Comments (39) Jump to Comments Form

1. 

   GNWachs said, 2 months ago

   There is a long difficult road ahead for the economy. People are scared and will respond with less spending and more saving. Thus a turnaround will not bring an immediate increase in employment. Therefore tax receipts will continue to be lower than budgeted. It might seem this is not the best time to add trillions to both our deficit and our debt.

2. 

   cjr53 said, 2 months ago

   That is true.

   However, don’t forget the past 8 years of transferring wealth from the bottom 98% to the top 2%. In addition to running on credit where the big deficit started. It isn’t all Obama’s fault now.

   That is one thing that the “w” and crew were very successful with. And wiretapping Americans, and torturing people and taking us into a couple of wars, seemingly unending.

3. 

   GNWachs said, 2 months ago

   I truly don’t understand the logic of the liberal mind. Bush did indeed cut taxes. By doing so the ultra-wealthy paid a lower percentage of their income as taxes. They responded by working harder and earning so much more that their total tax dollar sent into Uncle Sam went way up. The US government now takes in more dollars and a higher percentage of tax income from these exact same ultra-wealthy.

   In simple terms under Clinton the top 1% paid in 20% of all tax intake and under Bush they paid in 30%. Yet you are complaining. What do you want to raise their tax rate and decrease the number of actual tax dollars they pay in? The system worked exactly as planned.

   Is it you really don’t care how much they actually paid in, in taxes, but your sense of justice is bothered that their tax rate percentage went down?

4. 

   benbrilling said, 2 months ago

   The myth goes on. Will you ever learn? America prospered decades ago when the wealthy paid a much higher tax rate.

5. 

   cabrobst said, 2 months ago

   “It isn’t all Obama’s fault”?
   Hardly any of it’s Obama’s fault!
   It’s Obama’s fault that it is NOT now worse than the Great Depression.
   Sure, we aren’t out of the woods yet. That we are STILL in the woods is the fault of the Republican’s who stand in the way of the American people recovering from Republican shenanigans. That we were in the woods at all is the fault of the Republicans.

6. 

   senorbullwinkle said, 2 months ago

   GNC, Guess you never played monopoly, When the 1% has most of the money, Game Over ! Ever hear about the redistribution of wealth ? That’s what the make the world go round. Just where do you think the rich get their money ? They certainly dont work for it.
   Today, I think I’ll play with the price of gasoline, or maybe, health care. Maybe I’ll raid some steel companies, do some corporate take overs. I know I’ll buy a bicycle company and move to Hong Kong.

7. 

   believecommonsense said, 2 months ago

   GNW, your numbers are suspect and presented, as usual, with no source or link …. nope, don’t believe what you write

8. 

   motivemagus said, 2 months ago

   GNW: cite data. All the data I have seen indicates that the only people who really benefited from the Bush tax-cuts were the superrich, while the economy as a whole declined and the average American income went down. Furthermore, the gap between the rich and the poor increased – just as it did under Reagan’s version of “trickle-down.” And for some reason it’s not right to raise the minimum wage?

9. 

   MurphyHerself said, 2 months ago

   Well, it distress me that people on SS are not getting an increase this year, not even to cover the increased cost of Medicare. A good many of these seniors need that money, yet Congress still goes along its merry way with its yearly pay hike.

10. 

    GNWachs said, 2 months ago

    http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/250.html

    Now I finally understand where BCS and big ear are coming from. In the truest sense of the word they are “without knowledge”, note not stupid.

    In 2007 the wealthiest 1% paid in 40% of all personal income taxes. The top 5% paid in 60% of all Federal Personal Income Taxes. Read the entire report. BTW, just Google taxes paid by income level and get hundreds of similar citations.

11. 

    GNWachs said, 2 months ago

    I obviously was unable to accurately convey my main point in the first post. I used numbers just made up out of my head to prove the point that the wealthy far overpay in relation to what they earn. And also that as you decrease the highest rate of tax the wealthy actually pay more and the poor pay less. The actual numbers, which I knew but was too lazy to look up, are far far more convincing. As an example I guestimated they pay 30% of all Federal taxes when they actually pay 40%. Think about that 1% of all Americans pay 40% of all the taxes and the bottom 46% pay nothing-zero-nada.

    You questioned the 30% number implying it was too high but accept the 40% number which from your viewpoint defeats your hypothesis.

    JFK knew that when you lower the maximum tax rate you actually increase the $$ taxes paid. That is why he did it also.

12. 

