That part about stealing someones wealth when they die smacks of communism. Sorry bill.
I will say that for those who have worked and helped pay for health coverage, should have between job coverage that wasn't horrifically expensive. COBRA costs too much. It's a huge barrier to changing jobs and it shouldn't be.
You can't steal from a dead man.
Cycloptichorn
Cycloptichorn wrote:You can't steal from a dead man.
Cycloptichorn
What about his family? What about the kids who are forced to sell the family home because they can't pay the inheritance tax? That tax has to go.
Cycloptichorn wrote:You can't steal from a dead man.
Cycloptichorn
Death is the "final" steal.
cjhsa wrote:Cycloptichorn wrote:You can't steal from a dead man.
Cycloptichorn
What about his family? What about the kids who are forced to sell the family home because they can't pay the inheritance tax? That tax has to go.
How many examples of this do you think you can actually find?
What you are talking about is poor planning. Anyone with an ounce of sense can take steps to get around the inheritance tax. Not to mention the fact, that the home in question would have to be worth somewhere around a million dollars for it to even qualify; my heart isn't bleeding for those poor kids, forced to sell the home and pocket all that cash, oh woe is them...
Cycloptichorn
cjhsa wrote:That part about stealing someones wealth when they die smacks of communism. Sorry bill.
If you knew that your "wealth" would be distributed to those who are not your heirs upon your death then you would make different choices about what to do with your money during your life. I'd rather see increased incentives for private support of underprivileged neighbors than the government taking your estate through taxes, but I don't think your heirs are "entitled" to your wealth.
They are unless I say otherwise.
And that is the difference between you and me. "Keep" means it's mine and you can't have it....
cjhsa wrote:They are unless I say otherwise.
And that is the difference between you and me. "Keep" means it's mine and you can't have it....
Hahah, until the government takes it, which you cannot prevent from happening.
Cycloptichorn
JPB wrote:cjhsa wrote:That part about stealing someones wealth when they die smacks of communism. Sorry bill.
If you knew that your "wealth" would be distributed to those who are not your heirs upon your death then you would make different choices about what to do with your money during your life. I'd rather see increased incentives for private support of underprivileged neighbors than the government taking your estate through taxes, but I don't think your heirs are "entitled" to your wealth.
That's why some of the wealthiest like Warren Buffet and Bill Gates "donated" most of their wealth to a trust for charitable donations to help the most needy in this world. God/karma bless them, and I'm not religious.
I don't want it, cj, nor do I need it. I just don't think your heirs are entitled to assets they didn't earn any more than I am (and I include my own heirs in that soup as well).
BUT -- I don't like a central government deciding who does get it and who does need it either.
cicerone imposter wrote:JPB wrote:cjhsa wrote:That part about stealing someones wealth when they die smacks of communism. Sorry bill.
If you knew that your "wealth" would be distributed to those who are not your heirs upon your death then you would make different choices about what to do with your money during your life. I'd rather see increased incentives for private support of underprivileged neighbors than the government taking your estate through taxes, but I don't think your heirs are "entitled" to your wealth.
That's why some of the wealthiest like Warren Buffet and Bill Gates "donated" most of their wealth to a trust for charitable donations to help the most needy in this world. God/karma bless them, and I'm not religious.
heh -- I'm a long ways from blessing Bill Gates, ci, but I agree with you in principle.
Today's remarks by Obama on the economy. There are plenty of details in there, for those who are looking for specifics proposals and plans from him.
http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/6/9/132919/4423
Cycloptichorn
Nimh & OB - I'm just going to agree to disagree.
Before the discovery of the Americas, both the Native Americans and the Europeans had boats. They looked different, but the concept was the same. They both functioned off the same principal.
You seem to think that because the Amish, Hutterites, Native Americans weren't Marxist/Leninist that they can't be practicing communism. you seem to think that labor unions don't have communist themes. I have never said that anything not capitalism is communism. Please stop putting words in my mouth. What I am saying is if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, it's a duck, even if it's not red. My view of things is not the Reagan/McCarthy everything is communist if not total capitalism. With this topic like others I see two defined boundaries and a continuum between.
You think my definition is too broad, I think yours is too rigid. For instance, all those horrible dictators you listed, do you think that they were accurately communists? Did they uphold the rights or the working class? The peasants? No. They were/are all VERY VERY bourgeois. Go ahead and push them out as examples, but ultimately they weren't/aren't even good examples. Their problem was something else, but all you seem to see is communism.
Like I said communism is simply exploitable. That's it's problem. I'm not saying that "Communism is a bad word," because I think it's cool either. I don't really even care for it, I just abhor the idea the double standard that makes it so evil and us so righteous. I asked if any system/ideology is not a timebomb, and I'm not sure the relevance of the link that was posted. The propaganda is enough to choke on. You can say that my examples are invalid, but that's no less of an assertion than what your accusing me of.
I honestly don't care. I don't have any money on the communist horse, I just think it should be able to race with the others. Don't punish the horse for the jockey.
T
K
O
Cycloptichorn wrote:cjhsa wrote:They are unless I say otherwise.
And that is the difference between you and me. "Keep" means it's mine and you can't have it....
Hahah, until the government takes it, which you cannot prevent from happening.
Cycloptichorn
The fact that you somehow find that funny is a true testament to your lack of a human soul, a trait common to all liberals.
cjhsa wrote:Cycloptichorn wrote:cjhsa wrote:They are unless I say otherwise.
And that is the difference between you and me. "Keep" means it's mine and you can't have it....
Hahah, until the government takes it, which you cannot prevent from happening.
Cycloptichorn
The fact that you somehow find that funny is a true testament to your lack of a human soul, a trait common to all liberals.
I find it funny in YOUR case.
Besides, the accumulation of wealth amongst families is not an American virtue in the slightest... I see no real reason to defend it in any way.
Cycloptichorn
[/side discussion]
How many people will ignore this and continue to ask for it?
T
K
O
Yup, lots of specifics of giving your and my money to people who don't have any, helping people avoid the consequences of the choices they made, no incentives to encourage business to do the right thing but only punishing any who don't; more government mandates and regulation, and not one single suggestion of personal accountability or responsibility and/or government providing an environment where people are encouraged to make better choices so that they can grow the economy and provide for themselves.
McCarthyism is still alive in the US.
