Liberal Forum

Xavier_Onassis » 05 Jun 2023, 7:54 pm » wrote: ↑

05 Jun 2023, 7:54 pm

It is the least troublesome type of tax possible. The person paying it cannot take his money with him.
An inheritance tax is a good way to prevent a huge portion of a country's wealth to belong to a few people who did nothing to earn it.
Do you want wicked George Soros to pass his billions on to his heirs, or don't you?

I'm the only Conservative here arguing that a inheritance tax is a necessary thing.  Its one of the few fair and needed taxes.
 

Skans » 05 Jun 2023, 3:13 pm » wrote: ↑

05 Jun 2023, 3:13 pm

So?

I guess I have to ask again.  Do you believe families should be able to amass wealth without any check or balance?

       There are checks and balances ---- If that money is legally earned and taxes have been paid on it, then it is theirs to bequeath to whom & how they wish.... And so an inheritance tax is really little more than the Government appointing itself as one of your Heirs, as well as how much they get to confiscate from one's estate..  Achieving success or wealth shouldn't have to come with a warning label.. 

Skans » 05 Jun 2023, 3:46 pm » wrote: ↑

05 Jun 2023, 3:46 pm

First, I am not jealous over what others have.  That really does not matter to me. 

But, I find it interesting that you would eliminate the "free" step-up in basis of an asset that transfers upon death.  So, you are not a purist when it comes to taxing wealth.  Some forms of wealth are ok to be taxed.

But, let's say that you eliminate the death tax (state and federal) but also eliminate the step-up basis on death.  How are smart wealthy people going to side-step that step-up basis problem?  I'll tell you how they will do it:

• First, no more "growth" investments. 
• Next, only invest in dividend investments.  These would be companies with high dividend growth rates and high pay-out ratios. Sure, you will be taxed on the dividend income, but what's left over will be plowed right back into buying more shares.   More shares = more income, and the "nest of investments" can grow to infinity (theoretically) from generation to generation.
• Dynasties get richer, and working class people are priced out of ever being able to afford these types of investments. Why?  Because Trillionaire dynasties will price them out.  Don't believe me? Berkshire Hathaway Inc. - Class A NYSE: BRK.AAs of June 5, 2023 • 3:59 PM EDT$499,088.98 / Share

And you want to take it away from them and give it too the government? We need to be taking the wealth away from the government so we can keep more of it.  The government has too much of our wealth...and notice how wealthy all the politicians end up.

Skans » 05 Jun 2023, 8:56 pm » wrote: ↑

05 Jun 2023, 8:56 pm

Berkshire A?  None. I don't own any A or B shares. I had a very wealthy friend tell me to buy Berkshire A shares back in the 1990's.  I believe they were selling for 30K / share then.  Truth be told, Apple and Microsoft outperformed Berkshire. In fact, I believe that 40% of Berkshire's portfolio is now Apple.  Still, I would have been smart to buy one A Share.  It would have entitled me to attend the annual shareholder's meeting - and that would have been worth it.

we must have that same friend...  

working in the publishing and print industry, our field was all Apple...I remember when it hit $13 before bill gates threw money at it...If only...

2015 I was finally able to buy in to Apple...while not the investment at $13...it's done very well...
 

Skans » 05 Jun 2023, 3:13 pm » wrote: ↑

05 Jun 2023, 3:13 pm

So?

I guess I have to ask again.  Do you believe families should be able to amass wealth without any check or balance?

Yes
 

Xavier_Onassis » 05 Jun 2023, 7:54 pm » wrote: ↑

05 Jun 2023, 7:54 pm

It is the least troublesome type of tax possible. The person paying it cannot take his money with him.
An inheritance tax is a good way to prevent a huge portion of a country's wealth to belong to a few people who did nothing to earn it.
Do you want wicked George Soros to pass his billions on to his heirs, or don't you?

Yes
 

michaelf » 06 Jun 2023, 4:07 am » wrote: ↑

06 Jun 2023, 4:07 am

And you want to take it away from them and give it too the government? We need to be taking the wealth away from the government so we can keep more of it.  The government has too much of our wealth...and notice how wealthy all the politicians end up.

