Estate Taxes

#77
#77
LouderVol said:
If the government didnt allow something you wouldnt be allowed to do it. Jesus what a circular line of reasoning. How did we ever function without the government?

The only role the government should have here is if disputes are brought before them.
Click to expand...

He must be a lawyer.
 
#79
#79
hog88 said:
Either you cannot read or cannot comprehend.

A person should not have to pay a lawyer to set up their estate so that their estate isn't consumed or broken up because of taxes. If my dad had a will drawn up all legal by a lawyer leaving the entire farm (land, equipment, cattle, everything) to my mother she would have to sell a good portion of it to pay the taxes.

THIS IS WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT.
Click to expand...
It's not even moving goalposts, he is digging up the goal posts and saying we are playing a different sport.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
#81
#81
hog88 said:
Either you cannot read or cannot comprehend.

A person should not have to pay a lawyer to set up their estate so that their estate isn't consumed or broken up because of taxes. If my dad had a will drawn up all legal by a lawyer leaving the entire farm (land, equipment, cattle, everything) to my mother she would have to sell a good portion of it to pay the taxes.

THIS IS WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT.
Click to expand...
If they knew the laws and how to plan their own estate they could avoid that. Most people don't so they hire a lawyer to help. Sorry they couldn't figure it out on their own.
 
#82
#82
Sea Ray said:
You're drifting here. Let's use the example of Henry Ford. He wanted to leave his business to his family, in your words, spouses and children. There were no issues with them not receiving protection. But he saw that laws would take a great deal of his business away from them. So he comes up with this scheme of voting and non voting shares etc, etc. OK, so why did he and his accountants have to jump through those hoops? Why does the gov't think that they should get a portion of his business that he built from scratch?
Click to expand...
Why does Henry Ford think he should be able to give it to his kids? That's an expectation that has to be weighed against other competing societal interests.

You can cry for his kids but I wont.
 
#83
#83
Ashevolle said:
Why does Henry Ford think he should be able to give it to his kids? That's an expectation that has to be weighed against other competing societal interests.

You can cry for his kids but I wont.
Click to expand...
Wtf is this bs?

If society wanted a piece they should have been involved. Since it's a family matter I am guessing they weren't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HeadVol77, NorthDallas40, jaybird_1981 and 3 others
#84
#84
Ashevolle said:
If they knew the laws and how to plan their own estate they could avoid that. Most people don't so they hire a lawyer to help. Sorry they couldn't figure it out on their own.
Click to expand...

That's the point, no one should have to hire a lawyer to mitigate an estate tax.
 
#87
#87
Ashevolle said:
Why does Henry Ford think he should be able to give it to his kids? That's an expectation that has to be weighed against other competing societal interests.

You can cry for his kids but I wont.
Click to expand...

Why should Henry Ford be able to keep it even when he’s living? This has to be weighed against other competing societal interests.
When a man goes to the hospital with a broken thumb, why not take his liver, kidneys, heart and lungs which will save 6 people who need a transplant? It’s for the “greater good”.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40, jaybird_1981, Sea Ray and 3 others
#88
#88
midnight orange said:
Why should Henry Ford be able to keep it even when he’s living? This has to be weighed against other competing societal interests.
When a man goes to the hospital with a broken thumb, why not take his liver, kidneys, heart and lungs which will save 6 people who need a transplant? It’s for the “greater good”.
Click to expand...

Lawyers should be required to provide free legal services to those that can't pay. It's for the greater good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HeadVol77, NorthDallas40, Pepe_Silvia and 4 others
#89
#89
midnight orange said:
Why should Henry Ford be able to keep it even when he’s living? This has to be weighed against other competing societal interests.
When a man goes to the hospital with a broken thumb, why not take his liver, kidneys, heart and lungs which will save 6 people who need a transplant? It’s for the “greater good”.
Click to expand...
They never want the continuation of their thought process examined. They want to ignore we are already half way down the slippery slope, not at the top/bottom.

It's the "real socialism" issue. If we just did the right things it would work. When it doesnt it justifies further socialism.
 
  • Like
Reactions: midnight orange
#90
#90
hog88 said:
Lawyers should be required to provide free legal services to those that can't pay. It's for the greater good.
Click to expand...
I was thinking there should be some type of mandatory public service there. Considering it's all a "right" and they want to be involved in the determination/execution of those rights.
 
#94
#94
LouderVol said:
They never want the continuation of their thought process examined. They want to ignore we are already half way down the slippery slope, not at the top/bottom.

It's the "real socialism" issue. If we just did the right things it would work. When it doesnt it justifies further socialism.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately the view that our worth is nothing more than revenue stream for the government is the dominant view. Public education has done a bang up job of indoctrinating this point of view as they teach our children how to be obedient postal clerks. Got to go, I hear the lunch bell ringing.
 
Last edited:
#96
#96
Many people are dead and buried with precious metals taken to the grave. Wedding bands, favorite pieces of jewelry, gold dental fillings, replacement joints, etc.

If we are not able to steal from the deceased, and if societal needs outweigh the sentiments of surviving family, do we not have a moral obligation to exhume those bodies and confiscate anything of value for the benefit of society?
 
  • Like
Reactions: midnight orange, NorthDallas40, jaybird_1981 and 3 others
#98
#98
McDad said:
Many people are dead and buried with precious metals taken to the grave. Wedding bands, favorite pieces of jewelry, gold dental fillings, replacement joints, etc.

If we are not able to steal from the deceased, and if societal needs outweigh the sentiments of surviving family, do we not have a moral obligation to exhume those bodies and confiscate anything of value for the benefit of society?
Click to expand...
What we need is, like, camps that we could put all these rich people and others that have jewelry or metal fillings or successful businesses and then when they die we can get all that stuff and melt it down and sell it. And if they won't die quick enough naturally we can maybe figure out a way to speed it up. Idk I'm just spitballing what would benefit the greater good.
 
#100
#100
WBO said:
Actually the estate tax was the first national tax. It was promoted by Teddy Roosevelt as a device to break up the concentrated wealth and power of the old robber barons.

As for the poster who says the IRS could just say the estate is worth $500 million, actually no they can't. It's my understanding the Taxpayer Bill of Rights says that if the IRS assesses a tax without proof and the amount is determined to have been incorrect, the taxpayer can recover 20% of the unsubstantiated amount on top of having that assessment thrown out.

Currently the exemption amount is over $11.2 million per taxpayer so a married couple can pass over $22 million without any tax.

For all you guys who don't want any taxes, that's fine as long as you are comfortable with no police, no roads, no schools and no military. Start learning Mandarin.
Click to expand...

Total nonsense post right here...
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40 and jaybird_1981
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top