Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: James on September 23, 2016, 06:57:13 AM
-
Hillary Clinton wants to increase the estate tax to 65 percent on the wealthiest Americans, according to her latest tax plan.
The Clinton campaign estimates that the increase would raise an addition $75 billion in revenue over the next decade. The current rate maxes out at 40 percent.
But Hillary Clinton and her husband Bill have created a number of tax shelters in recent years to dramatically limit their payment of the very same tax. As Bloomberg reported back in 2014: “To reduce the tax pinch, the Clintons are using financial planning strategies befitting the top 1 percent of U.S. households in wealth.”
In 2010 the Clinton created “residential trusts” and the following year moved their Chappaqua estate into the trust, according to their financial records. As David Scott Sloan, a partner at the firm Holland Knight explained the Clinton trust to CBS News, “You’re creating things that are going to be on the nontaxable side of the balance sheet when they die.”
The move will save the Clintons hundreds of thousands of dollars in estate taxes, according to accountants quoted by Bloomberg.
http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/09/23/hillary-clinton-wants-higher-estate-taxes-but-not-on-her-family/
-
The purpose of an estate tax is to prevent an aristocracy from developing. It encourages rich people to give their fortune to charities and trusts before they die.
Adjusted for inflation, John D Rockefeller is considered the richest person of all time. Today, many of his descendants are well off, but they're not super rich. They're not part of an aristocracy.
J P Getty was once the richest person in the world. His descendants (one of who was my student when I was a TA at USC) live comfortable lives, but are not aristocracy.
Bill Gates has said he's leaving very little of his fortune to his children, having already moved most of it to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, a trust. Same with most other billionaires.
Hillary Clinton's plan "would impose a 50% rate that would apply to estates over $10 million a person, a 55% rate that starts at $50 million a person, and the top rate of 65%, which would affect only those with assets exceeding $500 million for a single person and $1 billion for married couples."
Are you really that concerned about Ivanka's great grandchildren?
-
The purpose of an estate tax is to prevent an aristocracy from developing. It encourages rich people to give their fortune to charities and trusts before they die.
Adjusted for inflation, John D Rockefeller is considered the richest person of all time. Today, many of his descendants are well off, but they're not super rich. They're not part of an aristocracy.
J P Getty was once the richest person in the world. His descendants (one of who was my student when I was a TA at USC) live comfortable lives, but are not aristocracy.
Bill Gates has said he's leaving very little of his fortune to his children, having already moved most of it to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, a trust. Same with most other billionaires.
Hillary Clinton's plan "would impose a 50% rate that would apply to estates over $10 million a person, a 55% rate that starts at $50 million a person, and the top rate of 65%, which would affect only those with assets exceeding $500 million for a single person and $1 billion for married couples."
Are you really that concerned about Ivanka's great grandchildren?
If someone wants to donate, fine. If they want to keep it in the family, fine. What business does the government have telling people what to do with their property and money?
-
If someone wants to donate, fine. If they want to keep it in the family, fine. What business does the government have telling people what to do with their property and money?
One of the things the American colonies were rebelling against was the aristocracy. "All men are created equal"
-
One of the things the American colonies were rebelling against was the aristocracy. "All men are created equal"
That doesn't mean the government dictates what happens with private wealth.
-
That doesn't mean the government dictates what happens with private wealth.
Do you think income inequality is a problem? That 1% currently own 43% of the wealth ? That the top .1% own over 20% ?
If you think income inequality is a problem, what do you think we should do about it? In the 1970s, the top .1% owned "only" about 7% of the wealth. Most of the change is because of changes to US tax law (Thanks Ronnie).
If you don't think income inequality is currently a problem, at what point will it? Existing laws will cause the rich to continue to accumulate wealth faster than the rest of us. The top 1% will eventually own 90% of the wealth.
You might want to look at existing countries where that has already happened. The super rich live behind fortresses and drive their kids around in armored cars in constant fear of kidnappings.
-
Do you think income inequality is a problem? That 1% currently own 43% of the wealth ? That the top .1% own over 20% ?
If you think income inequality is a problem, what do you think we should do about it? In the 1970s, the top .1% owned "only" about 7% of the wealth. Most of the change is because of changes to US tax law (Thanks Ronnie).
If you don't think income inequality is currently a problem, at what point will it? Existing laws will cause the rich to continue to accumulate wealth faster than the rest of us. The top 1% will eventually own 90% of the wealth.
You might want to look at existing countries where that has already happened. The super rich live behind fortresses and drive their kids around in armored cars in constant fear of kidnappings.