    ReasonsVentriloquist said, 2 months ago

    GNWs numbers are well enough towards being common knowledge.

    What’s wrong is GNWs assertion that the rich just “They responded by working harder and earning so much more that their total tax dollar sent into Uncle Sam went way up.”

    Worked harder? Don’t you mean made the people that worked for them work harder? Bought new ways to streamline operations, sent jobs to lower cost environs, blackmailed local governments for tax abatements and found new ways to transfer the wealth from the many to the few?

    I’m sure that’s not what you mean, but only because you don’t know what really happened.

    Because you are a piker wannabe!

13. 

    Loco80 said, 2 months ago

    What is a piker, and why would someone want to be one? Why are you becomming so vicious when your post would indicate that you are intellectually inferior to your adversary?

    Murphy, isn’t that the truth. I would like to see all members of congress have to turn over THEIR pot of retirement gold to Social Security and try to live like the general populace.

    Motive, I received two helpful tax rebates, and a lower base tax rate during the Bush administration. Maybe my income was so low that a tax increase wouldn’t have helped much.

14. 

    GNWachs said, 2 months ago

    Can’t speak for you but my physician friends didn’t open offices in India or China. We just put in more hours at the office, saw more patients, took less vacation and just worked harder. We got to keep more of what we earned and so responded just as was planned by JFK et al. So gross dollars paid into tax was up but so was the money we all earned.

    The staff also did better and got extra hours and bonuses.

    Bottom line, happier patients, happier staff, happier Uncle Sam -a win/win/win.

15. 

    senorbullwinkle said, 2 months ago

    GNC is a pill pusher, a salesman.

16. 

    ReasonsVentriloquist said, 2 months ago

    Loco80,

    A piker is one of limited means who pretends to be more than (s)he is.

    A wannabe is one who aspires to a “goal” that is beyond their ability and pretends that they have already achieved said “goal.”

    So perhaps I’m guilty of redundancy. I, however, see it as “added for emphasis.”

    GNW,

    My wife worked for a medical group for 22 years before I encouraged her to leave.

    The doctor works longer hours and sees more patients for less time each. This results in seeing the same patient more often with a new charge for each office visit (gee, I wonder if the doctors figured that out). It resulted in my wife, a new mother, getting home to see her children at 6:30 - 7:00 at night (fortunately we had in-laws that could be with the children). She worked in a high stress environment that was a snake pit of estrogen vipers.

    The doctor she worked for got a divorce and spent half of his time talking to his atty, half of his time talking to his mistress and half of his time talking to his stock brokers. My wife spent all of her time trying to calm down his patients who had waited patiently in the waiting room.

    Then she worked for a different doctor in the same group (after the first one’s mistress decided that he deserved an older, less attractive assistant and she was fired without notice one random Friday night) for a number of years before he committed suicide.

    Then she worked for a number of different doctors at the same time.

    Extra hours? Yes. Higher pay? Not. Bonuses? She got a few nice sweaters at Christmas.

    Happier Uncle Sam? There was a saying back in the old Tax Shelter business days “‘Greedy Avaricious American In Search Of Tax Shelter’ or Doctor for short.”

    Doctors are notorious for trying to put together retirement plans that allow them to shelter as much money as possible and at the same time protect that money from employees. Go ask any life insurance agent who has doctors’ pensions as a part of their business.

    Meanwhile, as “rich” as doctor are compared to the Average Joe, they don’t come even close to what the REAL wealthy make. Unless they own a string of offices they’ll never be able to pull down the $5,000,000+ that it takes to join in the real dance.

    That you don’t know this shows me that you don’t even understand what “Capitalism” is.

    This is why you are one of the people that can be fooled all of the time.

17. 

    d_legendary1 said, 2 months ago

    First and foremost anyone pulling more than $100,000 dollars doesn’t pay any more taxes after the first $100,000 so the fact is that they pay 30-40% in taxes at the $100,000 threshold. So a person making a million dollars pays taxes on the first $100,000 and the rest of the $900,000 is tax free. So the notion that they are paying more in taxes is laughable at best. If they paid 40% percent overall taxes on income then it makes sense that they pay a lot in taxes but right wingers never mention the $100,000 cap on their taxes.

    In essence giving a percentage and not a base number makes it seem that these people are paying a lot in taxes. An old right wing ploy to get the rich not to pay their fair share.

