• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should Jim DeMints proposed amendment, removing the estate tax have failed?

Should Jim DeMints proposed amendment removing the estate tax have failed?

  • Yes

    Votes: 10 41.7%
  • No

    Votes: 14 58.3%

  • Total voters
    24

Gabriel

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 14, 2010
Messages
1,019
Reaction score
118
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
Should Jim DeMints proposed amendment of unemployment benefits removing the estate tax have failed?

An Old Fashioned Debate on Tax Fairness

 
Last edited:

earthworm

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 21, 2005
Messages
5,728
Reaction score
904
Location
Goldsboro,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
The estate tax primarily affects the ultra wealthy - they can afford it.
This character is a conservative, and we know who they serve.
 

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,955
Reaction score
12,423
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Should Jim DeMints proposed amendment of unemployment benefits removing the estate tax have failed?

An Old Fashioned Debate on Tax Fairness

If we are going to have an estate tax, it should only be on liquid assets.
Mainly cash.

It's not right to tax a person that gets transferred a family business, which they may have to sell in order to pay taxes on it.
Better thing is to tax cash, for one people will try to avoid it and keep the money moving, stimulating some sort of economic activity.

It also doesn't unfairly punish the people with illiquid assets.
 

The_Patriot

DP Veteran
Joined
May 28, 2010
Messages
1,488
Reaction score
206
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
The estate tax primarily affects the ultra wealthy - they can afford it.
This character is a conservative, and we know who they serve.
Sounds like you have class envy. It's their property and the government wasn't there when the person earned it. In fact, the government made it difficult for that person to earn it to begin with. Are you implying that the ultra-wealthy don't have a right to have their views represented?
 

Gabriel

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 14, 2010
Messages
1,019
Reaction score
118
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
If we are going to have an estate tax, it should only be on liquid assets.
Mainly cash.

It's not right to tax a person that gets transferred a family business, which they may have to sell in order to pay taxes on it.
Better thing is to tax cash, for one people will try to avoid it and keep the money moving, stimulating some sort of economic activity.

It also doesn't unfairly punish the people with illiquid assets.
Whatever the details are on the matter you already do have one.
 

Gabriel

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 14, 2010
Messages
1,019
Reaction score
118
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
The estate tax primarily affects the ultra wealthy - they can afford it.
This character is a conservative, and we know who they serve.
A conservative with interest in advancing libertarian economics.
 
Last edited:

obvious Child

Equal Opportunity Hater
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
19,883
Reaction score
5,120
Location
0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
If we are going to have an estate tax, it should only be on liquid assets.
Mainly cash.
Except that creates perverse incentives. If the tax was on only liquid assets, then those who were going to die would simply buy up lots of illiquid assets leaving only the necessary amount to live on til they die. When they die, a tax on only liquid assets wouldn't touch them. Effectively they'd managed to hide large portions of otherwise liquid assets from the tax. And this would create sizable amounts of bubbles in assets with trillions of dollars in potential estates trying to buy illiquid assets. And you and I don't like bubbles.

A better way is simply raise the exemption to $10 million.
 

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,955
Reaction score
12,423
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Except that creates perverse incentives. If the tax was on only liquid assets, then those who were going to die would simply buy up lots of illiquid assets leaving only the necessary amount to live on til they die. When they die, a tax on only liquid assets wouldn't touch them. Effectively they'd managed to hide large portions of otherwise liquid assets from the tax. And this would create sizable amounts of bubbles in assets with trillions of dollars in potential estates trying to buy illiquid assets. And you and I don't like bubbles.

A better way is simply raise the exemption to $10 million.
Index it to inflation and that would be fine with me.
 

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
34,340
Reaction score
16,230
Location
A place where common sense exists
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
I do not think its right to tax something that someone has already paid taxes on. Its just like these vehicle registrations and property taxes, there should one be a one time tax at the time of the purchase and thats it.
 

d0gbreath

Yellow Dog Democrat
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 5, 2010
Messages
14,043
Reaction score
4,086
Location
Denton, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
I do not think its right to tax something that someone has already paid taxes on. Its just like these vehicle registrations and property taxes, there should one be a one time tax at the time of the purchase and thats it.
I too believe that everything contained in the estate of a deceased individual has already been taxed once, twice, or possibly to death (literally). To consider the items and amounts that are willed to individuals as income to them is ludicrous.
 

Gabriel

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 14, 2010
Messages
1,019
Reaction score
118
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
Well at least DC isn't full of the idiots on this board that voted no.. Something the American people should be happy about. What Americans should be unhappy about was that an amendment like this was even suggested. Just saying.
 