I don't disagree with what you've said in that regard.  The funds coming from any inheritance tax should be offset by a reduction of the highest income tax bracket.

ROG62 » 06 Jun 2023, 5:30 am » wrote: ↑

06 Jun 2023, 5:30 am

we must have that same friend...  

working in the publishing and print industry, our field was all Apple...I remember when it hit $13 before bill gates threw money at it...If only...

2015 I was finally able to buy in to Apple...while not the investment at $13...it's done very well...

I've been in Apple for some time - I think I got in around 2008 - it was before the 7-to-1 split. It actually wasn't doing that well back then.  So, when it started to pick up again, I sold half of my Apple holdings.  At the time, I thought it was a smart move, diversifying those funds so that I would not be so heavy-weighted in one stock.  Of course, now I wish I hadn't done that.
 
 

Cedar » 06 Jun 2023, 6:10 am » wrote: ↑

06 Jun 2023, 6:10 am

Yes

At least you answered my question.  I do believe that generational wealth, when allowed to run unchecked, can be dangerous.  It can starve out most people from even being able to live. 

If my family consists of 100 members who all control a pot of money equal to 10 trillion dollars, here are some of the things that I would be inclined to do:

• buy up the best farmland - farm it using robotics (already being done).  I would create a stranglehold on the country's food supply.
• buy all of West Virginia or Mississippi and kick everyone out and bring people in who will vote in a legislature which my family can absolutely control.  First order of business is to eliminate all state income tax and property taxes.  
• create a state military.
• Purchase some **** land in Mexico - this will be where everyone now residing in West Virginia will be forced to live.
• Hire as many "alien workers" (from other states) as I need to secure our state's borders.
• Buy up all of the precious and rare-earth metals, so that our wealth and ability to trade with foreign nations is not dependent on the US dollar.

Perhaps I partner up with one or two other Trillionaire families to take over some surrounding states. We would take over state by state, and anyone who is not in the Trillionaire club will essentially become our slaves or will be exported to Mexico.
 

Skans » 06 Jun 2023, 7:52 am » wrote: ↑

06 Jun 2023, 7:52 am

I've been in Apple for some time - I think I got in around 2008 - it was before the 7-to-1 split. It actually wasn't doing that well back then.  So, when it started to pick up again, I sold half of my Apple holdings.  At the time, I thought it was a smart move, diversifying those funds so that I would not be so heavy-weighted in one stock.  Of course, now I wish I hadn't done that.

Oh how I feel your pain...

when I started working at the plant, I invested in the company's ESOP...in 2 yrs when rumors of a buyout floated... I panicked and sold...of course when the buyout was completed and ESOPs paid out, I lost another 50%... buy high and sell low is all I know...    and I do it well...
 

Skans » 05 Jun 2023, 3:13 pm » wrote: ↑

05 Jun 2023, 3:13 pm

So?

I guess I have to ask again.  Do you believe families should be able to amass wealth without any check or balance?

Why not.

We let our elected representatives do it.
 

Skans » 05 Jun 2023, 8:56 pm » wrote: ↑

05 Jun 2023, 8:56 pm

Berkshire A?  None. I don't own any A or B shares. I had a very wealthy friend tell me to buy Berkshire A shares back in the 1990's.  I believe they were selling for 30K / share then.  Truth be told, Apple and Microsoft outperformed Berkshire. In fact, I believe that 40% of Berkshire's portfolio is now Apple.  Still, I would have been smart to buy one A Share.  It would have entitled me to attend the annual shareholder's meeting - and that would have been worth it.

You are still spry enough to buy one A share of Berkshire Hathaway.
Even if it is 43%  (I looked it up) Apple stock, it is still more diversified than owning Apple alone.
Buffett was born August 30, 1930, so perhaps if you do want to attend his shareholders' meeting, sooner is advisable.