18. 

    d_legendary1 said, 2 months ago

    And another thing: No one busts a.s.s. in wall street to get their money. If you only knew the ways people with tons of money can make money with money your head would spin. Here’s two examples:

    Market Speculation: When rich people pool their money togher to influence the price of a stock or good. Remeber when gas prices went out of control? It wasn’t the camel jockies who cut supply. It was the rich guys pumping their money in crude oil to increase the price of the good. This is a perfect example of making money with money. Their shares in the stuff go up so if the price of crude was at $20 a share and they pump 1 millon dollars to get 50,000 shares, the stock increases the price to $40 dollars a share, then sell all their shares. They would have made a cool million without having to lift a finger. That’s how the rich work for their money.

    The take over: T. Boone Pickins and Mitt Romney made their bones using this technique. Essentially they would get a bank loan that matches the value of the business that they want to acquire, buy that business, and tell that business that now they have to pay back that bank loan since the said individual owns the company. Now the company has to lay off workers, make budget cuts such as health care and things that costs money all to cover the bet that the individual who bought them out made. This used to be illegal until Regan changed all that.

    This is capitalism right now. Why do you think the Boston Globe and all these papers are in trouble now? Cause some butt wipe with money is using his wallet to crush the rest of us.

19. 

    d_legendary1 said, 2 months ago

    Wow! Did a little research with the IRS numbers and come to find out that they did increase the taxes on the rich at about 35% or so in income taxes. I’ll retract my $100,000 ramble. I hate being wrong.

    Sounds great when you think about it however…

    It only applies to income tax. The IRS numbers show you how much revenue they get but don’t specify from what (I’ll assume its wages, tips, and commission, like in my w-2). Millionaires typically give themselves a wage of $2-10 milion dollars and pay the 35% tax on that, but their real wealth comes from capital gaines.

    For those of you who don’t know capital gaines its basically a tax on the stock these guys sell, which is between 0% to 15% depending on how long they hold their stocks.

    Most of the rich Like Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld use this income tax loop hole in order to avoid paying the 35% rate imposed on them by the government. Ler’s take the $2-10 million dollar example. They get paid that amount in wages (if they so choose so, some people get paid about $100,000 in wages) and get nailed for 35% tax. Sounds fair at first, but then they get paid in $100,000,000 worth of stock courtesy of Halliburton. Depending on how long they hold that stock they can pay anywhere from 0% to 15% in taxes resulting in Cheney paying $15,000,000 max in taxes. The rest goes into his pocket.

    So in retrospect how is the tax system fair to everyone? The rich pay more because they make more. Its a numbers game. I bet if he paid his 35% our deficit would start to pay itself off in a matter of years.

20. 

    d_legendary1 said, 2 months ago

    They would pay 35% if they don’t use tax deductions. If they do its even lower.

21. 

    ReasonsVentriloquist said, 2 months ago

    d_leg,

    Sorry guy, but you know less than nothing about what you are talking about.

    You shouldn’t talk of these things until you understand them. I’m willing to help you.

22. 

    DrCanuck said, 2 months ago

    Since when has not understanding things ever stopped anyone from talking about them?

23. 

    GNWachs said, 2 months ago

    Big Ear How much tax are the various groups paying? Here is your answer.

    The facts are shocking to liberals because they have been taught the exact opposite. BTW there is no such thing as 0% capital gains tax. He just makes up numbers just like when he said there are no taxes on incomes above $100,000 (see above)

    http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/250.html

24. 

    GNWachs said, 2 months ago

    Each state is different, each city is different, each county is different. The only possible global number is Federal.

25. 

    ReasonsVentriloquist said, 2 months ago

    He’s right Satipera4, every neighbor is different. I may pay more or less taxes than the guy who lives next door even if we make the same income.

    And let’s not forget the deductions (YEEE HAAAW!).

    I used the same link that GNW used there and it does take some digging through and clicking on links (Thank Bill for tabs) and I’m pretty sure the answer you seek is there.

    See? Now what’s important about what we’ve just said though is that what GNW said about Liberals being taught and blah blah blah, a majority of the taxes we pay are voluntary (this fact is ignored by the anti tax Republican crowd).

    We choose to pay higher taxes on more expensive clothing. We choose to pay higher taxes to live in McMansions (that they never thought about the impact of taxes on when they bought them). We choose to pay taxes on our cell devices and on our home phone lines. We choose to pay tolls. We choose to live far from work so we can pay gasoline taxes. We choose to vote against legislators who try to get us to consolidate our tax burdens into one, more efficient collection agent (most of our increased taxes came about due to Reagan cutting off Fed funding and shifting the cost down to the local level, a very inefficient business model. Truth is that trend happened at the same time as the Walmart/Home Depot buisness model of centralized purchasing and distribution revolutionized the retail industry!).

