By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - Why do people vote for Hilary and Obama?

Final-Fan on 23 November 2007

And again I will say I have yet to hear a good argument for penalizing those who wish to save money.

If you're such a successful saver that you have millions upon millions when you die, having a sizeable chunk taken out in taxes isn't going to kill your beneficiaries.

The number of rich and poor people by percentages is remaining relatively stable

But are the rich getting richer while the poor get poorer?

Ultimately I think your argument deals far too thoroughly in generalities, it really is an oversimplistic view of what is going on and makes it seem as if the rich are just getting richer because they are rich. When in reality only some are increasing their wealth and those are the ones who are investing and providing jobs and economic growth. To tax them specifically for the reason that they are spurring growth and providing jobs is beyond ridiculous. It is once again a penalty for success.

I don't see you providing specific data either.

Actually the rich do tend to get richer more easily because they HAVE money they can afford to invest and get returns on, whereas the less fortunate spend almost all of it on necessities or depreciating assets and the leftovers getting socked away for retirement/college/whatever. They can't afford to invest on high-return stuff because (a) they generally don't have the connections of the rich; (b) they can't make large investments; and (c ) they are truly boned if they suffer a large setback, while the rich can bide their time and (usually) make up the difference over time.



Tag (courtesy of fkusumot): "Please feel free -- nay, I encourage you -- to offer rebuttal."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
My advice to fanboys: Brag about stuff that's true, not about stuff that's false. Predict stuff that's likely, not stuff that's unlikely. You will be happier, and we will be happier.

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Sen. Pat Moynihan
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The old smileys: ; - ) : - ) : - ( : - P : - D : - # ( c ) ( k ) ( y ) If anyone knows the shortcut for , let me know!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I have the most epic death scene ever in VGChartz Mafia.  Thanks WordsofWisdom! 

Around the Network
Sqrl on 23 November 2007
Final-Fan said:
And again I will say I have yet to hear a good argument for penalizing those who wish to save money.

If you're such a successful saver that you have millions upon millions when you die, having a sizeable chunk taken out in taxes isn't going to kill your beneficiaries.

The number of rich and poor people by percentages is remaining relatively stable

But are the rich getting richer while the poor get poorer?

Ultimately I think your argument deals far too thoroughly in generalities, it really is an oversimplistic view of what is going on and makes it seem as if the rich are just getting richer because they are rich. When in reality only some are increasing their wealth and those are the ones who are investing and providing jobs and economic growth. To tax them specifically for the reason that they are spurring growth and providing jobs is beyond ridiculous. It is once again a penalty for success.

I don't see you providing specific data either.

Actually the rich do tend to get richer more easily because they HAVE money they can afford to invest and get returns on, whereas the less fortunate spend almost all of it on necessities or depreciating assets and the leftovers getting socked away for retirement/college/whatever. They can't afford to invest on high-return stuff because (a) they generally don't have the connections of the rich; (b) they can't make large investments; and they are truly boned if they suffer a large setback, while the rich can bide their time and (usually) make up the difference over time.

 Its not about what will and won't be missed.  Otherwise it would be ok for me to steal half-cents from every bank transaction.  This idea is fundamentally flawed.

As I said, some of the rich are getting richer and some are getting poorer.  The fact that they are investing puts them at risk and while they can take more in losses it is because they have earned more in the first place.  

I'm not providing data because I am not making claims that the economy will spin out of control.

Of course the rich make more money easily, they can also lose a lot of money easily as well.  But just describing the situation that rich people are in and pointing out that they have more than you isn't a reason to take it from them. 
To Each Man, Responsibility
famousringo on 23 November 2007
elprincipe said:
famousringo said:
 

Sorry, next time I'll use facts that are more in line with your pre-conceived notions.

Do me a favour. The next time you demand that somebody "prove it," replace the language with "you can't prove it to me." Don't pretend that you can be reasoned with when you've already made up your mind.


Do me a favor: don't point out rankings by a supremely biased source as "proof" of something and then get upset when I don't accept them.


Do you have any evidence that the WHO is biased? According to Google, the only people who think the WHO is biased is the tobacco industry.

Let me guess, it's part of the UN, so it must hate the US. Is that the assumption you're making?

 Edit: Found one article from the National Review. Main criticism is the WHO continuing inefficient aid programs at the behest of NGOs.

 Still can't find anybody else doing broad comparisons of health care performance, though. I imagine that study about relative administration costs between US and Canadian systems didn't hold any truck with you, either.



"The worst part about these reviews is they are [subjective]--and their scores often depend on how drunk you got the media at a Street Fighter event."  — Mona Hamilton, Capcom Senior VP of Marketing
*Image indefinitely borrowed from BrainBoxLtd without his consent.

