- comment
Shaun Kenney - body
- Any system that punishes success, or more accurately damages an individual's ability to be self-sufficient, I would broadly define as being against the American ethos.
Income has always been the best method of taxing the American public, on a gentle progressive scale that enables those least able to afford the siphoning of their incomes (i.e. the poor) to join the middle class and ultimately become self-sufficient.
Anything that harms self-sufficiency and punishes success should be treated with the highest suspicion, IMHO. Consumption taxes are interesting, but to be very honest I'm not sure how well it would work. Very much open to the 201 class explanation though (as I understand what it is, but now precisely it would replace the income tax without being ridiculously high).
- comment Dvt guy
- body
- It's not punishing success!!! They're dead! they can't use it anymore! There is no disincentive towards success..
If anything, the estate tax gives near-dead people an incentive to send money to private charities (tax free!) so that their massive wealth can be administered efficiently by a private non-profit.
This in turn relieves the need for the bloated welfare state.
You see? God bless the death tax!
- comment Shaun Kenney
- body
- This in turn relieves the need for the bloated welfare state.
As it has done since inheritance taxes have been enforced, right? It's a Marxist principle for a reason...
Better to have families keep the money so as not to use the welfare state at all -- that would be my line of thinking.
- comment Kevin
- body
- It affects 1,000 people in the Commonwealth of Virginia. These people are the most affluent of all Virginians. They get tax break after tax break and you want to hoist the losses from this tax to be heaped on the backs of hard working Virginians. Nice.
- comment Jason Kenney
- body
- Kevin, this is coming from the same side that increased the sales tax which always disproportionately targets the poor and fixed income more than the affluent. That sought a referrendum in Northern Virginia to increase taxes for transportation on roads used more by people who could afford to go elsewhere to buy their goods, leaving the poorest to pay for roads they never used.
The death tax is unnecessary and is a repetitive tax on money and goods that were originally taxed when they came into the hands of the deceased. At what point do you truly own what you've earned? At what point does the government no longer lay claim to what you've worked hard to achieve? Even in the grave they tax us.
5 Comments:
Income has always been the best method of taxing the American public, on a gentle progressive scale that enables those least able to afford the siphoning of their incomes (i.e. the poor) to join the middle class and ultimately become self-sufficient.
Anything that harms self-sufficiency and punishes success should be treated with the highest suspicion, IMHO. Consumption taxes are interesting, but to be very honest I'm not sure how well it would work. Very much open to the 201 class explanation though (as I understand what it is, but now precisely it would replace the income tax without being ridiculously high).
If anything, the estate tax gives near-dead people an incentive to send money to private charities (tax free!) so that their massive wealth can be administered efficiently by a private non-profit.
This in turn relieves the need for the bloated welfare state.
You see? God bless the death tax!
As it has done since inheritance taxes have been enforced, right? It's a Marxist principle for a reason...
Better to have families keep the money so as not to use the welfare state at all -- that would be my line of thinking.
The death tax is unnecessary and is a repetitive tax on money and goods that were originally taxed when they came into the hands of the deceased. At what point do you truly own what you've earned? At what point does the government no longer lay claim to what you've worked hard to achieve? Even in the grave they tax us.
Post a Comment
Home