|
Dixie Cretin Seaman posted:if you're arguing revenues you're missing the point. take everything above a few million and light it on fire if you must. dynastic wealth is a cancer with no moral or economic justification
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2017 23:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 19:14 |
|
|
Cybernetic Vermin posted:well, broadly, the best taxes are on things which would otherwise be excessively durable. transporting a days labor far into the future should come at a substantial cost if they can preserve their fortune either your property and sales taxes are too low, in which case raise them, or they're creating enough economic activity to overcome your taxes which likely means growth that's good for everyone. going after cash hordes encourages hiding cash hordes. cant hide property. also in the case of somewhere like CA where property taxes are hosed by law, you have people with no dynasties or cash hordes who are sitting on incredibly valuable property and preventing any new property from being built. taxing them properly would do so much more immediate good than an inheritance tax that would barely affect them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2017 23:35
|
|
|
it is by necessity true that there is enough money available, on a yearly basis, to keep the vast majority of the population of the country alive. after all, they are alive and the amount of people who die from straight up not being able to afford things is rather small in comparison to the 340 million people living here. we also know that since there's people in this country going and making literally thousands times the money those who died make, hell people making millions times that, there is therefore money available on an ongoing basis to clear up the modest amount of people who can't afford to live now. so shouting about how it'd be impossible to provide for everyone is ludicrous, if it were really not possible to provide for everyone we'd have millions upon millions literally starving in the streets each year. that's why any argument that's all "durr but you can't afford it!!!" is bullshit
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2017 23:35
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:if they can preserve their fortune either your property and sales taxes are too low, in which case raise them, or they're creating enough economic activity to overcome your taxes which likely means growth that's good for everyone. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2017 23:36
|
|
|
Just-In-Timeberlake posted:
It's simple, all they have to do is make sure that the maps have extremely accurate up-to-date information about the location of every person in the mapped area.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2017 23:42
|
|
|
I hate shaggar with the burning passion of a thousand fiery suns but this isn't really a substantive argument
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2017 23:43
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:also in the case of somewhere like CA where property taxes are hosed by law, you have people with no dynasties or cash hordes who are sitting on incredibly valuable property and preventing any new property from being built. taxing them properly would do so much more immediate good than an inheritance tax that would barely affect them. but grandmas everywhere will be forced to sell their incredibly valuable homes
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2017 23:45
|
|
|
bob dobbs is dead posted:from a developer point of view, every time i encounter someone about to make the life mistake of touching the mongo poop i redirect them towards couch if they can afford it / are building something that Matters they should use marklogic.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 00:04
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:if they can preserve their fortune either your property and sales taxes are too low, in which case raise them, or they're creating enough economic activity to overcome your taxes which likely means growth that's good for everyone. this is broadly true, certainly anyone who keeps creating economic activity commensurate to the values of the estate (while under reasonable incidental tax pressures while doing so) should get to continue, but i am not sure property taxes are quite where they need to be here, and to be honest i think even in this optimistic scenario some inheritance tax is due, because the transfer of wealth is society banking on keeping such competent management up, and should get *some* compensation for the trust (inheritance is after all rather artificial and state-bound)
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 00:04
|
|
|
yospos: the idea that people should have to work for a living is toxic and outdated also yospos: guillotine everyone who inherited a bunch of money
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 00:08
|
|
|
bernie wants a straightup wealth tax to pay for healthcare i'm down. let's see them actually get taxed into the poor house instead of just whining about the possibility
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 00:08
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:yospos: the idea that people should have to work for a living is toxic and outdated yospos: people should be guaranteed food shelter and medical care regardless of work status. also yospos: people shouldn't be able to inherit billions
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 00:12
|
|
|
a lot of you folks are gonna suddenly change your mind about a 100% inheritance tax when your parents croak and leave you a house worth a couple hundred grand