Final-Fan on 23 November 2007
Sqrl said:
Final-Fan said:

I would treat someone inheriting $10,000 differently than someone inheriting $10,000,000 because -- guess what -- it's a different situation. If I had a rich uncle I expected to inherit millions from -- and in fact I DO have a wealthy uncle, but I don't know his net worth and haven't seen his will -- I would be making the same exact arguments. I'm not saying I would fork over the $2 million tax bill with a smile on my face, but I would still vote to keep the law even knowing that would happen to me.

"Treating each person the same" -- Do you tell someone in a wheelchair to suck it up or do you build him a ramp next to the staircase? Rich people are more able to pay a high tax rate without hardship, so we do, to benefit society.

Its not a different situation. It is someone dying and leaving their estate to their friends and family. Why does it make a difference if I leave $10,000 worth of posessions or $10,000,000 worth of posessions. It is still the final request of a person who has just died and it is being ignored because the government wants to cram its hand down their pocket one last time. I'm sorry but you just cannot convince me that this is "ok".


Aside from that there are so many problems with the tax, for example: Would you think it is ok if your uncle leaves you an authenticated baseball bat signed by Babe Ruth and certified as the last bat he used to hit a home run with. Oh...but wait, you can't keep it because it is valued at $20m and in order to pay the estate tax it has to be sold. Sorry better luck next time, maybe next time your relative dies and specifically gives you a priceless treasure the government will decide that it is ok to follow their wishes....but only if you can fork over the cash!


The difference is exactly the same as the difference between a guy who makes $10,000 a year and a guy who makes $10,000,000 a year, only we don't start taxing inheritance until it hits $2 million. 

Your example is such an extreme unlikelihood that I find it hard to believe that such a thing has ever happened.  Has it?  Did the IRS heartlessly force him to sell it off to pay the bill or did they cut the guy some slack?  The IRS guys are human too. 

Tag (courtesy of fkusumot): "Please feel free -- nay, I encourage you -- to offer rebuttal."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
My advice to fanboys: Brag about stuff that's true, not about stuff that's false. Predict stuff that's likely, not stuff that's unlikely. You will be happier, and we will be happier.

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Sen. Pat Moynihan
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The old smileys: ; - ) : - ) : - ( : - P : - D : - # ( c ) ( k ) ( y ) If anyone knows the shortcut for , let me know!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I have the most epic death scene ever in VGChartz Mafia.  Thanks WordsofWisdom! 

Sqrl on 23 November 2007
Final-Fan said:
Sqrl said:
Final-Fan said:

I would treat someone inheriting $10,000 differently than someone inheriting $10,000,000 because -- guess what -- it's a different situation. If I had a rich uncle I expected to inherit millions from -- and in fact I DO have a wealthy uncle, but I don't know his net worth and haven't seen his will -- I would be making the same exact arguments. I'm not saying I would fork over the $2 million tax bill with a smile on my face, but I would still vote to keep the law even knowing that would happen to me.

"Treating each person the same" -- Do you tell someone in a wheelchair to suck it up or do you build him a ramp next to the staircase? Rich people are more able to pay a high tax rate without hardship, so we do, to benefit society.

Its not a different situation. It is someone dying and leaving their estate to their friends and family. Why does it make a difference if I leave $10,000 worth of posessions or $10,000,000 worth of posessions. It is still the final request of a person who has just died and it is being ignored because the government wants to cram its hand down their pocket one last time. I'm sorry but you just cannot convince me that this is "ok".


Aside from that there are so many problems with the tax, for example: Would you think it is ok if your uncle leaves you an authenticated baseball bat signed by Babe Ruth and certified as the last bat he used to hit a home run with. Oh...but wait, you can't keep it because it is valued at $20m and in order to pay the estate tax it has to be sold. Sorry better luck next time, maybe next time your relative dies and specifically gives you a priceless treasure the government will decide that it is ok to follow their wishes....but only if you can fork over the cash!


The difference is exactly the same as the difference between a guy who makes $10,000 a year and a guy who makes $10,000,000 a year, only we don't start taxing inheritance until it hits $2 million.

Your example is such an extreme unlikelihood that I find it hard to believe that such a thing has ever happened. Has it? Did the IRS heartlessly force him to sell it off to pay the bill or did they cut the guy some slack? The IRS guys are human too.

 This past year the guy who cought the big Bonds homerun had to sell the ball because the IRS knocked on his door the next morning saying they wanted their share. 

