That is it in a nutshell.

Post #253,735 by bepatient 4/28/06 11:57:52 AM Reply	That is it in a nutshell. Its double-taxation...and tell me one financial advisor that will tell you your retirement should be under $1M. While it >currently< might impact .25% (a stat I don't believe to be true, its too low), you've no idea the impact it has in teh tax planning stages in order for people impacted to AVOID the tax...because it simply makes sense to do so. It is CHEAPER to pay gift tax (at income rates) on donations over maximum. There are annual deductions allowed to place finances in trust, etc. The only people making money on this tax are the gov't on those who do NOT plan and the financial advisors who plan for everyone else. Impact on family businesses? One very highly public example...and its largely speculation that this was the reason...is the case of Art Modell, owner of Baltimore Ravens. When the move from Cleveland occured, Art was in negotations with Cleveland to keep the team there. New stadium was committed and all things that most teams hold the city hostage for...but NO CASH. Baltimore offered all of the above..plus a cash bonus that just happened to be approximately 50% of the teams market value at the time. The reason estate tax was thought to be involved, at this time Modell was very ill...and it was thought that this cash incentive was offered so that, in case he passed away, there would be enough cash reserves in the family to not force the sale of the team. This is the single largest issue with the tax. While a Dale Carnegie or Bill Gates do not risk the going concern of their business, the impact of transfer tax on a business in value of 1 to 5 million (a high growth section of the economy) is nearly well over 100% even though the effective rate is only 50%. If a 2.5 million estate is willed to 2 family members and 1.5 million is in business asset value (fair market, not invested)...the fed takes 1.25 million..leaving the 2 family members a choice. PAY 250k to keep the business, or sell it...often at well BELOW market because the fed doesn't wait for you to come up with the cash. It needs to go away...or be seriously modified to around the transfer of businesses as a going concern. If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. _{Fudd's First Law of Opposition} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #253,736 by Another Scott 4/28/06 12:34:41 PM Reply	Bah. "Double taxation" is a specious argument. You pay sales tax on [link\|http://www.irs.gov/publications/p510/ar02.html\|excise tax] when you buy tires. That's double taxation too. Big deal. It's incredibly easy to come up with specious arguments when talking about the "fairness" of taxes, IMO. "I don't like supporting the military. It's *unfair* that I have to pay taxes that go to the Pentagon!" Etc. Taxes are the price of having a functioning government that protects the rights of all of us, enables society as a whole to progress economically, etc. Enough money has to flow into the government to do that in a sustainable fashion. Inheritance taxes are an important component because: 1) they raise a significant amount of money, 2) they can slow the rise of vast accumulations of wealth that persist for generations that can damage society. As TR said in a link in my earlier post, the wealthy have a great deal invested in society. They didn't get their wealth on their own - society provided the framework that made it possible. They have a responsiblity to give back to society to enable others to have similar or better opportunities. People can and do argue about the appropriate and necessary level of taxation. That's fine. The threshold for applicability of inheritance taxes should be adjusted over time, and the rate should be examined as well. But comparing Joe Smith who has a $500k home, $500k in investments, and college funds for his 2.3 kids with the Mars or Walton or Kennedy or Rockefeller or Mellon or Ford or Heinz or [link\|http://www.forbes.com/lists/results.jhtml?passListId=54&passYear=1996&passListType=Person&resultsStart=1&resultsHowMany=25&resultsSortProperties=-numberfield2%2C%2Bstringfield1&resultsSortCategoryName=worth\|other family empires] when discussing inheritance taxes is disingenuous. What about family farms and small businesses? It seems to me that ways can be found to transfer control or ownership of companies without busting up the farm or destroying small business. Why should it be more of an issue when farms are sold without death being involved? For me, the more important issue is concentration of wealth - not necessarily having huge sums of money transferred to the US Treasury. It makes no sense to me that someone can build an empire in their lifetime and transfer it to their decedents or heirs and continue to have that concentrated wealth impact society for generations. We're not an aristocracy or plutocracy. In sum: Small businesses and farms are different from family empires. Wealth should not be concentrated in vast amounts for generations. Reasonable inheritance taxes are a good thing. The wealthy need to give back to society. We can argue about what "reasonable" is, but just because some of the wealthy have found ways to avoid inheritance taxes does not mean that they should be abolished. Don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. "Mend it, don't end it!" Cheers, Scott.
