MATH

Sky Blue Lou said:
Inherited wealth.
There are huge family fortunes out there whose heirs and managers contribute nothing to society besides some token taxes. I have nothing against Elon Musk* and in many ways admire him for his bold vision for the future and efforts to get us there. When he passes it is likely that his companies will be taken over by money managers whose first directive will be to protect the assets. The innovation will be done. The benefit to society will be diminished and there will just be one more wealth fund with entitled assholes that have never worked a real job jetting around and contributing zero.

*All conjecture as far as Musk. Substitute any massive fortune from the industrial revolution forward. After multiple generations the fortune is larger and public benefit smaller.

What if when the creator of these fortunes passes the estate is taxed at 50%? 50% of a billion dollars is still a shitload of money for the heirs to live on for at least one more generation and with wise investment will still leave a sizable fortune for the next and the next after that. If one of those generations contains an innovator/inventor of even some fractional ability of the progenitor the financial ability to create another empire is there and free to employ.

All this is speculation on my part of course. I have read too much "future history" good and bad (both in outlook and quality of writing lol!) Blow it up, shoot it down. Suggest changes in percentages or thresholds. Tell us why it couldn't or shouldn't be but, first and foremost - got something better?
Click to expand...
Sky Blue Lou said:
I believe it is society's right to make use of the fruits of the labors of those who have built that wealth after they have passed and can no longer use it.
Click to expand...
So, I expect your line of reasoning includes the necessity of tax brackets; otherwise taking 50% of the 60k left by some poor guy when he dies would not be "fair"?

The reason that capitalism does not allow for tax brackets is that there is reduced incentive for entrepreneurship that way. Yes, there has to be mechanisms in place for the employees to be paid their fair share. "Well, we should have employee-owned companies..." but corporations only survive because entrepreneurs (with big money) are willing to stake some significant capital in return for significant... returns (even bigger money). It's called "angel investment" -- look it up. Besides, if you want to use Elon as an example, he has created well over 200,000 jobs through companies that he founded / co-founded. Not insignificant, but also very far from being the best, with Steve Jobs and Jeff Bezos far outranking Musk.

If anything, taxes should go down all around to stimulate the economy, offshore jobs should be brought back to the US, and we have to stop fighting foreign wars just because some bigwig in Washington is making a profit. Oh waaait... does that mean Trump should come back??
 
leddy said:
Where it gets dicey is when you might have a family business. I’d hate for the children to have to sell the business to pay an inheritance tax.
Click to expand...
Agreed. That is why you have thresholds and those devilish details. Maybe the tax starts at $100 million. Maybe it's only the cash assets that are taxed. Maybe children actively employed by/operating the business are exempted. (Or that particular business and its assets are exempted). & etc...
 
Serendipity Records said:
But WHY would you ever tax someone because their parent died?
Click to expand...
We are not taxing the child. We are taxing the parent.

Let's assume all the benefits that accrue from a wealth builder's activity; jobs, taxes, life-improving products are stipulated. No argument over the truthfulness of the comment. All fortunes created public benefit just by existing where before they did not. Let's take 50% of that estate and dedicate it not to the general fund but to specific societal needs; hospitals, bridges, baseball stadiums (j/k) i.e. good, positive things. If it makes you feel better we can name these public works after the benefactor whose death provided them. Hell we can build a statue and invite the kids to the dedication. The point is that we do not impoverish the heirs. We don't even make a substantial difference in their lives. We reallocate financial resources that the creator is no longer around to direct and that his heirs will never miss.
 
A man's estate represents what he has worked for all his life... represents what wealth he has managed to accumulate despite his tax burden. Taxing him again "WHEN HE'S DEAD" is just fucking ridiculous!

An inheritance has already been taxed...

Think about the precedence this sets for the "average" man who has lived long enough to simply pay off his house.
 
Sky Blue Lou said:
The point is that we do not impoverish the heirs. We don't even make a substantial difference in their lives. We reallocate financial resources that the creator is no longer around to direct and that his heirs will never miss.
Click to expand...
In order for that to be true, there has to be a tax bracket. Otherwise
Serendipity Records said:
taking 50% of the 60k left by some poor guy when he dies would not be "fair"
Click to expand...
 
Serendipity Records said:
Isn't that the definition of "tax bracket"?
Click to expand...
If you want to use that definition I suppose that is correct. When talking of tax brackets I have always assumed it meant graduated income tax percentages. The higher your earnings the higher your rate. The opposite of a flat tax. This is a one time tax at a flat rate with a threshold or floor below which it doesn't apply.

Happy now?
 
Sky Blue Lou said:
Yeah so? His kids didn't accumulate it. Let them accumulate their own.
Click to expand...
I assume it you are not leaving a dime of inheritance to your own children. Taxation issues aside, it's cold hearted, unless you prefer to trust the frigging State to put whatever $$$ you leave behind toward a supposed "good cause".

Hmmm? Perhaps you're right. Mick Jagger is worth 500 mil, and he's not leaving any of it to his kids. Undoubtedly, the government will put the 500 mil to good use.
 
60's guy said:
I assume it you are not leaving a dime of inheritance to your own children.
Click to expand...
C'mon man! What is it with you fuckin guys that don't read the posts? I won't have anywhere near large enough an estate to be affected by this tax proposal should it miraculously come to be before I pass.
 
Last edited:
Sky Blue Lou said:
If you want to use that definition I suppose that is correct. When talking of tax brackets I have always assumed it meant graduated income tax percentages. The higher your earnings the higher your rate. The opposite of a flat tax. This is a one time tax at a flat rate with a threshold or floor below which it doesn't apply.

Happy now?
Click to expand...
Glad we're clear, no hard feelings. I respect your opinion, though I really can't understand how you can possibly owe the State (or "society" if you prefer that word -- likening one to the other defines socialism though) once you die, after a lifetime of being cheated by them at every turn. I stand for a single income tax, no bracketing, with deductions for single-income families and freelance/self-employed. Maybe also a sales tax, but not as high as the current one. The whole system is way too convoluted as it is.
 
brassplyer said:
You're not, I see.

When you use the word "confiscatory" what does that mean to you?
Click to expand...
I know exactly what it means.

How about instead of playing semantics games and the gotcha tear down competition you try answering the questions I asked you? Do you have anything to contribute to the discussion or not? Is it all hit and run, seek and destroy or does there lurk some constructive thought in that dark psyche of yours?

Do you believe social stratification is increasing and does it constitute a problem? Do you believe wealth distribution is fair as it currently stands or is there a potential social problem with the ratio? Do you have any thoughts on possible solutions to these problems if you do in fact believe they are problematic?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top