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 00:14
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:a lot of you folks are gonna suddenly change your mind about a 100% inheritance tax when your parents croak and leave you a house worth a couple hundred grand i think a lot of them assume that even if they're only children a lot of that inheritance is going to be consumed by end-of-life care. hell, i hope i don't get my mom's house until much later in life anyway. that said doesn't estate tax only kick in after the first million or so as it stands? i'm entirely fine with that exemption, just jack the rates up on the non-exempt portions.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 00:21
|
|
|
in the usa there is a 5 million dollar exemption.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 00:24
|
|
|
Cybernetic Vermin posted:this is broadly true, certainly anyone who keeps creating economic activity commensurate to the values of the estate (while under reasonable incidental tax pressures while doing so) should get to continue, but i am not sure property taxes are quite where they need to be here, and to be honest i think even in this optimistic scenario some inheritance tax is due, because the transfer of wealth is society banking on keeping such competent management up, and should get *some* compensation for the trust (inheritance is after all rather artificial and state-bound) yeah I'm suggesting a change to property taxes to increase them on a progressive scale as a compensation for that trust. if you keep it up, great, you're fine. if you don't, we're gonna take it away over time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 00:25
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:a lot of you folks are gonna suddenly change your mind about a 100% inheritance tax when your parents croak and leave you a house worth a couple hundred grand i won't be inheriting anything even close to limit
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 00:26
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:a lot of you folks are gonna suddenly change your mind about a 100% inheritance tax when your parents croak and leave you a house worth a couple hundred grand lol not even close to estate tax levels.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 00:26
|
|
|
end of life care, reverse mortgages, life settlements and even then that's assuming that the estate is worth enough to get hit by the tax in the first place after settling other debts. hell i'd be fine w/ 80% besides, most boomers aren't gonna kick off for at least another decade or two anyway
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 00:26
|
|
|
unless you're suggesting changing it so all inheritance of all types is 100% taxed in which case lol yeah you'd get murdered if you tried to get that passed
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 00:27
|
|
|
While you're all arguing about ubi, I just stayed until 7pm on a Friday trying g to figure out why systemd decided to randomly forkbomb ~2% of our fleet. I still don't know why, but at least we figure out how to talk it out of its desire for hostwide murder-suicide. This vintage systemd moment has been brought to you by "whiskey", which I'm going to go consume like $50 worth of now. Systemd. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 00:27
|
|
|
Here I am glad I won't be responsible for my parent's debts when they die.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 00:30
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:a lot of you folks are gonna suddenly change your mind about a 100% inheritance tax when your parents croak and leave you a house worth a couple hundred grand oh wow a house i have to spend a bunch of money and time cleaning out if i want to sell it, in maybe 30-40 years when they actually die, and not really located somewhere that'll not be all that useful to instead live in at that point unless some projects that are pretty pie-in-the-sky for the region at this point are actually completed in like 2050. and at the end it's just a pretty generic, not that big, house from the 90s which while well insulated and quite sturdy, doesn't do all that much. i'll gladly give up that "opportunity" in exchange for ubi and uhc Farmer Crack-rear end posted:that said doesn't estate tax only kick in after the first million or so as it stands? i'm entirely fine with that exemption, just jack the rates up on the non-exempt portions. less than 5000 people who died last year left estates large enough to be touched by the estate tax at all, even fewer of them left estates large enough to trigger state-level estate taxes/inheritance transfer taxes, which almost universally discount the value of your estate by any federal estate tax that was paid on it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 00:32
|
|
|
Steve Jorbs posted:Here I am glad I won't be responsible for my parent's debts when they die. debt collectors will certainly try also your parents could fraudulently take out a joint loan in your name
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 00:33
|
|
|
H.P. Hovercraft posted:debt collectors will certainly try
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 00:33
|
|
|
fishmech posted:less than 5000 people who died last year left estates large enough to be touched by the estate tax at all, even fewer of them left estates large enough to trigger state-level estate taxes/inheritance transfer taxes, which almost universally discount the value of your estate by any federal estate tax that was paid on it. remember when we didn't even have an estate tax for awhile there and that uberwealthy dude died and his heritors got out of payin billions
