🚀 go-pugleaf

Steve Carter wrote:

> "Merlin Dorfman" <dorfman@netcom17.netcom.com> wrote in message
> news:8otu90$lhe$9@nntp9.atl.mindspring.net...
> > In ca.general Tracey-Levin <tracey12@hotbot.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > : This week, Comrade Clinton vetoed the bill that ended Estate Taxes.
> > : You spend all your life paying taxes on everything you earn, then
> everything you
> > : buy, and to the Federal Government.  Then when you some how create a
> nice
> > : retirement and leave it for your children, the Feds step in and say that
> your
> > : kids owe 55% on everything you left behind.
> >
> >      If your estate is over $1.2 million, and you have been too
> > stupid to use the many mechanisms available for protecting it,
> > then the excess over $1.2 million is indeed subject to a 55%
> > tax.
> >      Call it a tax on stupidity.
>
> That's cute, maybe but beside the piont.
>
> > : Republicans tried to end this awful taxation that keeps families from
> passing
> > : along their wealth to the next generation.
> >
> >      Do you feel all estates should be exempt from all taxes?
> > Why?
>
> Yes, absolutely.  Never mind the double taxation and moral aspects of the
> tax.  If there were no extate taxes of any kind, frugal families could
> firmly extablish themselves among the financialy secure over just a few
> generations.  Small farming operations are also adversly affected,
> particulary when located close to expanding suburban areas.
>
> > If I earn a million bucks I sure pay taxes on it.  If my
> > dad leaves me a million, why is that different?
>
> The obvious difference is that one tax is an income tax and the other an
> estate tax.  Your father's million has already been taxed.  The logic behind
> your argument is that teh government has a prior claim to all wealth and
> that it is only by their good graces that we are allowed to keep anything.
> I reject this argument.  I think most Americans do.
>
> >
> > : Democrats love taxation, and that is why clnton / gore defeated this
> bill.
> >
> >      Clinton/Gore didn't defeat it.  Clinton vetoed it.  In case
> > you hadn't noticed, Bill Clinton isn't running for anything this
> > year.
> >      It's not that he loves taxation, it's that he hates unfair
> > taxation.
>
> Really? See above.  According to you keeping anything is unfair if the
> government wants it.
>
> >
> > : Keep the lower classes from climbing out of the sandbox!  Tax them on
> everything
> > : while they are alive, and when they die, take 55%.
> >
> >      So you will explain why a tax on estates of over $1.2 million
> > keeps the lower classes from climbing out of the sandbox?  At what
> > point have you left the sandbox?  $2 million?  $5 million?  $10
> > million?  A billion?
>
> Again, what difference does it make?  It's not the government's money.  It
> has been taxed.  Are you the arbiture of how much is enough?  Let's pose the
> question as starkly as you have to Sen. Kennedy.  Mr. Kennedy, why didn't
> your family turn over your excess wealth after the death of your father?
> Aren't you aware of your societal obligation to financially level yourselves
> back down to the middle class and earn your own way?
>
> Steve

OUTSTANDING!

You hit it!  The government lays claim to all wealth, and you and I should be
happy that we are "allowed" to keep the portion they've decided to let us have,
and when they want it back, we should proudly hand it over to them.

Never forget what Comrade Clinton said when confronted about a tax cut veto:
"I didn't cut your taxes because you might not spend the money the right way..."

A huge banner should be hung off the White House with this quote on it until
that jerk is replaced.



Tracey