Post #253,738 by boxley 4/28/06 12:46:24 PM Reply	how very marxist of you "Wealth should not be concentrated in vast amounts for generations" So lets just kill all the rich people and their kids, worked in 1917. thanx, bill Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
Post #253,739 by Another Scott 4/28/06 12:50:11 PM Reply	I don't think Teddy was a Marxist.
Post #253,752 by ben_tilly 4/28/06 1:26:04 PM Reply	For those who don't understand that comment... Teddy Roosevelt was the US President who introduced the estate tax in the USA, which was one of the things that helped bring to an end the first Gilded Age. Any understanding of the history of that time underscores the point that excessive concentrations of wealth are bad for democracy. Cheers, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
Post #253,747 by ben_tilly 4/28/06 1:23:49 PM Reply	You have to have balance Go back to [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=253728\|http://z.iwethey.org...?contentid=253728] and you'll see that what I want is the preservation of democracy. While allowing incredible excesses of wealth to build up is bad for that, killing all the rich people is even worse. I am not a Marxist. Cheers, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
Post #253,751 by boxley 4/28/06 1:25:42 PM Reply	so advocating theft of private property to balance power is democracy? What an odd notion. thanx, bill Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
Post #253,756 by ben_tilly 4/28/06 1:30:59 PM Reply	Yes, it is. Democracy is rule by the people. Contrary to recent US propaganda, democracy is not the same as capitalism. Their interests align to some extent, but the alignment is not perfect. One example of the misalignment is that excessive concentrations of wealth create small groups of people who have the motivation and resources to try to take over the country. Therefore it is in the interests of democracy to keep such concentrations from developing. However measures to do this must necessarily run counter to capitalism. Cheers, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
Post #253,771 by boxley 4/28/06 2:06:23 PM Reply	Oh you mean national socialism, got it Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
Post #253,781 by ben_tilly 4/28/06 3:00:51 PM Reply	Nice insult Insults are for when you don't have any facts left, so I guess you're out of facts. For the record, National Socialism was to democracy as the neocons are to freedom and justice. For a historical figure who closer represents the view that I'm presenting, look at Teddy Roosevelt. (You know, the guy who actually introduced estate taxes.) Cheers, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
Post #253,782 by boxley 4/28/06 3:16:41 PM Reply	not an isult just a description of what you want to do Riches are yours for your lifetime only, then they are nationalized, that is a socialist idea practiced by a sense of the state or nation owns the fruits of your labor, you might not like the label but that is what you are describing. now, off to nawleans if the famdamily is ready. thanx, bill Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
Post #253,792 by ben_tilly 4/28/06 4:43:11 PM Reply	Then use another description Your description just happens to be the name of the single most reviled political party in 20'th century European history. And you claim that it is just intended as a description. Ri-ight. Pull the other one. It's got bells on. Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
Post #253,910 by boxley 4/30/06 7:23:22 PM Reply	well lets see, that party believed that all wealth was at the forbearance of the state. The state could confiscate at will and did from selected members of society who they claimed were rich and were simply reclaiming those parts of the state which were wrongly collected by the jews. You are expanding on that. You do not beleive in private property, you think it is just a single generational loan from the government to the individual. To me that is very scary that so many people seem to think the same way. With attitudes like that it wont be long before the "why wait until they're dead" crowd comes in and takes it a step further. When they do that it wont be the wasp's they start with. Your supposed reason is that we dont want a confiscatory aristocracy or religious body so you devise a scheme that is identical and held by political dynasties, no different from the european small states model in medeival times. Then after you re-invent the wheel you loudly proclaim that this is different. No, your goal is to ensure that only the National State Owns things and People. That was the heart and soul of National Socialism. Im sorry if it makes you uncomfortable but read the economic beliefs of that group and suspend your knowledge of their racial policies and you will see similarities to your economic belief system. thanx, bill Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