No I don't believe income inequality is a problem. I think the statistics are pretty meaningless. You cannot reasonably use those statistics to start making public policy. People compromise those statistics. They include individuals and small business owners. They include people who worked very hard to earn what they have. They include people who are lazy and underachievers. Some of those people have a high income. Some have a high net worth. Some do not.
I'm totally opposed to the government acting like Robin Hood. If you want a better life, work for it. Some have to work harder than others. It may not be fair, but that's life.
We should not be punishing success. And we particularly should not be feeding more money into a government that has proved incapable of managing our money, amassing a $19 trillion debt.
I think what we do for people on the bottom income end is enough: tax breaks, income assistance, job training, education assistance, healthcare, food, etc.
-
two words....
Salary Cap
Just like pro sports...
-
in the 1970s the top 0.1% owned 7% of the wealth. Today they own over 20%. It changed because US tax law changed, lowering taxes on the rich, including the estate tax. We use to have a middle class, today we really don't. Again this in part due to changes in tax laws. (as I said, thanks Ronnie) Should we lower taxes on the rich even more so they can accumulate wealth even faster?
People on the right are always talking about how things were better in the past. In this case I would agree. I'm all for going back to the tax structure of the 50s, which did a lot to strengthen the middle class.
-
two words....
Salary Cap
Just like pro sports...
a progressive tax accomplishes much of the same thing.
you can pay this person $50k and it will be taxed at 20%. (I'm just making numbers up here) You pay that person an additional $100k and that part will be taxed at 30%. You pay that person another million and that part will be taxed at 40%. Pay that person another $10 million and that part will be taxed at 50%.
-
Yes, keep talking about "the rich" and "the wealthy" as if they are faceless, nameless, homogenous. You wouldn't want to talk about the small business owner with a family, whose business income makes her a target, but is hardly wealthy. Or the couple whose income makes them a target, but has challenges making ends meet. Or that person who is actually wealthy, but busted his butt to earn, save, and invest. Let's just create a big bad boogeyman who is hoarding your unearned income and wealth. Forget about making your way. Just take from people who have, and give to the government. (Not talking about anyone personally.)
-
With the current law, the first $5,450,000 is exempt from the estate tax. And there are plenty of ways to protect "small business owners" who have businesses with net worth larger than 5 and a half million. Plus most "small businesses" are S-Corps, where the profits are passed through to the owners each year and taxed as regular income.
-
With the current law, the first $5,450,000 is exempt from the estate tax. And there are plenty of ways to protect "small business owners" who have businesses with net worth larger than 5 and a half million. Plus most "small businesses" are S-Corps, where the profits are passed through to the owners each year and taxed as regular income.
Hey Tim. just out of curiosity, since you make excuses for EVERYTHING that Clinton did, does and wants to do, are you voluntarily writing an extra check to the IRS? or do you take advantages of the certain deductions and write offs to save a little?
Here Tim, feel free to hit this link anytime you want. You don't have to be rich, just do it from your heart because "you care"
https://www.irs.gov/payments
-
I know I'll get flamed here by some, but I don't really have a problem with some sort of estate tax. I think it sucks for some, like it did in Britain when they did this after the Second World War and some of the old noble families had to sell their estates because they couldn't afford the taxes, but sometimes it's necessary. I live pretty comfortably, vote republican in presidential races, but I'll not just hand my children what I've amassed. If they work hard and learn the business's, sure, but to just give some one something because they won the genetic lottery, no I'm not good with that. I hope my children take what I leave for them and get a head start but that they surpass me because of a work ethic I've instilled upon them. Good for them, people like the Gates, who decided they'll give some help, but not a pile of cash that the kids become entitled brats.
-
I know I'll get flamed here by some, but I don't really have a problem with some sort of estate tax. I think it sucks for some, like it did in Britain when they did this after the Second World War and some of the old noble families had to sell their estates because they couldn't afford the taxes, but sometimes it's necessary. I live pretty comfortably, vote republican in presidential races, but I'll not just hand my children what I've amassed. If they work hard and learn the business's, sure, but to just give some one something because they won the genetic lottery, no I'm not good with that. I hope my children take what I leave for them and get a head start but that they surpass me because of a work ethic I've instilled upon them. Good for them, people like the Gates, who decided they'll give some help, but not a pile of cash that the kids become entitled brats.
You are overlooking the fact that the death tax is a clear cut example of double taxation. If you don't believe that your children, and other heirs, are worthy of getting your money, then give it away to others, or non-profit organization, before you die.
-
in the 1970s the top 0.1% owned 7% of the wealth. Today they own over 20%. It changed because US tax law changed, lowering taxes on the rich, including the estate tax. We use to have a middle class, today we really don't. Again this in part due to changes in tax laws. (as I said, thanks Ronnie) Should we lower taxes on the rich even more so they can accumulate wealth even faster?
