Death tax

Discussion in 'Budget & Taxes' started by trickyricky, Nov 6, 2017.

  1. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,883
    Likes Received:
    2,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Long term welfare payments are quite natural in capitalism: given the inefficient tendency towards mass unemployment and poverty. Perhaps you should revisit your support for capitalism?
     
  2. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Capitalism works just fine and I cannot imagine another economic system that can work better in the USA and across the world. Just because there will always be perhaps 5% of the eligible workforce either unemployed or in transition does not mean that capitalism is the root problem. Poverty is not a result of capitalism. Capitalism cannot solve everyone's problems which is why we have government in place to create programs that assist the 5% and is funded by all Americans. IMO government is to blame for most all of these problems...not capitalism!
     
  3. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,883
    Likes Received:
    2,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You don't have just capitalism though do you? You have neo-liberalism that has generated severe inequalities through ideological limitation.

    Why is poverty higher in the US compared to most, if not all, developed nations?

    Why do countries that have more generous welfare states have higher social mobility?
     
  4. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The economic system of capitalism works just fine. What does not work well is how people embrace or not capitalism and what government does to assist those in need.

    It's not neo-liberalism? Whatever we have today evolved from the demands and needs of all Americans over decades.

    I don't care how the US is compared to other nations on poverty...is there some prize for being number one...or in the top ten? Capitalism is an economic system while government is a social system...welfare is a social issue...not a capitalism issue...
     
  5. Shiva_TD

    Shiva_TD Progressive Libertarian Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2008
    Messages:
    45,715
    Likes Received:
    885
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Two reasons:

    1. If that money is in investments, and usually is, then it's generally untaxed assets. Let me explain.

    If I purchased $1 million in stocks twenty years ago with after-tax income and those stocks are worth $50 million when I die then $49 million has not been taxed. If I don't sell those stocks during my lifetime, turning the investment into income, then it isn't taxed. Only income is taxed.

    2. The inheritance tax is not imposed on the person that accumulated the assets. Regardless of any taxes related to the financial assets of the deceased that they may have paid on those assets during their lifetime they're not taxed again... because they're dead!

    The tax is imposed on the recipient of the assets (heir that may or may not be a family member) that receives those assets as income. The recipient of the proceeds from the estate that ultimately pays the "inheritance tax" has never done anything to earn the income and has never paid a single dime of taxes related to the income they receive from the estate.

    ***************************************************************************************************
    The "inheritance tax" is an income tax imposed on the distribution of the assets of the deceased as income to the "heir" that did not earn or pay any taxes on that income previously. The actual accumulation of the financial assets by the deceased may or may not have been taxed but it's irrelevant to the distribution to the heir of the estate because the heir, that receives the assets as income for the first time, never paid any income taxes on the assets.
     
  6. liberalminority

    liberalminority Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Messages:
    25,273
    Likes Received:
    1,633
    Trophy Points:
    113
    allow me to correct this common error, when you say an heir has 'never done anything to earn the income' it is wrong.

    most heirs earn the income they inherit by showing unwavering loyalty in the face of incalculable odds to those they stand to inherit from.

    traditional employment earners are actually lazy when compared to these harder workers, for example Ivanka Trump and jered kushner are probably harder workers than their own parents. the children of rich liberals like bill gates and warren buffet suffer the same way.
     
    Last edited: Dec 19, 2017
  7. Shiva_TD

    Shiva_TD Progressive Libertarian Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2008
    Messages:
    45,715
    Likes Received:
    885
    Trophy Points:
    113
    ROFLMAO

    I'm hard pressed to remember ever reading such drivel before.
     
  8. Ndividual

    Ndividual Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2013
    Messages:
    3,960
    Likes Received:
    638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's especially true of a family run farm.
     
  9. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,883
    Likes Received:
    2,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You're making a false assumption that the private sector and public sector can be separated in capitalism? You're at least ignoring that different forms of capitalism deliver different levels of poverty.

    There's no evolution to it. Its imposed by the political elite.

    It provides a means to understand economic success. It also provides a 'don't give a toss about my fellow man" measure.

    False distinction. For example, welfare is found to impact on self-employment rates. By impacting on firm creation, its an economic issue by definition.
     
  10. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I stand by my comment; "Capitalism is an economic system while government is a social system...welfare is a social issue...not a capitalism issue..."