Post #253,915 by jb4 4/30/06 7:46:30 PM Reply	You been taking rhetoric lessons from BeeP? You do not beleive in private property, you think it is just a single generational loan from the government to the individual. I've been staying out of this because I see both sides of the argument, and I haven't yet decided where I will eventually weigh in on this. But, cripes, Box, he never said this, or naything like in the referenced post, or any other post I read of his. Such a blatant strawman argument is sucha complete turnoff, that any else reading this is most likely to give you a big "bullshit" and ignore that and any other argument you might wish to offer in support of your position. Let's try sticking to the knitting, OK? jb4 "Every Republican who wants to defend Bush on [the expansion of Presidential powers], should be forced to say, 'I wouldn't hesitate to see President Hillary Rodham Clinton have the same authority'." — an unidentified letter writer to Newsweek on the expansion of executive powers under the Bush administration
Post #253,921 by boxley 4/30/06 8:13:34 PM Reply	Sorry Ben, Ascribed a quote from Todd to You "Sorry man, while you live, you play and maybe win. When you die, it all goes back to the banker for the next round." That is the Idea that there is no personal ownership of wealth, its a loan from the government. Now I do not expect to be hit when I die and my Ma had to scrub floors to pay off the old mans owes and doughs but I firmly believe that mismanages wealth shrinks not grows and a new better viking will inherit thru business cutthroatedness and I want a chance for my Kids to have a shot. From observation I think it is 6 generations. New Wealth, growth, stodgy conservative, dissapation, growth. How is Mrs Ford and all the little Fords doing? 60 years they will be begging for a floor spot with the UAWSPD. United Autoworkers Space Division. thanx, bill Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
Post #253,927 by drewk 4/30/06 9:16:20 PM Reply	I don't think that's the "banker" he meant It sounded to me more like, "You can't take it with you." === Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link\|http://DocHope.com\|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats]. [link\|http://DocHope.com\|http://DocHope.com]
Post #253,929 by boxley 4/30/06 9:22:44 PM Reply	maybe not but the freekin local squire with his hand out shouldnt get shinola and all the posturing about, well we have to ensure... etc is that these people dont have a clue about what is MINE! Private! I already paid you fucks! thanx, bill Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
Post #253,958 by tuberculosis 5/1/06 12:20:49 AM Reply	What are you gonna do with it from a hole in the ground? [link\|http://www.blackbagops.net\|Black Bag Operations Log] [link\|http://www.objectiveclips.com\|Artificial Intelligence] [link\|http://www.badpage.info/seaside/html\|Scrutinizer]
Post #253,979 by boxley 5/1/06 8:17:45 AM Reply	I think my kids could sqander as efficiently as a government Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
Post #253,992 by pwhysall 5/1/06 9:35:56 AM 5/1/06 9:36:23 AM Reply	Not spend it on invading Iraq, for one thing. Peter [link\|http://www.no2id.net/\|Don't Let The Terrorists Win] [link\|http://www.kuro5hin.org\|There is no K5 Cabal] [link\|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org\|Home] Use P2P for legitimate purposes! Edited by pwhysall May 1, 2006, 09:36:23 AM EDT Expand All History
Post #253,957 by tuberculosis 5/1/06 12:20:19 AM Reply	It was a reference to Monopoly [link\|http://www.blackbagops.net\|Black Bag Operations Log] [link\|http://www.objectiveclips.com\|Artificial Intelligence] [link\|http://www.badpage.info/seaside/html\|Scrutinizer]
Post #253,963 by ben_tilly 5/1/06 1:49:59 AM Reply	The usual quote is "rags to rags in three generations" A man is born poor but motivated, builds up a financial empire. His sons never have to work and never learn how to. They piss away the fortune. His grandsons are in rags again. Great fortunes take longer to vanish, but the usual difference is that there gets to be several middle generations. If the fortune is large and the money is tied up in ways that the inheritors cannot readily waste, there might be quite a few such middle generations. The problem comes when someone gets the bright idea of manipulating the political system to make the wealth travel further. Then we wind up having to deal with someone like George III. (Pick either one - both were bad for America.) About capitalism, I firmly believe that "wealth" and "ownership" are societally created ideas. It isn't that they are granted to us by the government, it is that both government and ownership are powerful