People on the right are always talking about how things were better in the past. In this case I would agree. I'm all for going back to the tax structure of the 50s, which did a lot to strengthen the middle class.
This country and most members of getbig have the lottery mentality. They think one day they will wake up and cash the winning ticket. When that happens, they don't want the government coming in and giving all their hard earned money to the coloreds. Why else are these guys carrying the water for millionaires let alone billionaires?
-
This country and most members of getbig have the lottery mentality. They think one day they will wake up and cash the winning ticket. When that happens, they don't want the government coming in and giving all their hard earned money to the coloreds. Why else are these guys carrying the water for millionaires let alone billionaires?
^^^^^ this 1000000%
-
One of the things the American colonies were rebelling against was the aristocracy. "All men are created equal"
LOL, we already have an aristocracy, it's called the government.
-
You are overlooking the fact that the death tax is a clear cut example of double taxation. If you don't believe that your children, and other heirs, are worthy of getting your money, then give it away to others, or non-profit organization, before you die.
I have a different view as I watched family hover over someone like vultures waiting for them to die. Kind of like the movie with Michael J Fox and Phil Hartman(can't remember the name). The person doing the dying doesn't know there's other people who are waiting for them to die so they can cash in. I saw it first hand and couldn't believe how entitled they all felt. I wished none of them had gotten anything. I'm biased I suppose, but it's all free money, as you don't do anything to earn it.
-
This country and most members of getbig have the lottery mentality. They think one day they will wake up and cash the winning ticket. When that happens, they don't want the government coming in and giving all their hard earned money to the coloreds. Why else are these guys carrying the water for millionaires let alone billionaires?
Simpleton. Let me enlighten you a little. No, people (like me) that started out with nothing and built it in to something sure as hell don't want it stolen (yes stolen) from us because we actually worked our asses off to provide for our families and more. It's not up to the government to decide what my son(s), wife and family receive when I die. This is just pure commonsense. What Killary is asking for is a power grab. She's a dem in name and a Marxist/socialist at heart. Why else would most compare her to Obama?
-
Simpleton. Let me enlighten you a little. No, people (like me) that started out with nothing and built it in to something sure as hell don't want it stolen (yes stolen) from us because we actually worked our asses off to provide for our families and more. It's not up to the government to decide what my son(s), wife and family receive when I die. This is just pure commonsense. What Killary is asking for is a power grab.
Do you think you'll have an net worth of more than $5.5 million (which goes up each year adjusted for inflation) when you die? And you don't include what ever is in your 401k or retirement account. If you really are worth that much, then you surely have a financial advisor who can show you ways to transfer ownership of some of your company before you die.
You say you started with nothing and built it into something. But as we argued 4 years ago, you didn't build it on your own in a vacuum. You had public education, and since you're about my age, probably pretty cheap public college. Your employees have public education. Your customers do too, so that they can make enough money to spend on your product. Even though you're rich, you really don't have to worry about being kidnapped and held for ransom. You have cheap gas, clean air and water. on and on.
Taxes are what we pay for civilized society. It is perfectly ok to argue how taxes are spent. I for one, think military spending at levels much higher than when we were facing down the Soviet Union is foolish. Two trillion dollars on the Iraq war! We could have just given Sadam Husein and his two sons a billion each and let them live in Trump tower.
She's a dem in name and a Marxist/socialist at heart. Why else would most compare her to Obama?
Didn't our support of Sanders show you anything? Obama and both Clintons are right of center, pro business, neocons. So is Feinstein. If only we could get someone from left of center into the White House, or as a California senator.
-
Simpleton. Let me enlighten you a little. No, people (like me) that started out with nothing and built it in to something sure as hell don't want it stolen (yes stolen) from us because we actually worked our asses off to provide for our families and more. It's not up to the government to decide what my son(s), wife and family receive when I die. This is just pure commonsense. What Killary is asking for is a power grab. She's a dem in name and a Marxist/socialist at heart. Why else would most compare her to Obama?
do you support Trump adding 25 or 35% to every item coming in from Mex or China?
Because almost everything you buy IS going to cost more as a result. That ipad or samsung you're typing on is going to cost much more.
-
With the current law, the first $5,450,000 is exempt from the estate tax. And there are plenty of ways to protect "small business owners" who have businesses with net worth larger than 5 and a half million. Plus most "small businesses" are S-Corps, where the profits are passed through to the owners each year and taxed as regular income.
So what? The government doesn't have any greater entitlement to take and waste other people's money simply because the person reaches some arbitrary threshold.
