It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Your momma and daddy may have to give away much of your inheritance to someone else

page: 5
38
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 19 2015 @ 08:20 AM
link   
Oh come on does nobody understand the accumulation of wealth and the inequalities in the system? rich people dont get rich through hard work, they get rich by creaming their money from the wages of the real hardworkers who they step ont to achjieve wealth.
And for some on here to suggest that people who are low income somehow dont undertsand hard work, or you completely stupid or what?




posted on Jan, 19 2015 @ 08:20 AM
link   
The ignorance in this thread is overwhelming.

Ironically most of those who are vocal against this proposal, to tax the rich a little more, are the ones who would benefit from the taxes but have been manipulated to believe that this is a tax that will hurt the working man.

It is sad that so many Americans actually side with the OP on this issue.



posted on Jan, 19 2015 @ 08:44 AM
link   
a reply to: jrod
Yeah but another way to look at it is that history shows that taxing the rich would most likely just benefit the rich some more. Corporate welfare. The military budget. That kind of stuff, which all just goes back to the rich again anyway.

The rich make sure of that by saying that if they have less money they will have to cut jobs.

So maybe that's what at least some of the objections are about. More cynicism that the money would actually benefit anyone at all?

The only way this would work would be with bipartisan (cringe to use that word) support that the money go to something that is good for everyone and the country.

edit on 1/19/2015 by ~Lucidity because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2015 @ 09:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: WilsonWilson
Oh come on does nobody understand the accumulation of wealth and the inequalities in the system? rich people dont get rich through hard work, they get rich by creaming their money from the wages of the real hardworkers who they step ont to achjieve wealth.
And for some on here to suggest that people who are low income somehow dont undertsand hard work, or you completely stupid or what?


so the solution is to put everybody out of work, so the wealthiest can't benefit from our labor? but unfortunately, they just pick up and move their toys to somewhere else, where the people will work for them. damned if you do, damned if you don't. two party stranglehold

p.s. who made it possible to have such an unequal trade deficit?


edit on 19-1-2015 by undo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2015 @ 09:25 AM
link   
a reply to: queenofswords

The inheritance tax doesn't just affect big money passing down big money from generation to generation.

It's ALL inheritance.



posted on Jan, 19 2015 @ 09:33 AM
link   
a reply to: queenofswords

"Your momma and daddy may have to give away much of your inheritance to someone else"

Really? I seriously doubt that!

Who do you think your talking to here on ATS anyway? I seriously doubt that there's a single person on this site with an income level anywhere near the minimum threshold for this inheritance tax and very few with parents wealthy enough to be affected by this proposed legislation. That's why they're called the one percenters.

I say yes to increasing the tax rate and not just on inheritance, but on capital gains as well. It's more than ironic that in a nation that professes to value honesty and hard work above all else, we award the lowest tax rates for earnings made on capital investments.

Especially when many of those capital investments are made with companies like Bain Capital, who's earnings are often the result of destroying the livelihoods of hard working people while outsourcing their jobs to foreign lands for even greater profits.

It's pathetic, to say the least.



posted on Jan, 19 2015 @ 10:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Flavian

Oh yes I can because it is the FEDERAL RESERVE that artificially manipulating interest rates of everything in this country.

The bankers ain't got jack snip to do with it.

The central bank does.



posted on Jan, 19 2015 @ 10:40 AM
link   
a reply to: undo

but outsourcing was "Good for the economy!!!"

outsourcing didn't help many either, except for the investors who invested in the companies that shipped the jobs overseas. We consumers were told that we would benefit from it with cheaper prices which for awhile may have been true but I got to tell ya I don't remember any $100 pair of shoes while I was growing up!! So I think those investors got the profit and all we got was the same danged prices and unemployment lines!



posted on Jan, 19 2015 @ 11:10 AM
link   
a reply to: jrod

Yeah the IGNORANCE in this thread is astounding.

www.atr.org...

Those are the taxes he has already levied.

Then:

Obama has Proposed 442 Tax Hikes Since Taking Office

In order to stick it to the rich those taxes stick it to the middle class.

The tobacco tax

The ACA individual mandate excise tax

The employer mandate TAX.

The ACA surtax on investment income. That sticks it to IRA's,and 401k's, and pensions of millions of middle class.

The medicare capitali gains surtax.

Read the rest.

Quadruple taxation doesn't even begin to cover what has gone on, and he is still trying to do.

Obama=King George.



posted on Jan, 19 2015 @ 11:14 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96

They can't stop devaluing the dollar because 100 a of billions a year in cash leave the country in various forms, they have to reprint that amount every year or there would be no hard currency left



posted on Jan, 19 2015 @ 11:19 AM
link   
a reply to: onequestion

No it doesn't.

Money is digital these days.

There is no physical amount of cash leaving here.

There is no physical amount of cash at banks for what is in bank accounts.

Bankers just 'promise' to pay.



posted on Jan, 19 2015 @ 11:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: Flatfish
a reply to: queenofswords

I seriously doubt that there's a single person on this site with an income level anywhere near the minimum threshold for this inheritance tax and very few with parents wealthy enough to be affected by this proposed legislation. That's why they're called the one percenters.


You do realize that the 1% includes people making around $300,000 per year, right. The 1% are not just those lucky enough to be making millions per year. My opening scenario is not fantasy. There are many American families just like that.

You only hear about the "evil filthy rich" when MSM covers stories about Wall Street fat cats that have done something reprehensible.