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
34,340
Reaction score
16,230
Location
A place where common sense exists
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Well at least DC isn't full of the idiots on this board that voted no.
Why should the government be able to tax the same thing that you already paid taxes on at the time of the sale over and over again?

. Something the American people should be happy about.
Why should Americans be happy about legalized theft?

What Americans should be unhappy about was that an amendment like this was even suggested. Just saying.
What Americans should be unhappy about is the fact the government can extort money out of you over something you already paid taxes on. I guess it takes a liberal mindset to think that it is okay to forcefully take money from others.
 

The_Patriot

DP Veteran
Joined
May 28, 2010
Messages
1,488
Reaction score
206
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
I just thought of something... the colonies went to war with one of the reasons being taxation without representation. Since the property belongs to a dead person wouldn't that be taxation without representation?
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
244,362
Reaction score
73,449
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
The estate tax primarily affects the ultra wealthy - they can afford it.
This character is a conservative, and we know who they serve.
typical class warfare

do you think an estate of a couple million is "ultra wealthy"
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
244,362
Reaction score
73,449
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Why should the government be able to tax the same thing that you already paid taxes on at the time of the sale over and over again?



Why should Americans be happy about legalized theft?



What Americans should be unhappy about is the fact the government can extort money out of you over something you already paid taxes on. I guess it takes a liberal mindset to think that it is okay to forcefully take money from others.
gabriel operates under the belief that the government owns all property
 

Moon

Why so serious?
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
9,649
Reaction score
4,958
Location
Washington State
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Well at least DC isn't full of the idiots on this board that voted no.. Something the American people should be happy about. What Americans should be unhappy about was that an amendment like this was even suggested. Just saying.
Idiots? Guess that shoots down the theory that you were interested in anything like a debate, or an honest discussion. Might I recommend that in the future, just state what the correct answer is in your OP so the folks that don't agree with you can find a more honest thread for discussion.
 

obvious Child

Equal Opportunity Hater
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
19,883
Reaction score
5,120
Location
0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
I do not think its right to tax something that someone has already paid taxes on. Its just like these vehicle registrations and property taxes, there should one be a one time tax at the time of the purchase and thats it.
Come again?

So if Harry buys a stock at $5 with after tax dollars and dies when it's at $15, that gain of $10 has already been taxed?

If so, when was that gain ever taxed?
 

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
106,340
Reaction score
50,344
Location
Georgia
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Well at least DC isn't full of the idiots on this board that voted no.. Something the American people should be happy about. What Americans should be unhappy about was that an amendment like this was even suggested. Just saying.
Moderator's Warning:
Gabriel, you are now banned from this thread. If you post in this thread again, it will be a 5 point infraction
 

tacomancer

Big Scary Liberal
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
39,848
Reaction score
20,683
Location
Akron
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
If we are going to have an estate tax, it should only be on liquid assets.
Mainly cash.

It's not right to tax a person that gets transferred a family business, which they may have to sell in order to pay taxes on it.
Better thing is to tax cash, for one people will try to avoid it and keep the money moving, stimulating some sort of economic activity.

It also doesn't unfairly punish the people with illiquid assets.
I essentially agree since many farmers could be hit by this. I think we should attach some conditions to the illiquid thing though.
1. It has to have shown profitable income and be a business for a certain number of years (maybe 10) to prevent people just buying stuff before they die.
2. The ownership of whatever asset has to be within the family or held by a single individual (to prevent a person just buying into some existing investment which would be a loophole in my opinion)
3. The person who receives it has to pay estate taxes at the time of selling the asset.
 
Last edited:

tacomancer

Big Scary Liberal
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
39,848
Reaction score
20,683
Location
Akron
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
I just thought of something... the colonies went to war with one of the reasons being taxation without representation. Since the property belongs to a dead person wouldn't that be taxation without representation?
Are you proposing we raise a zombie army to fight the government with? :shock:
 

tacomancer

Big Scary Liberal
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
39,848
Reaction score
20,683
Location
Akron
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Now that would be a cook idea. :D
What is we give zombies the right to vote? Would that keep them from rebelling? Of course, if we do that, we might have entitlement issues after a few years from all the politicians voting to give them free brains from the wealthy.
 

earthworm

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 21, 2005
Messages
5,728
Reaction score
904
Location
Goldsboro,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Sounds like you have class envy.Do I??; when young, YES!!, now - NO!! It's their property and the government wasn't there when the person earned it.Maybe it should have been.. In fact, the government made it difficult for that person to earn it to begin with. Are you implying that the ultra-wealthy don't have a right to have their views represented?
Nothing of the sort.....what gives you this ****-a-manny idea???
I do see a man who is so anti-government that it clouds his vision.
 
Top Bottom