26. 

    d_legendary1 said, 2 months ago

    Since people are ripping me about my numbers (because no one has the balls to admit when they are wrong and have the hutzpa to trash you when you are) I have to defend my work:

    RV I was explaining INCOME tax rates that were set forth by the IRS. Rich guys, since they are rich, don’t pay the set forth amount because they manage to pay lower taxes in other ways such as the capital gains tax because they are dealing with ASSETS and not WAGES, TIPS, and COMMISSION. So for someone with a big wallet they would rather pay 0-15% tax than 35% tax. The key as you pointed out is what types of “deductions” they want to use to pay as little as they can.

    To GNW I’ve already retracted my previous statement so if you’re gonna hound me for a mistake (like most repos do) knock yourself out. Also 0% capital gains exist depending on whether you hold stock short term or long term. Look it up.

    http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=106799,00.html

    The line is there! 0% does exist.

    “I’ve come prepared my son”

27. 

    ReasonsVentriloquist said, 2 months ago

    Satipera4,

    You actually have it backwards.

    Those at the top 1% and above generally have a significant percentage of their income coming from tax advantaged sources.

    Those earners generally have significant dividend income, trust fund income, let’s not forget tax free income from municipal bonds etc. Traditionally, there are one timers in the T1P as a result of something along the lines of a capital gain on the sale of an asset.

    A person with significant assets and intelligence would endeavor to put as much money as possible into non taxed assets and or to shift taxed assets to other tax paying entities (trusts, children, businesses and the like).

    I read a report that said the 1.6% of the population of the USA inherit over $100,000. Nearly 97% of the population inherit between $0 and $50,000. The Estate tax is the other Federal tax that would make a difference to the very wealthy, and only to them.

    If you die in 2010, there is no estate tax. If you die tomorrow there is a $3.5M exemption (where your tax is covered by your unified credit). As it stands now, if you die in 2011, you are back to the old $1M (well, not old, it’s still higher than the $600,000 it was for years) exemption.

    Other than that I can’t think of a specific tax that would impact the T1P earners (as if they make a diference).

    What might be concerning you is the figure that the T1P pay some 40% of the income tax. That is just a function of how wide the disparity is between the T1P and the T10P (not to mention the bottom 90%) ( http://tinyurl.com/nl9utb there’s the breakdown.) $113,000 to $410,000.

    More illustrative will be the guy at the top of the tenth percentile compared to the guy at the bottom versus the guy at the top of the .2th percentile versus the bottom of the 1th… i.e 178,964 - 160,041 (an 18,923 difference, 1,600 a month) versus $2,155,364 - 410,096 (a $1,745,268 difference, 145,000 per month)

    The bottom guy at the top 10 has to work all year to make as much as the bottom of the top 1 makes by the 3rd week of March.

    The guy at the bottom of the T1P has to work all year to make what the guy just 90 basis points ahead of him has made by the third week of February.

    Top 10 guy is overtaken less than 3 weeks into January.

28. 

    GNWachs said, 2 months ago

    dlegend

    I still fail to understand you. If you have a long term or short term capital gain you pay taxes. there is no 0% capital gains tax. If you lose money on a capital investment there obviously is no tax. if you invest in tax free munis there is no tax but these are not capital gains. where do you get your numbers from?

29. 

    GNWachs said, 2 months ago

    RV

    Dividend income and trust fund income are taxable events. I don’t understand your point.

    Estate tax. The world’s most unfair tax. You earn money. You are a good citizen and pay the full 38% Federal income Tax on it + Medicare tax. You then pay state/city income tax sales tax etc. So for example you earn $1M and after all taxes have 1/2 Million left. These are after tax dollars. You have paid your taxes on them. You die and try and give that after tax 1/2 million to your children and they are further taxed an additional 55% on the remaining after tax .5M. And you think that is fair?

30. 

    d_legendary1 said, 2 months ago

    Hey GNW,

    I got the percentages at the IRS website.

    Capital gains and losses are classified as long–term or short–term. If you hold the asset for more than one year before you dispose of it, your capital gain or loss is long-term. If you hold it one year or less, your capital gain or loss is short-term.

