Tuesday, December 21, 2010

One big reason I've come to despise the Democrat Party

and call it the National Socialist Democrat Party: you build an estate, on which you pay various taxes throughout life- sometimes more than once on the same things- but you shouldn't be allowed to leave the estate to your family or whoever because miserable little bastards like Barney Frank say 'They haven't earned it."

Frank, put bluntly, it is NON OF YOU GOD-DAMNED BUSINESS WHAT I DO WITH THE ESTATE I BUILT. None. You and your kind are nothing more than thieves workign under color of law to steal what other people earned.


DJMoore said...

I'm willing to go this far:

If we have a personal income tax at all, then an inheritance is nothing but income for the recipients, and it should be taxed as such.

What cranks me is a separate "estate" tax, clearly confiscatory above a certain amount, on the excuse that they haven't earned it.

My sense is that recipient did earn it, in the eyes of the decedent, who is solely able to determine what the recipient's relationship was worth.

An estate tax assumes that the state alone is competent to determine what is useful activity that deserves compensation.

Income is income; why it is paid is purely between the payer and the payee.

(Actually, I think I do understand the origins of the estate tax prejudice: it's the very wise prejudice against a hereditary noble class. But that includes a privileged position under the law, not just wealth, and does apply here in the U.S.)

DJMoore said...

Aargh, sense reversing typo in my closing sentence:
"does not apply here in the U.S."

Anonymous said...

See Robber Barron's a history lesson. The go hug a union member for your workers rights and many of the social benefits you take advantage of.

Phelps said...

Frankly, I would rather pile it up and set it on fire than pay the sumbitches one dime when I die.

Titan Mk6B said...

Let's say a father and son work a farm. The land and assets are in the fathers name so he will receive all the gains in land value and assets that the farm makes. Son would share in the profits but does not realize any of the property gains even though he works just as hard. When it is time to realize those gains through inheritance the government thinks it should receive a portion of those gains even if it means the farm will have to be sold in order to pay. To make this nightmare even worse the son will also probably be subject to capital gains tax on the sale of any farm assets.

This is just wrong.

Not really sure how likely this scenario is but it certainly is possible.

Firehand said...

Anonymous, off topic and bullshit.

Oh, and when unions stopped worrying about fair pay and safe working conditions and got into politics- like Trumka the socialist- they became a threat. Screw you.