The fact is that there are folks who have estates worth a few million and the money is all tied up in assets that they own. It is not an uncommon occurence for people to sell portions of an estate to pay the taxes on the estate.  The fact that anyone would be forced to sell things given to them by their recently deceased relative is quite frankly mortifying.
To Each Man, Responsibility
Around the Network
Final-Fan on 23 November 2007
Sqrl said:
Final-Fan said:
Sqrl said:
Final-Fan said:

I would treat someone inheriting $10,000 differently than someone inheriting $10,000,000 because -- guess what -- it's a different situation. If I had a rich uncle I expected to inherit millions from -- and in fact I DO have a wealthy uncle, but I don't know his net worth and haven't seen his will -- I would be making the same exact arguments. I'm not saying I would fork over the $2 million tax bill with a smile on my face, but I would still vote to keep the law even knowing that would happen to me.

"Treating each person the same" -- Do you tell someone in a wheelchair to suck it up or do you build him a ramp next to the staircase? Rich people are more able to pay a high tax rate without hardship, so we do, to benefit society.

Its not a different situation. It is someone dying and leaving their estate to their friends and family. Why does it make a difference if I leave $10,000 worth of posessions or $10,000,000 worth of posessions. It is still the final request of a person who has just died and it is being ignored because the government wants to cram its hand down their pocket one last time. I'm sorry but you just cannot convince me that this is "ok".


Aside from that there are so many problems with the tax, for example: Would you think it is ok if your uncle leaves you an authenticated baseball bat signed by Babe Ruth and certified as the last bat he used to hit a home run with. Oh...but wait, you can't keep it because it is valued at $20m and in order to pay the estate tax it has to be sold. Sorry better luck next time, maybe next time your relative dies and specifically gives you a priceless treasure the government will decide that it is ok to follow their wishes....but only if you can fork over the cash!


The difference is exactly the same as the difference between a guy who makes $10,000 a year and a guy who makes $10,000,000 a year, only we don't start taxing inheritance until it hits $2 million.

Your example is such an extreme unlikelihood that I find it hard to believe that such a thing has ever happened. Has it? Did the IRS heartlessly force him to sell it off to pay the bill or did they cut the guy some slack? The IRS guys are human too.

This past year the guy who cought the big Bonds homerun had to sell the ball because the IRS knocked on his door the next morning saying they wanted their share.

The fact is that there are folks who have estates worth a few million and the money is all tied up in assets that they own. It is not an uncommon occurence for people to sell portions of an estate to pay the taxes on the estate. The fact that anyone would be forced to sell things given to them by their recently deceased relative is quite frankly mortifying.


OK, so the "insanely valuable collectible" example is valid.  [edit:  No it's not -- that's the gift tax; thanks fkusumot!  My moment of stupidity...]  But as for the "no liquid assets" example, here's factcheck.org to the rescue:

"Worth noting is that family-owned farms and closely held businesses already receive special treatment under current law. Heirs who agree to keep the farm or business assets within the family for 10 years after death can reduce the taxable amount of the estate by 40 percent to 70 percent. And if the farm or business is at least 35 percent of the gross value of the estate, payments can be spread out over 14 years." http://www.factcheck.org/article328.html

In fact, there is not a single known incident of heirs being forced to sell the family farm to pay off the estate tax.

Tag (courtesy of fkusumot): "Please feel free -- nay, I encourage you -- to offer rebuttal."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
My advice to fanboys: Brag about stuff that's true, not about stuff that's false. Predict stuff that's likely, not stuff that's unlikely. You will be happier, and we will be happier.

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Sen. Pat Moynihan
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The old smileys: ; - ) : - ) : - ( : - P : - D : - # ( c ) ( k ) ( y ) If anyone knows the shortcut for , let me know!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I have the most epic death scene ever in VGChartz Mafia.  Thanks WordsofWisdom! 

Sqrl on 23 November 2007
Final-Fan said:
Sqrl said:

This past year the guy who cought the big Bonds homerun had to sell the ball because the IRS knocked on his door the next morning saying they wanted their share.

The fact is that there are folks who have estates worth a few million and the money is all tied up in assets that they own. It is not an uncommon occurence for people to sell portions of an estate to pay the taxes on the estate. The fact that anyone would be forced to sell things given to them by their recently deceased relative is quite frankly mortifying.


OK, so the "insanely valuable collectible" example is valid. But as for the "no liquid assets" example, here's factcheck.org to the rescue:

"Worth noting is that family-owned farms and closely held businesses already receive special treatment under current law. Heirs who agree to keep the farm or business assets within the family for 10 years after death can reduce the taxable amount of the estate by 40 percent to 70 percent. And if the farm or business is at least 35 percent of the gross value of the estate, payments can be spread out over 14 years." http://www.factcheck.org/article328.html

In fact, there is not a single known incident of heirs being forced to sell the family farm to pay off the estate tax.