    Capital gains and deductible capital losses are reported on Form 1040, Schedule D (PDF). If you have a net capital gain, that gain may be taxed at a lower tax rate than the ordinary income tax rates. The term “net capital gain” means the amount by which your net long–term capital gain for the year is more than your net short–term capital loss. Currently net capital gain is generally taxed at rates no higher than 15%, although, for 2008 through 2010, some or all net capital gain may be taxed at 0%, if it would otherwise be taxed at lower rates.

    From:

    http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc409.html

    If you still don’t get it then get some help cause the numbers and facts are there. Otherwise you are ignoring reality. This is from the GOVERNMENT’S WEBSITE. You know, the people who tell us how much in taxes we gotta pay.

31. 

    d_legendary1 said, 2 months ago

    Hey SATI,

    The reason repos’ point at the income tax is because under the income tax rich guys like Bill Gates would appear to be losing a lot of money, but in reality the above statement proves that they are paying far less in taxes than they should really be paying. This, however is at the individual level.

    Don’t get me started at the corporate level.

32. 

    ReasonsVentriloquist said, 2 months ago

    D_Leg

    You’re wrong on so many things. Long term cap gains rate is 15%

    One CAN pay net zero if they have Capital losses to write off against gains.

    One CAN write 3,000 of Capital losses (over and above the losses written against cap gains) against ordinary income and roll losses forward for year to come (God willing and the crick don’t rise)

    GNW,

    The reason for the inclusion of Trust Funds is that it shows where the wealthy can put assets such that they may grow. As opposed to most of us who live in our biggest asset.

    Dividend income is tax advantaged provided that the company was profitable.

    Dividend like distributions from Master Limited Partnerships are generally considered at least partly (usually mostly and occasionally completely) return of principle and therefore reduce the cost basis of the holding which may then be sold with a capital gain which is taxed at the more favorable rate (cap gains).

    Your understanding of the Estate tax is so flawed it I shouldn’t even touch it. Suffice it to say that the 1.6% of the population will inherit over 100,000.

    The exemption is now 3.5 million each (that’s $7 from Mom and Dad more than most moms and pops have.) That means that there is $0 tax due on that transfer.

    In 2010 the number goes to 10M each.

    There are myriad methods to protect assets from the estate tax (or rather to protect the heirs from getting less money) and, given that you know you are going to die, if you don’t do something about your assets beforehand, whose fault is that?

    Give it a break GNW, the world is set up for the wealthy, and they just keep coming back for more and more.

    And you don’t know uckfall about it.

33. 

    cdward said, 2 months ago

    Just a word on the estate tax. It is not a death tax because nobody charges you to die (other than outrageous funeral bills, but that’s another story).

    It is a tax on unearned income because those who inherit have not earned the income. It is a gift. And it has to be an outrageously big gift to even get taxed. Given that we are at our best a meritocracy, and that we do not want nobility in which wealth and power are handed down from generation to generation, the estate tax makes perfect sense. Let the kids who have already benefited from superb educations not open to most go out and get a job and fend for themselves. The rich who earned the money already got to spend it as they chose while they lived. After they die, it’s not theirs anymore.

34. 

    GNWachs said, 2 months ago

    cdward

    Very honest recitation of your opinion. It seems to be the majority view held by liberals. I think since I earned the money and paid taxes on it I should be able to give it to my children. The law says no unless you jump through hoops ABCD etc. Fortunately there are some very smart lawyers/accountants who know those hoops backwards and forwards. I have hired them.

35. 

    ReasonsVentriloquist said, 2 months ago

    CDward gave more than a recitation of his opinion, he gave an honest recitation of the facts.

    The fact is that the Estate tax laws were instituted as a “Confiscatory Action.” These are indeed a tax designed to damper wealth accumulation.

    Pikers such as yourself (with a screaming 1/2 mill to “protect” ) always want to believe that they are part of this nation’s aristocracy. You want to believe that the laws are made with guys like you in mind. You want to believe that you got the big swinging one and the nation is afraid of the power your wealth can buy.

    Let me construct a straw man so that I can then knock it down, hopefully, you’ll be able to see the truth that is revealed by the process, flawed as it is (that’s how plain this truth is). Let’s create a guy by the name of Cornelius I Biltafeller. Let’s recognize that this guy’s ambition is to be the most powerful man in the world. Let’s recognize that money is power, but power is more than just money. Power is control.