fictions created by people. So if we're going to make up rules, I'd like to see rules made up that tend to do well for people. Now the fact is that capitalism, for all of its shortcomings, is pretty darned effective. Therefore in general I'm a capitalist. However capitalism is not, for me, a root value. Therefore I'm in favour of deviations (eg taxes) from a purely capitalistic society if I see a lot of value in them. The idea of the estate tax is a deviation that I'm in favour of. (That said, I would like to see the level at which it kicks in raised.) However I'm against interventions that I think bring bad consequences and no good results. For example confiscating everyone's possessions upon death would be a horrible idea because I believe that the government will generally handle that property less effectively than private owners will. Furthermore saying that that is OK far too conveniently leads to abuses from the people in power. (Unfortunately, very few of my positions fit on a postcard...) Cheers, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
Post #253,740 by bepatient 4/28/06 1:00:51 PM Reply	And you'll see me be very consistent in any discussions I've had about pass-through excise taxes and government imposed "fees"...something I am involved in every day becasue of the 7.5% pass through on airline tickets, as an example. Don't like them, don't agree with them. Most are "hidden" so that the unsuspecting public doesn't understand that over 25% of that airline ticket you bought goes straight to the fed...nope...John Q Public thinks the airline gets all that money and can't understand why they all can't turn a profit. Not a big fan of the layering of taxes at all. In addition, the forced sale aspect of the estate tax either gets worked around or I'm all for throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Why, because Mars or Walton or Kennedy or Rockefeller or Mellon or Ford or Heinz will avoid paying the majority of their "fair share" by buying a nice, high priced, estate planner...while the guys that get blasted are the ones that can't afford such high priced talent when they're living. If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. _{Fudd's First Law of Opposition} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #253,767 by pwhysall 4/28/06 1:53:19 PM Reply	I see your Bah and raise you a Feh. The whole pro-death-tax argument boils down to penalisation of the successful. If I eat beans and sit in the dark my whole life, saving up almost every penny I earn (and being taxed on it already), why shouldn't my offspring reap those benefits without the gubmint taking nearly half of it, for no other reason than that I'm dead? Just tax live people to an appropriate level. Death tax is simply a disincentive to prudence and success. Peter [link\|http://www.no2id.net/\|Don't Let The Terrorists Win] [link\|http://www.kuro5hin.org\|There is no K5 Cabal] [link\|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org\|Home] Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
Post #253,778 by Andrew Grygus 4/28/06 2:32:17 PM Reply	Wow, is that ever a 'well worn' arguement. "Worn out" is more to the point. Now given my suggestion that the threshold be raised, and I'll accept Ben's figure of $20 million as reasonable, I'd like to see the guy who leaves more money than that who scrimped and ate beans all his life. The overwhelming majority inherited enough to make a lot more the easy way. The ones that didn't likely (with the exception of a few celebrities and athletes) made their millions by deception, exploitation or outright fraud. It's just become tiresome reading endless stories of "business geniuses" praised for making zillions of dollars with great new ideas and then reading about their convictions for fraud. [link\|http://www.aaxnet.com\|AAx]
Post #253,742 by ben_tilly 4/28/06 1:10:04 PM 4/28/06 1:22:02 PM Reply	Cry me up a river I don't like nepotism at the best of times. Claims that a tax makes nepotism more difficult doesn't sound like a problem to me. My view is that having a rich dad no more makes you deserve to have an easy life than having a poor dad makes you deserve to have a hard one. I take this point personally because I grew up in a family that had nothing but hopes. I can't really sympathize with people who think that it is too hard to pass millions on to their children. Making it personal, if my son can't get an advantage in life from his ability, how he's raised and the education that he's going to get, then he doesn't deserve to have a good life. Cheers, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother) Edited by ben_tilly April 28, 2006, 01:22:02 PM EDT Expand All History
Post #253,755 by boxley 4/28/06 1:29:12 PM Reply	so having a rich dad is a detriment because when he dies some fuck in washington, takes 1/2 yer old mans money and you are left homeless, thats very caring of you. thanx, bill Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