By 40 percent to 70 percent? 

Anyways, that information doesn't change anything. Its great that they are so nice as to lessen the amount of money they are stealing from you if you agree to hold on to it for a while but it doesn't change the fact that they are making you pay for what is, and rightfully should be, yours. 

 
To Each Man, Responsibility
Final-Fan on 23 November 2007

Look, the government collects taxes to provide infrastructure and services to society. 
Who pays the taxes?  The people. 
Which people?  The ones who can pay. 
How much?  The amount society thinks it needs. 
Should some people pay more than others?  This is the tricky one.  Well, the easy part first.  The people who can barely feed, house, and clothe themselves obviously can't afford much.  We'll give them a free pass, but society needs that much more from the rest.  Next up:  The ones who can't pay for college for their kids.  Let's just take a little.  Next:  These ones are living pretty good, even if they don't have a summer home or anything.  We'll take a pretty good chunk.  Next up:  These ones can afford to give their girl a Porsche for her Sweet 16.  They can afford a pretty penny.  Finally:  Jackpot!  These guys have mansions in three states and could still live off of stock dividends if not for the twice-yearly world tour!

I don't see why taking more from the final category is immoral.  Even the dead ones. 

Coming at it from a different angle:  some people here have noted that the estate tax is a defense against the creation of a permanent class of "capitalist nobility" -- whole sections of society that can live off of inherited, self-sustaining assets.  In fact, these people already exist.  Imagine what would happen if the trend wasn't held in check! 

This wealth isn't created out of thin air.  Something has to create it, and it's (as usual) the working class.  The magic of capitalism just moves the fruits of their labors up the food chain into the hands of the investor class.  How is that "fair"?  Down with capitalism!  Oh, wait, "fair" is your schtick.  



Tag (courtesy of fkusumot): "Please feel free -- nay, I encourage you -- to offer rebuttal."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
My advice to fanboys: Brag about stuff that's true, not about stuff that's false. Predict stuff that's likely, not stuff that's unlikely. You will be happier, and we will be happier.

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Sen. Pat Moynihan
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The old smileys: ; - ) : - ) : - ( : - P : - D : - # ( c ) ( k ) ( y ) If anyone knows the shortcut for , let me know!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I have the most epic death scene ever in VGChartz Mafia.  Thanks WordsofWisdom! 

fkusumot on 23 November 2007
Sqrl said:
 

This past year the guy who cought the big Bonds homerun had to sell the ball because the IRS knocked on his door the next morning saying they wanted their share.

The fact is that there are folks who have estates worth a few million and the money is all tied up in assets that they own. It is not an uncommon occurence for people to sell portions of an estate to pay the taxes on the estate. The fact that anyone would be forced to sell things given to them by their recently deceased relative is quite frankly mortifying.


 Taxes are paid on things given as gifts over a certain amount. Are you in favor of getting rid of the gift tax? Anyways, rich people, the really rich ones, have trusts. There are ways around paying estate taxes (estate planning) so in my mind it comes down to poor planning by the person making the gift of some property to another person upon their death.  I don't know why you find it mortifying that things are sold. I understand the sentimentality but painting it like that is a little overboard. If you look hard at what people have to sell to pay taxes it almost always involves real estate that is worth so much that the person inheriting it could not afford to live there and pay the property taxes. If it is the specifics that irk you so much then we could delve into details.

 On the question of a plutocracy vs. meritocracy: I have looked at the history and plutocracies only come about when the amount of capital becomes extremely skewed distribution wise. Plutocracies don't exist when the distribution of capital is more even. Plutocracies aren't meritocratic by definition. I prefer meritocracies so I am for measures that prevent the rise of plutocracies. I view campaign finance reform as only a treatment for the symptom and not a cure (but I'm still for campaign finance, go McCain). 



I Blame Wii Fit!

Final-Fan on 23 November 2007

The fact that anyone would be forced to sell things given to them by their recently deceased relative is quite frankly mortifying.

Nice pun.



GET IT? MORTIFYING?



Just thought I'd lighten the mood. 



Tag (courtesy of fkusumot): "Please feel free -- nay, I encourage you -- to offer rebuttal."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
My advice to fanboys: Brag about stuff that's true, not about stuff that's false. Predict stuff that's likely, not stuff that's unlikely. You will be happier, and we will be happier.

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Sen. Pat Moynihan
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The old smileys: ; - ) : - ) : - ( : - P : - D : - # ( c ) ( k ) ( y ) If anyone knows the shortcut for , let me know!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I have the most epic death scene ever in VGChartz Mafia.  Thanks WordsofWisdom!