|
|
Posted by Steve Guidry on 08/15/06 20:13
I agree that we've borrowed more than we should have over the last few
years. I'd personally prefer it if we balanced the budget every year. But
that's a separate issue - - at least in my mind.
And I'll agree that making and keeping contacts is one of the key skills
that has to be passed down from one generation to the next.
But my point was that the argument is telling : you can tell a lot about a
person by which way s/he swings on this issue.
Steve
"jakdedert" <jakdedert@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:oDpEg.15215$0k4.5246@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
> Steve Guidry wrote:
>> For what it's worth, I've always thought that this debate on the estate
>> tax is probably one of the most legitimate tax debates going . . .
>> because (whether you're for it or against it) it reveals one's basic view
>> of social policy.
>>
>> Here's the basic question as I see it : do we take money from those
>> families who have found ways to pass on the ability to generate wealth
>> from generation to generation, (this is no small feat) and - - among
>> other things - - give it to those who have demonstrated a profound lack
>> of this ability.
>>
> That 'ability' is to a great degree dependent on having large amounts of
> money to begin with, and intimate contacts among others with similar
> amounts. Not everybody is born with that, and they don't teach it in
> college. Granted, there are 'self made' millionaires out there; but the
> real push behind repealing this tax is coming from those with more than
> enough to go around, have had it for generations, and are busily
> collecting more and more...the very ones who have been the main
> beneficiaries of the other tax cuts of the last several years.
>
> All this happens while the nation, in under six years, has borrowed more
> money than the total of first 200 some-odd before 2001.
>
>> Those on the one side claim (rightly so) things like "This money has
>> already been taxed", and "It's my money, I should be able to leave it to
>> my kids, not the government".
>>
> Already discussed below. BTW, a non-partisan group found that the average
> 'real' rate of taxation for those with savvy estate planners and smaller
> (but taxable) estates was much less than the published rate of 45% an
> average of around 1.7%.
>
>> Those on the other side call for "social justice", and say "sock it to
>> those rich bastards, they probably stole it anyway."
>>
> It's tempting....
>
>> It's a fascinating argument . . .
>>
> jak
>
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|