    Industry requires ground, rail, air, and sea infrastructure. Local government must provide this infrastructure or industry will locate to other areas that do.
    Industry requires labor. Local government must design/maintain populated areas in order to allow all economic classes to live and work.

    Industry will assist, up to a point, but ultimately it's government's job to support the people and community...
     
  11. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,883
    Likes Received:
    2,144
    Trophy Points:
    113

    Then you'll continue to make bogus comment. Western capitalism is typically split into 3: liberal democratic, social democratic and Anglo-Saxon. The difference refers to the level of poverty associated with economic stability.

    You're saying industry is reliant on government here. What you deliberate underestimate the extent of that reliance. Imagine, for example, the repercussions of eliminating welfare. Quality of labour would fall through the floor, given human capital is easily destroyed.
     
  12. Shiva_TD

    Shiva_TD Progressive Libertarian Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2008
    Messages:
    45,715
    Likes Received:
    885
    Trophy Points:
    113
    http://www.nytimes.com/2001/04/08/us/talk-of-lost-farms-reflects-muddle-of-estate-tax-debate.html

    I've also spent considerable time trying to find even a single case of an operating family farm being lost because of the estate tax. Using a myth as an argument against the estate tax does not provide a valid argument.
     
  13. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Why do you suppose Apple does not locate a facility requiring 3000 employees and infrastructure in Mayberry RFD? Because the local governments have not created a society/community in which Apple can function. So Apple will find other locations in which the local governments have created the resources that industry requires. Apple only cares up to a point since Apple, and others, have both national and international options for facilities/labor/materials and those local governments who provide the most will attract industry. Any poverty is defined by the local governments and any poverty solutions come from local governments.

    Why have so many US companies resorted to outsourcing and off-shore facilities...because government has not done it's job to provide the labor and infrastructure required for industry. Yes the private sector depends on government to create the environment for industry but when government fails industry always have other options...
     
  14. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,883
    Likes Received:
    2,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The US's neoliberalism has encouraged short termism that fails to invest in human capital and more consistently create external economies of scale. That reflects of course the curse of free market economics.
     
  15. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You've already lost the argument when you continually invoke politics...liberalism or conservatism. Industry and environment and infrastructure should not be political. How about common-sense? How about consensus? How about instead of most humans being political we define the true root problem...most humans are self-serving, demand far more than they are willing to fund, and are too stupid to find consensus of what's in the best interest of the nation...no matter the color of their political stripes!
     
  16. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,883
    Likes Received:
    2,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Politics and economics cannot be separated. Neoliberalism of course uses market fundamentalism as the means to impose a corporate-friendly outcome (as shown by the intensification of inequalities and the productivity pay gap)

    It would be jolly nice to ensure more decision-making based on long term goals. You'd need a public investment bank for that mind you...
     
  17. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Politics only gets in the way of economics and business. A business manager does not use politics to manage their company. The business sector creates opportunities and wealth for society to draw from, and yes to your previous comment, both business and society depend on each other to do their respective jobs. However, if society does not do their job, business can seek other options. Economics is the sum of both parts working well.

    IMO the reason nothing gets better, why we have no consensus, why we have politics embedded in everything today, is rooted in people's severely limited capabilities and reasoning. And this is not going to change! It's not about conservatism, or liberalism, or business versus the public, or any other contrived boogeymen. Humans have reached the Peter Principle and this is as good as it's going to get...everything in the future will be a public fight to nowhere...
     
  18. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,883
    Likes Received:
    2,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    A business manager is in the politician's lap. The politician just has to say "boo" and, through confidence effects, decision-making is changed.

    Given your country has been one of the main players in inflicting the neoliberal curse on the world, its a shame your opinion doesn't include something a tad more radical!
     
  19. modernpaladin

    modernpaladin Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2017
    Messages:
    27,699
    Likes Received:
    21,098
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Transfer it all to gold before you pass and give it to whomever. Govt cant touch it.
     
  20. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There might be a couple of US businesses involved in politics but 99.99% of them want nothing to do with politics! Very few business decisions involve politics.