    Cornelius I. Biltafeller figured out a way to make gold out of software, and he has access to 25 Billion dollars by the time he is 39. He has himself cloned. He raises Cornelius I Biltafeller II to be just as ambitious and driven as he is. He teaches II all he knows about business. While his estate has grown by 10% per year, Cornelius the first dies at 62. Cornelius II has an estate valued at 100Billion dollars!

    Meanwhile, Cornelius’s business is under attack, there are all sorts of people who want to have what he has and they are turning their software into gold too. So what is Cornelius to do? He does what the military contractors do, he does what the NRA does, he moves operations into key Congressional districts and then uses the leverage afforded him by the threat of leaving those districts and costing the Congressman his job.

    He contributes mightily to the Pro Biltafeller Platform candidates and he winds up with a Congress that passes a law that all software must have this particular National Security patch that makes all other software beholden to the software produced by Biltafeller. Cornelius even pays for a vocal group of “activists” who protest this action, there’s an investigation and the scandal is call Bili-Gate. Admonished, he pays a 10Billion dollar fine, “the largest in history, ever”, but his patch remains standard. His growth rate remains 10%

    Biltafeller II clones Biltafeller III and IV. Dies at 62 like I. Biltafeller III works the business while B4 sees no challenge left in the software business. Biltafeller III wants to own all of the residential property in the nation. He/they have over a half a trillion dollars. Same trick, they pay an enormous fine and they get their laws passed and signed and stamped by the SCOTUS. Next thing you know, the Biltafellers own all the banks. They call all mortgages. 75% American must now pay rent to the fellers that I bilt.

    Nobody is interested in your measly 3 million dollars. The Estate tax is there so John D, and Cornelius Van and the other Robber Barons didn’t take over the nation (like they would have).

    And I’m sure you know this but one of the richest guys in the world, Warren Buffett, agrees with the principal. As do several others among the top tier.

36. 

    GNWachs said, 2 months ago

    If nobody is interested in my measly 3 million, may I please keep it and give it to my children, intact? if I die in 2011 or later.

37. 

    ReasonsVentriloquist said, 2 months ago

    Why don’t you put it into a Charitable remainderment Income trust? Take distributions from the trust and give that money to your children and have them pay for a life insurance policy for 4M on you and your spouse?

    That way when you die, the charity gets what’s left of your 3mill, the kids get a tax free settlement of 4mill. Oh and you got big tax deductions and a wing at the library named after you while you were alive.

    You won’t and you want to know why? Because you’ll say “I don’t want to give my money away. I shouldn’t have to spend money to buy insurance, the government should just let me alone.”

    I can agree that the exemption should be raised to 5M (2.5 each) but that’s nothing to the guys who make Tens of Millions per year and have assets to match. Those are the guys who bought the 2000 election.

    Seriously, do you think the country would have been better off if John McCain won the nomination in 1999? I sure as heck do! I think he’d have beaten Gore hands down. I think he’d have paid attention to intelligence reports. I think he’d have created a solid center in this country.

    Let’s say that W. spent 15million of personal money to get elected in 2000. If H. dies in 2010 (I misspoke before, in 2010 there is no cap to the exemption, the estate tax is repealed in 2010, but that repeal, along with a whole host of taxes and tax cuts “sunset”. It was a trap set by the Republicans so that when the provisions “sunset” the Repbs can say that the Dems presided over the biggest tax increase in the history of the world amen! AND if they sunset it then a whole host of good programs, like the 529 programs (which, btw are a great vehicle for you to reduce your estate by gifting to all of your children and grandchildren, but at the same time retaining control of) will also die, angering the left and allowing the right to say “They don’t want to help Americans save for college!” even though the 529 is only nominally a college savings program (who needs to put away 250,000 for a 2 year old’s college education? Nobody, but it helps codgers like you avoid estate tax.)

    Where was I? Oh yeah, GHB is worth north of $200M so how much does W. save by spending $15M to get elected to where he can repeal the Estate tax?

38. 

    d_legendary1 said, 2 months ago

    R.V. is trying to tell you that there are alternatives to avoid the estate tax, but rather you want to remove it permanently.

    Personally I have mixed feeling about this thing but anyway.

    If the max is 15% then that’s 15% of taxes that C.E.O.s pay in order to avoid the income tax.

    Again why do you think guys like howard stern and Bill McGuire are or were paid in stock and NOT in salary?

    We can talk about figures all day long but in the end the laws regarding income are really screwed up in favor of the guy who can crush the American Dream with his wallet.

39. 

    churchillwasright said, 2 months ago

    Friday night news dump: another 4 banks failed.