Post #253,757 by ben_tilly 4/28/06 1:34:04 PM Reply	What do you call having a poor dad then? When a poor dad dies you don't get anything. When a rich dad dies you get enough money to pay the rent on a nice place for a few years. It doesn't sound detrimental at all to have the rich dad. Cheers, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
Post #253,768 by inthane-chan 4/28/06 1:54:10 PM Reply	s/few years/rest of your life At least, if you actually live like I do, instead of like some spoiled rich brat. When somebody asks you to trade your freedoms for security, it isn't your* security they're talking about.*
Post #253,772 by ben_tilly 4/28/06 2:08:15 PM Reply	I said a nice place :-P However even if you change that you're probably wrong. After a couple of decades inflation, the money won't rent as much as it does now. Cheers, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
Post #253,773 by boxley 4/28/06 2:08:35 PM Reply	whenever someone takes 1/2 of mine it gets detrimental if the old fart cut me a check before he coughs then I pay 28%. Cause it was tied up in property and it didnt sell before he coughed I pay 50% I call bullshit, its the same pile of dough thanx, bill Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
Post #253,776 by ben_tilly 4/28/06 2:14:11 PM Reply	It wasn't yours It was your father's. The question is how much should transfer over to you. As for "detrimental", I understand you to be arguing that having a rich parent is detrimental because you get hit with this tax. I'm pointing out that having a rich parent and getting hit with this tax still leaves you better off than having a poor parent and not. So on balance you're still better off having a rich parent. Better off is not "detrimental" in my books. Cheers, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
Post #253,759 by Andrew Grygus 4/28/06 1:35:02 PM Reply	Please provide verifiable references . . . . . to sons and daughters of the very wealthy who were left homeless by the estate tax. [link\|http://www.aaxnet.com\|AAx]
Post #253,784 by Another Scott 4/28/06 3:44:53 PM Reply	:-) Not an answer, but the image reminds me of the stories about [link\|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hetty_Green\|Hetty Green]: Her frugality extended to family life. Her son Ned broke his leg as a child, but Hetty took him away from the hospital when she was recognized. She tried to treat him at home, but the leg contracted gangrene and had to be amputated \ufffd he ended up with a cork prosthesis. My Ma is a billionaire and I only got this cork leg! Cheers, Scott.
Post #253,796 by Andrew Grygus 4/28/06 5:40:39 PM Reply	Yeah, we had that in my family too. My grandfater on my father's side was the town banker in New Britain Connecticut. My father's eyesight was extremely bad. He had to get eyeglasses from a charity organization because his dad wouldn't put up the bucks for them. This guy used to walk home from the bank to his 3 story mansion (most of which was locked up the day after the decorating was done to save on heating costs). He'd stop by the butcher shop to see if the butcher had any meat that was starting to turn that he could get at a discount. Of course college for any of the kids was totally out of the question. I can't be too harsh on the old guy though. After dividing his estate a jillion ways from Suncay my grandchild share was $8000, enough to get me into the house I've lived in for 30 years now. [link\|http://www.aaxnet.com\|AAx]
Post #253,906 by boxley 4/30/06 7:07:32 PM Reply	Andrew Jackson's Grandchildren Roosevelt saw how wonderful reconstruction was for carpet baggers he extended it to a new generation. thanx, bill Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
Post #253,914 by Another Scott 4/30/06 7:41:28 PM Reply	Eh? [link\|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Jackson\|Wikipedia]: Jackson had two adopted sons, Andrew Jackson Jr., the son of Rachel's brother Severn Donelson, and Lyncoya, a Creek Indian orphan adopted by Jackson after the Creek War. Lyncoya died in 1828 at age 16, probably from pneumonia or tuberculosis. [...] In his will, Jackson left his entire estate to his adopted son, Andrew Jackson Jr., except for specifically enumerated items that were left to various other friends and family members. Jackson left several slaves to his daughter-in-law, and grandchildren. Jackson left a sword to his grandson, with the injunction, "that he will always use it in defence of our glorious Union." [link\|http://www.thehermitage.com/hermtg_history/hermtg_property/decline/content.htm\|The Hermitage] fell into decline after Jackson's death, but they don't mention estate taxes or any other tax problems. Do you have a link? Thanks. Cheers, Scott.
