It looks like it's Paul Ryan!!!

arbitrary tax

If any part of that collection was bought from a dealer or a public auction, or anywhere else except another private collector, the price included tax.

Why should anyone be forced to sell anything inherited, just to pay an arbitrary tax?
If any part of that collection was bought from a dealer or a public auction, or anywhere else except another private collector, the price included tax.
So why should the son pay tax on the items again?

You keep saying he should sell part of the collection, but you haven't made the case as to WHY.

You keep saying he should sell part of the collection, but you haven't made the case as to WHY.

Why should anyone be forced to sell anything inherited, just to pay an arbitrary tax?

If any part of that collection was bought from a dealer or a public auction, or anywhere else except another private collector, the price included tax. So why should the son pay tax on the items again?

Sales tax is a percentage of the purchase price, so the govt got their money then.
To decide that they want more after death on something that has already been taxed is wrong.

mysteryman wrote:

You keep saying he should sell part of the collection, but you haven't made the case as to WHY.

Why should anyone be forced to sell anything inherited, just to pay an arbitrary tax?

The tax is not arbitrary; it's a tax on a transaction, just like any other the government would charge.

Quote:

If any part of that collection was bought from a dealer or a public auction, or anywhere else except another private collector, the price included tax. So why should the son pay tax on the items again?

Assets and goods change hands many, many times over their lives; are you asserting that they should only be taxed the once?

For example, if Ford produces a car out of steel that was imported from China, and they pay tax on that steel, should you then not have to pay tax on the car when you buy it? If you then re-sell the car, should you not have to pay tax on THAT sale? I think, if you think about it, you'll realize that what you are proposing is a completely unworkable system of taxation. On the other hand, our current system works extremely well indeed.

Quote:

Sales tax is a percentage of the purchase price, so the govt got their money then.
To decide that they want more after death on something that has already been taxed is wrong.

You're clearly incorrect about this. What more, there are a wide variety of legal avenues available for those who are nearing death to transfer their assets to their children and others at reduced tax rates - if people bother to plan ahead.

Cycloptichorn

So, even though no money changes hands and the only actually transaction is a piece of paper that says someone else now owns something, that should be taxed at 35% of it's worth?

What did the government do to earn any of the wealth?

So, even though no money changes hands and the only actually transaction is a piece of paper that says someone else now owns something, that should be taxed at 35% of it's worth?

What did the government do to earn any of the wealth?

oh yeah, I forgot that govt does everything. My bad

You know what? I spent four formative years here in Ohio. I'm a product of the Ohio public university system. (Applause.) I'm a graduate of Miami of Ohio. (Applause.)

Paul Ryan, praising public education? Maybe the congressman really is a secret Obama plot.

WE built Paul Ryan(21+ / 0-)



Look at his life:

Born into a family that made its fortune building railroad embankments, highways and airports - all funded by us, the taxpayers.

He attended a public high school - funded by us, the taxpayers.

He received Social Security (survivor) benefits from age 16 to 18 - funded by us, the taxpayers.

He attended Miami (Ohio) University - funded by us, the taxpayers.

In the 20 years since he graduated from college, Ryan has spent 14 as a congressman and several more as a congressional aide - funded by us, the taxpayers.

His entire non-taxpayer-funded life consists of a couple years working for conservative 'think-tanks' in Washington, and a year doing marketing for the family business (funded by us, the taxpayers).

We built Paul Ryan.

And now that he has achieved his (taxpayer-funded) American dream, his life ambition is to prevent as many people from doing the same as he possibly can.

What an American hero!

Cheers.


Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. Friedrich Schiller

by databob on Thu Aug 16, 2012 at 08:14:17 AM PDT

You're suggesting that government intrusion into the lives of citizens should be based on whether or not the citizen can effectively argue that it is unnecessary or unfair rather than government demonstrating why they should?

WASHINGTON-- In a television interview with WCPO Cincinnati, Republican vice presidential candidate Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) directly contradicted an Associated Press report that said he had sought stimulus funds for his congressional district, while at the same time publicly decrying the bill as a "wasteful spending spree."

"No, I never asked for stimulus," Ryan said when questioned on reports that he had sought funds.

Ryan's statement directly counters the evidence of four letters obtained by the AP which the congressman wrote to Energy Secretary Steven Chu, praising energy programs supported by the stimulus and requesting funds for initiatives in his district.

Ryan's private praise for Department of Energy programs and his written requests for stimulus funds contradict not only his public criticism of the 2009 stimulus bill, but also many of the budget priorities he has laid out, including cuts to investments in green technologies.

The Boston Globe reported that in 2010, after writing several letters to federal departments requesting stimulus funds for his district, Ryan told a caller on Boston talk radio show WBZ Nightside with Dan Rea that he would never vote against the stimulus bill and "then write to the government to ask them to send us money."

Ryan went on to state that he "did not request any stimulus money."

Raising further questions about the vice presidential candidate's claim today that he never sought stimulus money, Ryan spokesman Brendan Buck referred AP to previous explanations by the congressman's office that by requesting funds Ryan was simply "providing a legitimate constituent service."

"If Congressman Ryan is asked to help a Wisconsin entity applying for existing federal grant funds, he does not believe flawed policy should get in the way of doing his job," Ryan's office said when first asked about the funding requests by the Wall Street Journal in 2010.

UPDATE: 11:59 p.m. --
Ryan responded Thursday night with a statement that said the letters "should have been handled differently."

"After having these letters called to my attention I checked into them, and they were treated as constituent service requests in the same way matters involving Social Security or Veterans Affairs are handled," Ryan said in the statement.

"This is why I didn't recall the letters earlier," he added. "But they should have been handled differently, and I take responsibility for that. Regardless, it's clear that the Obama stimulus did nothing to stimulate the economy, and now the president is asking to do it all over again."