Do We Really Need to Keep the Poor?

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by IIFFOFRDB

Great post Frick, very well said. Love, Frack!

No charge!

[CJ7]

the op started another thread and ended her first post with this ..

"It's never too late to save someone or be saved"

then started this thread questioning the need to save someone like the poor.


uh huh, I see ... whirlie with a vagina ... who knew?

[EXTXOILMAN]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

You make my point for me. They earned it. Shouldn't they decide what happens to their estate after they die? What gives you or the state the right to determine what happens to their estate?

You say that the country helped them get wealthy. I say that they helped the country be successful. They had an idea, they worked hard, and they built a business that hired workers, paid them, and paid taxes. The workers paid taxes on their income and bought things that had to be made by other people. Those people had to be hired by someone else to produce those items. The country had very little to do with it and lets be very clear here, when you say country you really mean government don't you? Government should have a very limited role in life. National defense, upholding the law, and protecting the defenseless from harm. There is nothing in our Constitution that said government should be in the role of deciding who gets ahead and who doesn't. In the early 1800s a bill was brought before the House. The goal was to establish a fund to help veterans from the Revolutionary War. James Madison stood against the bill. He said that it was a noble idea to help the poor but he could find no place in the Constitution that allowed for them to do that. He wrote most of the Constitution.

And there you have it, JD, personal responsibility or relying on a nanny state. There was a time when the overwhelming majority of our people didn't expect anyone else to take care of them. Further, many of them wouldn't have accepted it, anyway...personal pride and all that. We've almost turned 180 degrees on that...now the majority seems to want everything handed to them, as opposed to seizing the opportunities this country affords them.

Zabrina, you seem to be genuinely conflicted. In your first post, you endorse capitalism, yet want to understand why we can't just settle for equality. Then in your second post, you imply that our system is wrongly set up to support the cycle of poverty, yet later you wonder why we can't all just get along and share everything then the world would be a beautiful place. You'll get a variety of opinions from both sides on this board. My recommendation would be to do some reading, starting maybe with the Federalist Papers. Those will give you an idea of what the Founders were trying to accomplish with this marvelous experiment, then you can decide whether we've stayed true to that, or not. (Again, you'll get many different opinions on this board as to where we are with, as well!!??!!)

Good Luck.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

You make my point for me. They earned it. Shouldn't they decide what happens to their estate after they die? What gives you or the state the right to determine what happens to their estate?

You say that the country helped them get wealthy. I say that they helped the country be successful. They had an idea, they worked hard, and they built a business that hired workers, paid them, and paid taxes. The workers paid taxes on their income and bought things that had to be made by other people. Those people had to be hired by someone else to produce those items. The country had very little to do with it and lets be very clear here, when you say countr

Very little to do with it you say.....how about you move to Africa and see how much where you live in fact has a huge amount towards how you get by In life. That said, there was nothing you said that addressed my issue of any relative EARNING tax free income from a dead person, you can not do it when you are alive (give away money tax free to kinfolk ), why should you be able to when you die? Lastly, say the rich , who influence politicians to lower tax rstes which winds up concentrating the wealth further, should a kid who has done nothing, pay nothing on what amounts income? If that is not welfare for the rich, I don't know what is. Why would a dead person have any say or even care where his money went when he died? If you care enough, spend it on those things and die broke. The government does not tax broke fucs!

[I B Hankering]

Rich and poor are relative terms; hence, someone will always be “richer” or “poorer” in relation to someone else. Therefore, there will always be those in society who are considered "poor."

For example, when banker-financier J.P. Morgan died in 1913, “the newspapers estimated the value of his estate at about $80 million (or about $1.7 billion in 2011 terms), a fraction of the wealth of the businessmen he financed. John D. Rockefeller marveled upon learning the news, ‘And to think, he wasn’t even a rich man!’”

http://www.philanthropyroundtable.org/site/print/john_pierpont_morgan

[Jewish Lawyer]

WTF, we do have inheritance taxes. However, the rich will always find a way around them. I know you are a small, simple minded and unsophisticated businessman, but even your humble little operation has some taxable value. Give the whole thing to the government when you die. You could start the ball rolling towards a more equitable distribution of inheritances by giving all your own money and property (5000 total estate?) to the government upon your death, and not give any to your own kids. If you did that, I might believe the rest of the shit you say about death and taxes.

[Old Dingus]

I've been reading WTF for years. WTF gets overloaded with his bull shit blabber and sometimes (O.K. frequently) cannot make sense.

What he means (based upon years of reading his tripe) is simple:

"TO EACH according to their needs as approved by his liberal, socialistic views, and

FROM EACH according to everything they have at the time of their death (which WTF is willing to help along if they are elderly, or below his liberal, socialistic views)."

If you re-read his recent diatribes, this is fairly easy to discern.