And where are you getting info that most small businesses are S corporations?
-
Yeah - lets take someones money and waste it on bullshit. Sounds like a plan to me.
-
"You didn't build that..."
-
Yeah - lets take someones money and waste it on bullshit. Sounds like a plan to me.
I'm all for debating what we should spend money on or not on. But one of the reasons for the estate tax is to prevent an aristocracy from forming. If it wasn't for the estate tax, the Rockefeller great great grandchildren and the Getty grandchildren would be running the country, both in government and private industry. Gates and Zuckerberg's great-grandchildren would be running it in 100 years.
Income inequality is the highest it's been in the US since the 1920s. The current income inequality is due in large part by the lowering of tax rates on the rich by Reagan and W Bush. Trump has now proposed even more tax breaks for the rich.
Unregulated capitalism always ends up with oligarchs. Do you want to live in an oligarchy?
-
I'm all for debating what we should spend money on or not on. But one of the reasons for the estate tax is to prevent an aristocracy from forming. If it wasn't for the estate tax, the Rockefeller great great grandchildren and the Getty grandchildren would be running the country, both in government and private industry. Gates and Zuckerberg's great-grandchildren would be running it in 100 years.
Income inequality is the highest it's been in the US since the 1920s. The current income inequality is due in large part by the lowering of tax rates on the rich by Reagan and W Bush. Trump has now proposed even more tax breaks for the rich.
Unregulated capitalism always ends up with oligarchs. Do you want to live in an oligarchy?
We do live in an Oligarchy. They own Hillary, but they don't own Trump.
Income inequality is caused by government hands out, to the shit "people" that vote for the democrats, and will continue to vote democrat, to get more for nothing, from money stolen , through taxation to pay of the shit "people" to vote democrat, instead of going out applying themselves, by working hard, and making something out of themselves, and upping their incomes.
As long as half the population is working for a living, and the other half is voting for a living, then you can be sure we are ruled by an Oligarchy, who is stealing, through taxation, from the useful
productive people, to pay for the votes of shit "people." Robbing Peter, to pay Paul, will always get you the vote of Paul.
The other part of income inequality is IQ. Bill Gates created a lot of very high paying jobs for highly intelligent people. All the numbskull, dirtballs at the bottom of society don't have the brains to do anything but shovel shit, or collect welfare. Should we make sure they collect high government payouts, and reproduce more shit "people" such as themselves, and create more generations of human garbage?
-
The other part of income inequality is IQ. Bill Gates created a lot of very high paying jobs for highly intelligent people. All the numbskull, dirtballs at the bottom of society don't have the brains to do anything but shovel shit, or collect welfare. Should we make sure they collect high government payouts, and reproduce more shit "people" such as themselves, and create more generations of human garbage?
I have said this exact thing, but these people who are shoveling are the "middle class".
Turning a wrench on an assembly line in a Ford plant isn't some highly skilled position. It's not high IQ, and those are the jobs that are leaving the US.
So what is the difference?
-
I have said this exact thing, but these people who are shoveling are the "middle class".
Turning a wrench on an assembly line in a Ford plant isn't some highly skilled position. It's not high IQ, and those are the jobs that are leaving the US.
So what is the difference?
The "wrench turning jobs" have been automated a long time ago. You need the IQ to be trained as an IT tech these days.
"So what's the difference?", what do you mean?
-
The "wrench turning jobs" have been automated a long time ago. You need the IQ to be trained as an IT tech these days.
"So what's the difference?", what do you mean?
I mean, the premise that Trump or anyone can "bring back" these "middle class" jobs is just not realistic.
I have said numerous times in the past that the jobs are not going to "return" because the skills needed to do jobs has changed. I've continuously said that there are middle class and upper middle class jobs, but they are not in the same vein as they used to be. They are more higher skilled.
So how does Trump or anyone else, fix that?
The reality is that they can not.
-
I mean, the premise that Trump or anyone can "bring back" these "middle class" jobs is just not realistic.
I have said numerous times in the past that the jobs are not going to "return" because the skills needed to do jobs has changed. I've continuously said that there are middle class and upper middle class jobs, but they are not in the same vein as they used to be. They are more higher skilled.
So how does Trump or anyone else, fix that?
The reality is that they can not.
35% tariff on imported goods, and services.
-
35% tariff on imported goods, and services.
Do you believe that will actually happen?
Even if it does, who does that hurt? Just the consumer, the company will just pass the tariff on to anyone who can afford to buy.
-
Do you believe that will actually happen?
Even if it does, who does that hurt? Just the consumer, the company will just pass the tariff on to anyone who can afford to buy.
true that. People don't realize most poor folks already spend all of their money on these things. Raise the price by 35% and they don't spend 35% more lol. They spend way less.