I would be shocked if some ATSers don't fall into the 1% category. I would be doubly shocked if many on this board don't have parents wealthy enough to be affected by this.

I am a staunch believer that families should pass their wealth on to the next generation. All heirs that receive their parents' wealth are NOT deadbeats and lazy bums. I'm sure you can find some, but many increase their family's wealth and do good, honorable, and altruistic things with it.

I am constantly amazed at how many Americans think mediocrity is an honorable goal and vilify anybody that has a substantial pocketbook over the mediocre level.



posted on Jan, 19 2015 @ 11:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: neo96

They can't stop devaluing the dollar because 100 a of billions a year in cash leave the country in various forms, they have to reprint that amount every year or there would be no hard currency left


Most of that cash gets converted to other money.

Then "returned" via currency exchanges.



posted on Jan, 19 2015 @ 12:31 PM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

Newsflash: I don't have any investments beyond meager retirement and our house. But damn sure if I did have a lot of wealth or assets I would want to give it to my kids, not society at large. We paid taxes as our contribution to living in and benefiting from participating in American society....we shouldn't have to pay again.



posted on Jan, 19 2015 @ 12:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
There are two sides to this argument.


No, there is just one. Obama wants to 'redistribute wealth' by stealing from those who have earned it and giving to those who have not. Middle class America will be robbed. HIs agenda is clear.


Please, explain to me how being born to a massive inheritance is "earned" money. Hell, that's half of what the US was founded to escape, a hereditary ruling class who control all the capital.

Personally, I favour massive taxes on inheritance and any money "earned" via things like stock trading and market speculation.



posted on Jan, 19 2015 @ 01:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: ShadeWolf

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
There are two sides to this argument.


No, there is just one. Obama wants to 'redistribute wealth' by stealing from those who have earned it and giving to those who have not. Middle class America will be robbed. HIs agenda is clear.


Please, explain to me how being born to a massive inheritance is "earned" money. Hell, that's half of what the US was founded to escape, a hereditary ruling class who control all the capital.

Personally, I favour massive taxes on inheritance and any money "earned" via things like stock trading and market speculation.


The family earned it. If it was accumulated and grown within the boundaries of our laws, it belongs to the family. I don't think most super wealthy American families want to rule anything.

We are taxed enough already. Clean up the corruption, misappropriation of funds, slush fund programs that never accomplish much of anything, dumb ass politicians that don't know the first thing about money management, and the tax tax tax mentality of those same politicians, and they wouldn't have to rob from Peter to pay Paul.



posted on Jan, 19 2015 @ 01:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
There are two sides to this argument.


No, there is just one. Obama wants to 'redistribute wealth' by stealing from those who have earned it and giving to those who have not. Middle class America will be robbed. HIs agenda is clear.


N0? Just one? Are we to just lay down and believe that those in the highest percentiles of wealth have earned it? Is there no argument to be made for "stolen it"? And how about those who have not earned it? Can we not make a case that they have not been ALLOWED to earn it? Both these opposing positions to your sentence are brief and exaggerated positions used only to mark the far end of a spectrum of possible debate yet I gather, for you, this is moot.

You say middle class will be robbed. How do you know this so emphatically. You say his agenda is clear.

FF, EVERYTHING is clear if one already believes it, and the shortest and easiest way to believe anything is to deny there is any other possible side to an issue.



posted on Jan, 19 2015 @ 02:35 PM
link   
a reply to: ShadeWolf

Please explain how the US government despotism of taking from one group to give to a more favored group is 'earned' ?

Point of fact the US government doesn't earn money.

It creates it. Then steals it in the form of taxation.

Under the false pretense of altruism.



posted on Jan, 19 2015 @ 02:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
There are two sides to this argument.


No, there is just one. Obama wants to 'redistribute wealth' by stealing from those who have earned it and giving to those who have not. Middle class America will be robbed. HIs agenda is clear.


N0? Just one? Are we to just lay down and believe that those in the highest percentiles of wealth have earned it? Is there no argument to be made for "stolen it"? And how about those who have not earned it? Can we not make a case that they have not been ALLOWED to earn it? Both these opposing positions to your sentence are brief and exaggerated positions used only to mark the far end of a spectrum of possible debate yet I gather, for you, this is moot.

You say middle class will be robbed. How do you know this so emphatically. You say his agenda is clear.

FF, EVERYTHING is clear if one already believes it, and the shortest and easiest way to believe anything is to deny there is any other possible side to an issue.


Uh? What did you just say? FF is probably basing his/her "emphatic" statement on years of observation and living life under several administrations and congressional authority. You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.

Define "earned". To you, it may mean physical labor, a 9-5 job, sitting behind a desk 8+ hours, teaching a class, getting a paycheck the way most people do. There are many ways to "earn" income.

You may not like the fact that some "play" the stock market, make risky investments that pay off large, buy and sell real estate, manage other people's money and get commissions from it, or take their inheritance and use it to benefit themselves and their children, and their children's children. etc. etc. You seem to think if someone is in the "evil rich class" they MUST have received it by screwing someone else and this is false, not that some haven't done that, but I would venture to say, not the majority.
edit on 19-1-2015 by queenofswords because: spelling correction



posted on Jan, 19 2015 @ 03:07 PM
link   
Richest 1% Will Own More Than All The Rest By 2016


The combined wealth of the world’s richest 1 percent will overtake that of everyone else by next year given the current trend of rising inequality...


You're right OP, concentration of wealth isn't a problem and we should just let the rich have whatever they want. It'll be us one day, surely!




top topics



 
38
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join