    More radical than we've reached our peak...this is as good as it gets?? IMO humans across the globe today are generally incapable of rational review and consensus decisions on all major issues. For me this explains why most everything today is a ****-hole. Wars, fighting, posturing, chest-pounding, going it alone, religion, righteousness, etc. etc. are all indicators of our inability to perform at a higher level that can be in the best interest of our respective nation and world. Therefore, we are now relegated to the status quo...
     
  21. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,883
    Likes Received:
    2,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There are numerous alternatives available. 'Social democratic' capitalism, for example, would allow more Americans to folly their dream of being self-employed. Now I appreciate voting for a populist like Trump suggests 'problems' with the US electorate. However, I'd be much more optimistic. It demonstrates that the neoliberal consensus is breaking down. There is therefore greater opportunity for radical transformation in economic relations.

    Britain is also seeing this break down. Jeremy Corbyn, and the success of Momentum, highlights a willingness for an economy perceived to follow right wing dogma to break the shackles. The end result could well be adoption of public sector investment, coupled with control over inequalities to allow greater economic growth.
     
  22. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    In my county, a few years ago, they started a 'cottage industry' program which allows people with little means to start a home-based business and sell into the local markets. For example, if someone wished to create artisan bread, they would not require a full-on commercial kitchen which might cost $500K, and instead use their home appliances with some oversight regarding standard health practices. The program only had a couple of takers. I was surprised because having one's own business is an alternative to normal employment, or at least a supplement to a crappy job. So much of these societal issues IMO simply are rooted in poor decision making. If people cannot think through their scenario, cannot ascertain some options, and cannot take actions to achieve change, they are simply left wanting.

    I don't think any political process is breaking down. The issue is that politics will not solve all of these problems for people. Politics will promise everything imaginable to pander for votes, but politics will never solve their problems. Several years ago George W. Bush commented something to the effect; 'it's great to have a dictatorship if you're the dictator'. This is so true assuming the dictator has the best intentions for the people and the nation. It would eliminate the BS politics we have today...
     
  23. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    39,883
    Likes Received:
    2,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    In a country characterised by high poverty risk, you'd expect 'normal employment' to dominate more. That's the power of social democracy: its encourages risk taking and enables greater individual choice. Such aspects are beyond market fundamentalists. They deliberately ignore economic reality and impose restricted choice to the benefit of corporations.

    Its certainly breaking down in the UK, despite the desperate efforts to eliminate Corbyn and Momentum's influence. And I would have to disagree with you on the US too. Voting for cretinous populist is ironically still positive evidence of a radical change in attitudes.
     
  24. CourtJester

    CourtJester Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2013
    Messages:
    27,769
    Likes Received:
    4,921
    Trophy Points:
    113
    But of course change can be either good, bad, or neutral. And determining which is a matter of opinion.
     
  25. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Normal employment does not eradicate poverty. A high demand on goods/services creates more competition which should also reduce consumer prices, and within this framework are labor costs which are primarily created by supply and demand of labor. In parallel, in a growing economy, something which few people think about or dwell on, is inflation. Another aspect is population growth. So, while we might have companies holding tight on expenditures, including labor, and the economy is growing, and when most of this commerce is located in urban areas, those areas become unaffordable for most workers...inflation. In these urban areas across the US, average real estate prices might be $500K to $1 million, and with these high prices everything else in those areas becomes equally inflated. However, all of these areas still require unskilled and lower skilled labor, all of which cannot afford to live where they work, and can barely afford one hour+ commuting to bedroom communities. And now the bedroom communities, due to population and economic growth, are also unaffordable to average workers. It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy; High population areas provide the labor, industry evolves and grows creating demand and inflation, perhaps 50%+ of average workers cannot afford to live where they work, 1st and 2nd tier bedroom communities spring up forcing 1-2 hour commutes, and within this mess a significant portion of average workers fail. The scenario becomes unmanageable for them. Fact is in order to live in these areas requires a household income of perhaps $150-$200K and this is the low end! Therefore, it becomes impossible to solve poverty or wage disparity in these scenarios simply by forcing higher labor wages by a couple of bucks.

    I don't think it's a change in attitudes. I think it is ignorance and self-serving behavior. Our cretinous populist (only of a small base of his party) lied about everything, made promises that will never materialize, and 40-50 million voters fell for it! They were only thinking of themselves and never about what's in the best interest of the nation...this is not 'change'...this is pathetic...
     

Share This Page