Comment Over Bearing Land Lord (with proper line feeds) (Score 1) 1041
There is no reasonable argument for the death tax. After paying a life time of HIGHER TAXES it is decided that the wealthy have not given/contributed enough. What is it about death that makes it right to take something from them? Other then the fact they can no longer defend themselves. Why take just 50%, why not take it all? See #3 from Marx quote at bottom.
It could be argued that the death tax causes individuals to make poor economic decisions (that harm the public) they would not normally make had the death tax not been there. This is wrong, the argument should not be based in idea that the ends justify the means that is how we got the tax burdens we currently have. The argument must be based on the idea of property rights.
I AM SO GLAD THE GOVERNMENT GIVES US THE FREEDOM TO DONATE OUR MONEY TO WHO THEY DEEM WORTHY!!!!! (this is tongue in cheek, just in case you think I am being serious).
Maybe if the Europeans were not taxed @ > 50% they would donate more to charities. Or maybe if the government did not promise to cover all their needs they would do more to help their fellow man. Why donate when the government claims to solve all your problems? No your right the answer is to tax them more.
The bottom line is there are limits to what a person can spend the rest is invested in some manner or another. Either use of money does more to help the general public then SS, Medicare, welfare, ect.
Argument that Margaret Thatcher's elimination of the property tax was bad because people could no longer rummage through another's house is laughable. If it were not for MT the UK would be no better off then France. Much better to have the money go to taxes then invested?
Property tax is the most evil tax. Paying ever increasing amounts for the same damn thing. Once you own the land what gives the government the right to take it away from you? The only reason the house/land property tax now exists is because someone justified the money grab by diverting the money to education. Sometimes I wonder if I don't own the land or if I am just paying rent to an OVER BEARING LAND LORD.
If you want an argument for socialism you should really stick with the basics you know Marx, LBJ, Hitler, ect.. PLEASE NOTE number 3.
Marx...."Nevertheless, in most advanced countries, the following will be pretty generally applicable.
1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
8. Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc. " .. END OF MARX
There are no natural superiors (bourgeoisie) in the US this only happens when the government believes that is solely responsible for the well being of its people.
I am very uncomfortable with the idea of working harder and harder while getting less in return. With the prospect of never being able to retire because of never ending and ever increasing property taxes. It is a rat race the government does not want to let you out of, they need the tax base.
I do not exploit people by earning money nor should the "many" exploit my ability to make money.
It could be argued that the death tax causes individuals to make poor economic decisions (that harm the public) they would not normally make had the death tax not been there. This is wrong, the argument should not be based in idea that the ends justify the means that is how we got the tax burdens we currently have. The argument must be based on the idea of property rights.
I AM SO GLAD THE GOVERNMENT GIVES US THE FREEDOM TO DONATE OUR MONEY TO WHO THEY DEEM WORTHY!!!!! (this is tongue in cheek, just in case you think I am being serious).
Maybe if the Europeans were not taxed @ > 50% they would donate more to charities. Or maybe if the government did not promise to cover all their needs they would do more to help their fellow man. Why donate when the government claims to solve all your problems? No your right the answer is to tax them more.
The bottom line is there are limits to what a person can spend the rest is invested in some manner or another. Either use of money does more to help the general public then SS, Medicare, welfare, ect.
Argument that Margaret Thatcher's elimination of the property tax was bad because people could no longer rummage through another's house is laughable. If it were not for MT the UK would be no better off then France. Much better to have the money go to taxes then invested?
Property tax is the most evil tax. Paying ever increasing amounts for the same damn thing. Once you own the land what gives the government the right to take it away from you? The only reason the house/land property tax now exists is because someone justified the money grab by diverting the money to education. Sometimes I wonder if I don't own the land or if I am just paying rent to an OVER BEARING LAND LORD.
If you want an argument for socialism you should really stick with the basics you know Marx, LBJ, Hitler, ect.. PLEASE NOTE number 3.
Marx...."Nevertheless, in most advanced countries, the following will be pretty generally applicable.
1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
8. Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc. "
There are no natural superiors (bourgeoisie) in the US this only happens when the government believes that is solely responsible for the well being of its people.
I am very uncomfortable with the idea of working harder and harder while getting less in return. With the prospect of never being able to retire because of never ending and ever increasing property taxes. It is a rat race the government does not want to let you out of, they need the tax base.
I do not exploit people by earning money nor should the "many" exploit my ability to make money.
