the two will take more? Wait a minute, liberals do that too in addition to the death tax.
MRT - quote:
because it is a characterization, and by that very fact is not factual or a true indication of who i am. it is an overstatement in an attempt to brand me as something.i am not a liberal. I have certain opinions that lean left, and certain that lean right. get used to it. |
You didn't explain why my characterisation was invalid, you just said it was as if that's proof.
Krazyhorse - quote:
If it was a death tax then it would apply to all those that die.
It's a tax levied on the act of leaving an estate.
If you don't leave an estate when you die then there's no tax. |
Then the estate tax is not a tax on estates because it only applies to people who die with a certain amount of money. Virtually everyone leaves an estate...  I knew that argument was coming up...
Geronimo - quote:
Sure decide what you want. But do not expect me to ascribe to your post mortem transactions the same validity that I give to your ownership of the money you earn. |
That's a bogus argument, liberals won't let people hand over their money to their offspring when they're alive so they can avoid the death tax, there are all sorts of limits on what parents can give their kids to ensure there are estates liberals can tax to high heaven.
quote:
It's critical that we control the fruits of our own labors but it's of no consequence that other people get to keep the fruits of our labors after we leave the world. |
It's called respecting their wishes. Dying people feel better when we do that...
quote:
My objection to taking someone's earned money is that it is tantamount to slavery. Can't enslave someone who is dead. only the living. |
They can't make money when their dead either. So the money being taken was earned when they were alive, and that's when they are enslaved. Might as well tell people to spend everything they have because you will take it when they die. Hell, might as well send grave diggers into coffins to grab any other possessions they're buried with.  Better yet, why bury people in marked graves we're supposed to leave indisturbed? According to you, they shouldn't even own the burial plot.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MRT144
|
|
Seattle Washington
Oct 2002
time: 21:33
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Geronimo
Explain why it is not possible to enjoy these things without a welfare state. Assuming government provides services less efficiently than the private sector (and so far this appears to almost always be the case) then the greater efficiency of the economy of the non-welfare state should allow it to provide the same or greater free time at even lower cost.
Don't forget that the same people who you claim are bennefitting from their governments provision of their basic essnetials are also the same ones who will have to pay for it and who will have to labor to provide those essentials. |
the private sector is not benevolent, nor does it try to be. the government in some capacity should be. the role of government is to empower its people to succeed.
your second paragraph ties into the idea of "taxing the rich" using extra income to support people that need it isnt a bad idea. unless you believe in the duality of "fairness"
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MRT144
|
|
Seattle Washington
Oct 2002
time: 21:33
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Berzerker
MRT -
You didn't explain why my characterisation was invalid, you just said it was as if that's proof.
|
because i can tell you that i am not a liberal. i know myself better than you. or am i a dubious athourity on my own belief system.
i dont believe in stealing. Im not going to argue semantics with you about how you think taxes are stealing, because we each are stuck in our own ideology.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:33.
Apolyton Time is 00:33. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
30-07-2004 08:07
|