- Joined
- Oct 12, 2005
- Messages
- 281,619
- Reaction score
- 100,389
- Location
- Ohio
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
and should this result, where the rich were in retrograde, i would be inclined to agree with you, at that point the wealthy might very likely be paying a disproportionate share of the taxes
but what we do see is the opposite. the middle class is in decline, indicating that a disproportionately large portion of the tax burden is being imposed on that segment of our society
so you think its ok that next year most of those in the top 1% will be paying more than half of every next dollar they earn in federal and state income taxes and many could well be paying more than half of their total income in taxes
I think that is disgusting.
I also think it is disgusting that if someone dies with an estate of 2 million and his child dies within a few years, that estate is double taxed to the point it will never recover.
the theory of the death tax was that the heir would be able to build the estate back to-at the time of his death-to a bit more than what he was left. That is true with really big estates but if the estate is small and consists of non-income generating assets that are valued highly (art collection, gun collection, or non-farmed land) the estate tax is crippling-especially if the first generation of heirs die prematurely. Its like that example I know personally where the remaining grandparent of a girl I grew up with died, the estate tax took a ton and then her parents were killed by a suicidal driver shortly thereafter meaning what was a ten million dollar estate was hit with a huge tax and the 6 or so that was left was again hit. Sure we can claim they should have planned better but anyone who thinks that is fair is someone I surely do not want in any position of power in this country.