Post #253,918 by boxley 4/30/06 7:59:23 PM Reply	When I was at the Hermitage I saw info that had the begats living in frugality in California and the folks that currently have it saved it from being broken up for taxes. thanx, bill Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
Post #253,816 by tuberculosis 4/29/06 1:05:57 AM Reply	Its a tax on personal wealth I don't buy the business shit. Incorporate if its a problem and gift the stock. Furthermore, the tax only occurrs once per generation and doesn't kick in until you're worth $2 million buck AFTER all expenses, charitable bequests, and bequests to spouse. "The estate tax is not a death tax and it is not paid by the dead. It is a tax on the transfer of wealth and is paid by the heirs; it comes out of the estate before distribution. Currrently, the tax applies only to taxable estates over $1.5 million, that is, estates over $1.5 million after debts, final expenses, charitable bequests and bequests to a spouse have been subtracted. Because an unlimited amount may be transferred tax free to a spouse, the tax is typically paid only once a generation, when the second spouse dies. " Even Wm Gates II thinks repeal of the estate tax is BS. "Special rules allow family farms and businesses to further reduce or defer estate taxes. Of the 18,800 estates that filed returns in 2003 (out of approximately 2.4 million people who died), only 440 consisted primarily of family farms or businesses. (Center for Budget Policies and Priorities.) At the $ 2 million exemption level which takes effect next year, this will drop to 210 estates. Thus, the idea that large numbers of families will be forced to sell farms or businesses to pay the estate tax is a myth." My source: [link\|http://thenexthurrah.typepad.com/the_next_hurrah/2005/09/why_america_nee.html\|http://thenexthurrah..._america_nee.html] Perhaps your example is one of the edge cases. So what? You can't please everybody all the time. Nothing will be fair to everybody. Looks like a pretty small set of victims. I'm OK with it. [link\|http://www.blackbagops.net\|Black Bag Operations Log] [link\|http://www.objectiveclips.com\|Artificial Intelligence] [link\|http://www.badpage.info/seaside/html\|Scrutinizer]
Post #253,828 by bepatient 4/29/06 11:17:26 AM Reply	Small set of victims is larger than the set your after. Its a poorly conceived, poorly written and woefully unfit for the task piece of legislation. I would rather see it scrapped than continue in any form. I'll take my chances on being a surf to Sam Walton's kids. If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. _{Fudd's First Law of Opposition} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #253,830 by Another Scott 4/29/06 11:34:17 AM Reply	s /surf/serf/ "Surf's up at Wal-Mart!" :-)
Post #253,831 by ben_tilly 4/29/06 11:52:20 AM 4/29/06 11:58:08 AM Reply	I disagree on how good it is The estate tax has done a pretty good job of what was supposed to do, and has aged reasonably gracefully. And I say this despite personally knowing people who have been adversely affected by this. (My sister-in-law's parents owned a house on the Jersey Shore which, well you know the scenario.) I know you disagree on how graceful it is, but considering how many decades it has been around, I'm impressed. According to [link\|http://www.faireconomy.org/estatetax/ETHistory.html\|this] it settled on its current form in the mid-30s. Compare that with another specific tax on the wealthy which was introduced much later. Which tax do you think does its original job with less collateral damage today, the estate tax or the AMT? Is there any real comparison? Furthermore I think that fixing it is pretty easy. Just raise the bar for who is affected and make that be indexed to inflation. (I'd also want to increase the rate on the taxed amount, but leave that debate for another day.) By contrast my big fear is that the United States will devolve into a plutocracy. In fact to a good extent it already has (what portion of federal politicians have great inherited wealth?), and I'm therefore against any change that could accelerate that trend. Cheers, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother) Edited by ben_tilly April 29, 2006, 11:58:08 AM EDT Expand All History
Post #253,846 by tuberculosis 4/29/06 11:42:00 PM Reply	not if you measure in dollars And this family farm shit? There hasn't been a single family farm lost to the estate tax that would have been saved by the new cuts. Sorry man, while you live, you play and maybe win. When you die, it all goes back to the banker for the next round. [link\|http://www.blackbagops.net\|Black Bag Operations Log] [link\|http://www.objectiveclips.com\|Artificial Intelligence] [link\|http://www.badpage.info/seaside/html\|Scrutinizer]

Welcome to IWETHEY!