-
true that. People don't realize most poor folks already spend all of their money on these things. Raise the price by 35% and they don't spend 35% more lol. They spend way less.
Well, they spend the exact same amount. They just get less for their money.
This is just basic math.
-
Income inequality is caused by government hands out, to the shit "people" that vote for the democrats, and will continue to vote democrat, to get more for nothing, from money stolen , through taxation to pay of the shit "people" to vote democrat, instead of going out applying themselves, by working hard, and making something out of themselves, and upping their incomes.
That does not explain the vast income inequality of the past, in third world countries, banana republics, etc.
You're confusing cause and effect. You say government handouts leads to income inequality. But extreme income inequality tends to lead to revolution. Government handouts are a way to prevent abject poverty and revolution when there is income inequality.
-
I mean, the premise that Trump or anyone can "bring back" these "middle class" jobs is just not realistic.
I have said numerous times in the past that the jobs are not going to "return" because the skills needed to do jobs has changed. I've continuously said that there are middle class and upper middle class jobs, but they are not in the same vein as they used to be. They are more higher skilled.
The problem is that these jobs are not going to last in Mexico, China, India or anywhere else. Automation will replace most workers everywhere. We are getting to where 10% of the population can provide all the needs of the entire planet. We don't need workers any more. That means abject poverty for 90% of the planet, or guaranteed income (a type of government handout) for all.
-
The problem is that these jobs are not going to last in Mexico, China, India or anywhere else. Automation will replace most workers everywhere. We are getting to where 10% of the population can provide all the needs of the entire planet. We don't need workers any more. That means abject poverty for 90% of the planet, or guaranteed income (a type of government handout) for all.
they can innovate. I'm 40 and I'm studying 3+ hours every day, learning new skills. We all need to do it. Gone are the days of learning a skill at 22 years old and just doing that for life.
-
they can innovate. I'm 40 and I'm studying 3+ hours every day, learning new skills. We all need to do it. Gone are the days of learning a skill at 22 years old and just doing that for life.
I agree. I take new classes constantly.
-
That does not explain the vast income inequality of the past, in third world countries, banana republics, etc.
You're confusing cause and effect. You say government handouts leads to income inequality. But extreme income inequality tends to lead to revolution. Government handouts are a way to prevent abject poverty and revolution when there is income inequality.
No. The rise in income inequality, is proportionate to the rise in government handouts. As government handouts have grown, so has income inequality.
The American Revolution was spawned by taxation without representation.
-
Do you think you'll have an net worth of more than $5.5 million (which goes up each year adjusted for inflation) when you die? And you don't include what ever is in your 401k or retirement account. If you really are worth that much, then you surely have a financial advisor who can show you ways to transfer ownership of some of your company before you die.
Probably not and it really doesn't matter and yes, i do have a financial adviser but thats besides the point. My parents, family members or I did not work all of our lives to leave almost 3/4 to the government and yes, it's as black and white as that.
You say you started with nothing and built it into something. But as we argued 4 years ago, you didn't build it on your own in a vacuum. You had public education, and since you're about my age, probably pretty cheap public college. Your employees have public education. Your customers do too, so that they can make enough money to spend on your product. Even though you're rich, you really don't have to worry about being kidnapped and held for ransom. You have cheap gas, clean air and water. on and on.
Sorry Tim, I did build that with no hand outs, no loans and no one owed raising my son on my own. The idea of owning a business is to make money, not give away but retain profits and pay as little taxes as possible to keep the bottom line up. I'm not against taxes, I'm against unnecessary taxes that affect families and society as a whole. The government has no business intruding on assets that families have built for their children, grandchildren or other wise, it's their money not the govenments
Taxes are what we pay for civilized society. It is perfectly ok to argue how taxes are spent. I for one, think military spending at levels much higher than when we were facing down the Soviet Union is foolish. Two trillion dollars on the Iraq war! We could have just given Sadam Husein and his two sons a billion each and let them live in Trump tower.
Didn't our support of Sanders show you anything? Obama and both Clintons are right of center, pro business, neocons. So is Feinstein. If only we could get someone from left of center into the White House, or as a California senator.
Sanders? are you kidding? He basically ran on a platform of FREE everything which takes away any incentive for people to actually get a job and contribute to society. Thats just a fact, Tim
-
3/4 to the government? Stopped reading at this point. This is all you've got. Lies and what ifs. Sorry if you think I'm a simpleton. Fact is, this shit is pretty simple. The American dream existed prior to Ronald Regan. It's been trickling down into the toilet ever since. Hope this helps, fuckface.