I'm just sayin'.

Old Dingus

[WTF]

Originally Posted by Jewish Lawyer

WTF, we do have inheritance taxes. However, the rich will always find a way around them. I know you are a small, simple minded and unsophisticated businessman, but even your humble little operation has some taxable value. Give the whole thing to the government when you die. You could start the ball rolling towards a more equitable distribution of inheritances by giving all your own money and property (5000 total estate?) to the government upon your death, and not give any to your own kids. If you did that, I might believe the rest of the shit you say about death and taxes.

I did not say give everything to the government but there are folks that think the government should get nothing.

Yet they bitch about the deficit.

They bitch about welfare to the poor and cheer welfare for kids who have earned nothing.

When you give your kids money while you are alive, you pay a gift tax, why would anything be different when you die?

[WTF]

Originally Posted by Old Dingus

I'm just sayin'.

Old Dingus

You're just saying a lie...

[WTF]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Rich and poor are relative terms; hence, someone will always be “richer” or “poorer” in relation to someone else. Therefore, there will always be those in society who are considered "poor."

For example, when banker-financier J.P. Morgan died in 1913, “the newspapers estimated the value of his estate at about $80 million (or about $1.7 billion in 2011 terms), a fraction of the wealth of the businessmen he financed. John D. Rockefeller marveled upon learning the news, ‘And to think, he wasn’t even a rich man!’”

http://www.philanthropyroundtable.or...ierpont_morgan

I am not advocating for the poor. I am advocating for taxes when you transfer money, you are taxed when you gift people when you are alive, what makes dying so special? Why do folks think there should be no tax on that transaction?

Look , I will benifit from these stupid estate laws when my parents pass. That does not make the law fairer. Does anybody want to pay taxes? NO , but how do we pay for say the law tracking down these Boston Bombers?

Rockerfeller worked the government liked no other before or since!

[CuteOldGuy]

Originally Posted by WTF

It matters not if I like him or not, if he gives you money when he is alive, you pay taxes on it as if it were income. Why should you pay no taxes on any money he gives you in his death? [/SIZE]

Simply not true. Please google reputable sites.

And the money isn't transferred tax free. It's already been taxed, often more than once.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Simply not true. Please google reputable sites.

And the money isn't transferred tax free. It's already been taxed, often more than once.

COG, My money that I make has been taxed, if I hire somebody to say paint my house , they pay taxes on it. It is income to them, even though I have paid taxes on it. Take your lies some place else.

If you give a relative money over a certain amount, they pay a gift tax on that money. What is the difference between being alive or dead when you give them the money? It should be taxed, the person you give it to has no earned it, it is a gift. If you die it is just a gift from a dead person. You are showing your ignorance on tax laws.

[JD Barleycorn]

How many times should a dollar be taxed? Everytime it changes hands? Everytime the status of the owner changes (death, marriage, divorce, unemployment, etc)? How much should each person be taxed? How about people who are not citizens? Should they be taxed if their dollars are earned in this country? What about people in this country who earn their dollars (Euros, Yaun, etc) overseas? Tax law is complex and the philosophy behind taxation is just as complex. You can make it simple and just tax what you spend and leave it at that. People who spend a lot will pay a lot of tax regardless of how or where they made their money.......of course people may spend their money outside the country to avoid taxes if they can. The average person who lives on either the Mexican or Canadian borders. Or do you want someone to go through their grocery sack when they come back in the US? Really big ticket items can be bought in the Bahamas like a plane or sailboat. Wow! This tax thing really is complicated.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by WTF

COG, If you give a relative money over a certain amount, they pay a gift tax on that money. What is the difference between being alive or dead when you give them the money? It should be taxed, the person you give it to has no earned it, it is a gift. If you die it is just a gift from a dead person. You are showing your ignorance on tax laws.

And what is that amount?

Folks with more than that amount customarily structure their estate in anticipation of their deaths to minimize, if not avoid, the consequences of Federal taxes. Smart folks, anyway. Probably 95% of the rest of the people don't worry about it. Unless you want to tax them, also when they die, particularly after the current fruit-loop in the WH and those in the Congress get finished with this Country.

Why do you think they want to tax the shit out of the rich NOW?

"Much To Do About Nothing"!

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by Old Dingus

I've been reading WTF for years. WTF gets overloaded with his bull shit blabber and sometimes (O.K. frequently) cannot make sense.

What he means (based upon years of reading his tripe) is simple:

"TO EACH according to their needs as approved by his liberal, socialistic views, and

FROM EACH according to everything they have at the time of their death (which WTF is willing to help along if they are elderly, or below his liberal, socialistic views)."

If you re-read his recent diatribes, this is fairly easy to discern.

I'm just sayin'.

Old Dingus

#1. He's actually toned it down in the past year or so from what I've seen.