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 00:34
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:unless you're suggesting changing it so all inheritance of all types is 100% taxed in which case lol yeah you'd get murdered if you tried to get that passed well that seems to be what "100% inheritance tax" implies, because basically zero percent of people are affected by it already, and those who are usually find a way to apply it to far less wealth than they actually have if you're saying "take all the billionaires' money" well yes we all agree with that one but that isn't really going to make a huge dent in ubi or uhc. you need to tax every "i've only got two million in the bank so i'm not really rich" HENRY and every corporation to start making some progress
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 00:35
|
|
|
Steve Jorbs posted:My dad passed recently and they already tried on both fronts in the past lol. oh yeah they're complete jackals an ex of mine just took to screaming her head off on the phone w/ them that her mother was deeeeeaaaaaad whenever they'd try
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 00:38
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:well that seems to be what "100% inheritance tax" implies, because basically zero percent of people are affected by it already, and those who are usually find a way to apply it to far less wealth than they actually have
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 00:56
|
|
|
Bhodi posted:let's start with making the capital gains tax higher than the income tax nah it should straight up be treated as income, which would bump most of the people using that loophole up to the highest brackets immediately
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 01:13
|
|
|
fishmech posted:nah it should straight up be treated as income, which would bump most of the people using that loophole up to the highest brackets immediately
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 01:31
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/bobvulfov/status/880248711498141696
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 01:50
|
|
|
quote:Tesla fired hundreds of workers this week, including engineers, managers and factory workers, even as the company struggles to expand its manufacturing and product line.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 01:59
|
|
|
why is it that stack ranking never applies to the boss? makes u think
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 02:14
|
|
|
qirex posted:nothing to see here, just getting rid of the dead wood holy poo poo, half the floor is missing!
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 02:15
|
|
|
H.P. Hovercraft posted:i think it's time we killed a rich person goon project :iamafag: Dislike button posted:Dorrance v. United States quote:This issue, one of first impression in our circuit, arises out of a trend in the late 1990s and early 2000s towards the “demutualization” of mutual life insurance companies. As many mutual insurance companies transformed into stock companies, the surplus resulting from the sale of shares in the company was divided among current policy holders, often in the form of stock. sounds like their life insurance policy basically doubled as a stock ipo in a bull market, not exactly reproducible even for the megarich Sagebrush posted:if you're saying "take all the billionaires' money" well yes we all agree with that one but that isn't really going to make a huge dent in ubi or uhc. the inheritance tax isn't about paying for stuff. like i said, light it on fire if you must. it's about limiting the accumulation of massive wealth to a single generation at maximum. a self-made billionaire at least has some memory of what life is like for regular people, and often has earned some claim to a good life through hard work (in addition to other factors, notably luck). the 2nd, 3rd, etc generations are absolutely clueless yet wield significant power and influence. there's no reason to allow that. we fought a war and rejected hereditary rule for largely similar reasons.
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 02:22
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:yospos: the idea that people should have to work for a living is toxic and outdated these aren't actually as contradictory as you seem to think
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 03:20
|
|
|
Dixie Cretin Seaman posted:
i didnt mention the case because i wanted to talk about demutualization of life insurance policies, rather to illustrate why and who was buying 88 million dollar life insurance policies in the first place. but, lol at someone worth 1.5 billion dollars aldo getting a 2 million dollar windfall on their life insurance. the rich get richer
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 04:22
|
|
|
qirex posted:also get ready for tons of companies to ignore this law completely but also why wouldnt you just lie and say you made like 150k last job or something. old employers arent gunna release that information since often its confidential. all they will usually say is "yes they were employed here from x to y"
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 04:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 19:14 |
|
|
Xaris posted:that's good you can lie but you will usually get caught that is 90% of the "background check" -- verifying your old salary for ... reasons?
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2017 04:55
|
|