Xavier_Onassis » 06 Jun 2023, 10:04 am » wrote: ↑

06 Jun 2023, 10:04 am

You are still spry enough to buy one A share of Berkshire Hathaway.
It might be a better investment than at least some of the  less fashionable firearms.
Even if it is 43%  (I looked it up) Apple stock, it is still more diversified than owning Apple alone.
Buffett was born August 30, 1930, so perhaps if you do want to attend his shareholders' meeting, sooner is advisable.
Buffett is 12 years older than Biden, and might not be immortal.
 

 

ROG62 » 06 Jun 2023, 8:26 am » wrote: ↑

06 Jun 2023, 8:26 am

Oh how I feel your pain...

when I started working at the plant, I invested in the company's ESOP...in 2 yrs when rumors of a buyout floated... I panicked and sold...of course when the buyout was completed and ESOPs paid out, I lost another 50%... buy high and sell low is all I know...    and I do it well...
 

Roger first tells is that he regrets doing something he regrets and then tells us that he does it well.
Well, we all make mistakes.
 

Skans » 06 Jun 2023, 8:19 am » wrote: ↑

06 Jun 2023, 8:19 am

At least you answered my question.  I do believe that generational wealth, when allowed to run unchecked, can be dangerous.  It can starve out most people from even being able to live. 

If my family consists of 100 members who all control a pot of money equal to 10 trillion dollars, here are some of the things that I would be inclined to do:

• buy up the best farmland - farm it using robotics (already being done).  I would create a stranglehold on the country's food supply.
• buy all of West Virginia or Mississippi and kick everyone out and bring people in who will vote in a legislature which my family can absolutely control.  First order of business is to eliminate all state income tax and property taxes.  
• create a state military.
• Purchase some **** land in Mexico - this will be where everyone now residing in West Virginia will be forced to live.
• Hire as many "alien workers" (from other states) as I need to secure our state's borders.
• Buy up all of the precious and rare-earth metals, so that our wealth and ability to trade with foreign nations is not dependent on the US dollar.

Perhaps I partner up with one or two other Trillionaire families to take over some surrounding states. We would take over state by state, and anyone who is not in the Trillionaire club will essentially become our slaves or will be exported to Mexico.

I think my fantasy plan to breed unicorns is a more achievable goal.
I hear that they regrow their horns, so the trick is to harvest their horns regularly, grind them into powder and sell it to the Chinese as an aphrodisiac.

Xavier_Onassis » 06 Jun 2023, 10:10 am » wrote: ↑

06 Jun 2023, 10:10 am

Roger first tells is that he regrets doing something he regrets and then tells us that he does it well.
Well, we all make mistakes.

if you do something stupid, you may as well be good at it...

RedheadedStranger » 06 Jun 2023, 9:40 am » wrote: ↑

06 Jun 2023, 9:40 am

Why not.

We let our elected representatives do it.

That's wrong too.  And, it needs to be corrected.
 

Xavier_Onassis » 06 Jun 2023, 10:13 am » wrote: ↑

06 Jun 2023, 10:13 am

I think my fantasy plan to breed unicorns is a more achievable goal.
I hear that they regrow their horns, so the trick is to harvest their horns regularly, grind them into powder and sell it to the Chinese as an aphrodisiac.

That probably would be more achievable.  But, if the estate tax is completely eliminated, now you know what I plan on doing.  Maybe not in my lifetime.  But, I'd set things up to make sure my progeny use your progeny as tomato pickers.
 

Skans » 05 Jun 2023, 3:13 pm » wrote: ↑

05 Jun 2023, 3:13 pm

I guess I have to ask again.  Do you believe families should be able to amass wealth without any check or balance?

Of course there are checks & balances!

 For example, Walmarx customers tell me that store sells the same exact things as more expensive stores, but for a lower price.  I tell them that Walmarx Levis have fewer rivets.  I tell them Walmarx fishing rods are not baked properly.  That store has mowers with thinner metal and plastic substituted for metal.  And on & on.

 Walmarx customers need to check their stupidity.  The balance is for them to get their thumb outa their *** and on the product.
 

Skans » 05 Jun 2023, 3:13 pm » wrote: ↑

05 Jun 2023, 3:13 pm

So?

 

So I deal in reality, not dumb hypotheticals.