3 ms·

And you would also get to tax charity just as heavily. Because charity is all about giving gifts. I have no interest in living in your dream world of justice.

And you would also get to tax charity just as heavily. Because charity is all about giving gifts. I have no interest in living in your dream world of justice. As it would have been a totalitarian nightmare where everybody would be worse off.

morgante 10y ago
Ideally charities should benefit people besides your progeny. I really don't understand why you're so vehemently protective of inherited wealth. Do you think it's abhorrent that Bill Gates is voluntarily donating most of his wealth to charity instead of leaving it to his children? Why do you think an inheritance tax is "totalitarian?" At least, why is it any worse than income taxes?
- JanezStupar 10y ago
  You are being disingenuous when comparing "willfully donating" and 100% inheritance tax. I don't care what people do with their property out of their own free will. I do care when people are trying to instate authoritarian totalitarian governments. I oppose inheritance tax - as that inheritance has already been taxed at least once. I have plenty of good solid arguments on my side. And I would advise you to put a bit more thinking into your ideas.
  - morgante 10y ago
    There's no need to get into ad hominem attacks. If you have so many "good solid arguments" on your side, I'd love to hear them. Or answer my question of why they're so much worse than income taxes. Why do you think that an inheritance tax implies an "authoritarian totalitarian government?" It's a total non sequitur. Does Denmark have an authoritarian government because they impose a high income tax?
    - JanezStupar 10y ago
      Inheritance tax per say does not imply authoritarian totalitarian government. 100% inheritance tax does. Work out the details yourself. Your conflation of income and inheritance tax is disingenuous. My crown argument against inheritance tax is that the property being inherited has already been taxed before. Another would be that taxing inheritance destroys capital base, which no society really wants. Third would be that governments are really bad at managing capital. There are plenty of issues in the nordic models, where there are already signs that their massive welfare states are going to implode in the next couple of decades. p.s.: How is me remarking that you have poorly thought out positions an ad-hominem?
      - morgante 10y ago
        > Inheritance tax per say does not imply authoritarian totalitarian government. 100% inheritance tax does. Work out the details yourself. Why? What is the taxation level where the government is automatically authoritarian? 99%? 90%? 80%? You can't just assert things and then not provide a causal chain. What makes double taxation an unmitigated evil? Sales taxes are double taxes, as are taxes on corporate dividends. Yet I don't hear people railing about how they're symptomatic of an authoritarian regime. > Another would be that taxing inheritance destroys capital base, which no society really wants. How does it "destroy" capital base? Redistribution of wealth does not equal destruction of wealth. I agree that many governments do manage their capital poorly. Instead of having government hold on to the capital, I'd say we should collect all estate taxes and channel them into an annual basic income for all citizens. Let the living decide how to use the money. > p.s.: How is me remarking that you have poorly thought out positions an ad-hominem? It's not attacking the merits of the argument but instead the thinking of the arguer. I have actually thought about this quite a bit.
        JanezStupar 10y ago
        I am not going to engage in this discussion anymore as you have convinced me that you are arguing in bad faith. p.s.: for readers - see what Milton Friedman had to say on the very topic, to a person that seems very much on the same level as some of the contributors to this thread: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRpEV2tmYz4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRpEV2tmYz4

morgante 10y ago

Ideally charities should benefit people besides your progeny. I really don't understand why you're so vehemently protective of inherited wealth. Do you think it's abhorrent that Bill Gates is voluntarily donating most of his wealth to charity instead of leaving it to his children? Why do you think an inheritance tax is "totalitarian?" At least, why is it any worse than income taxes?

JanezStupar 10y ago
You are being disingenuous when comparing "willfully donating" and 100% inheritance tax. I don't care what people do with their property out of their own free will. I do care when people are trying to instate authoritarian totalitarian governments. I oppose inheritance tax - as that inheritance has already been taxed at least once. I have plenty of good solid arguments on my side. And I would advise you to put a bit more thinking into your ideas.
- morgante 10y ago
  There's no need to get into ad hominem attacks. If you have so many "good solid arguments" on your side, I'd love to hear them. Or answer my question of why they're so much worse than income taxes. Why do you think that an inheritance tax implies an "authoritarian totalitarian government?" It's a total non sequitur. Does Denmark have an authoritarian government because they impose a high income tax?
  - JanezStupar 10y ago
    Inheritance tax per say does not imply authoritarian totalitarian government. 100% inheritance tax does. Work out the details yourself. Your conflation of income and inheritance tax is disingenuous. My crown argument against inheritance tax is that the property being inherited has already been taxed before. Another would be that taxing inheritance destroys capital base, which no society really wants. Third would be that governments are really bad at managing capital. There are plenty of issues in the nordic models, where there are already signs that their massive welfare states are going to implode in the next couple of decades. p.s.: How is me remarking that you have poorly thought out positions an ad-hominem?
    - morgante 10y ago
      > Inheritance tax per say does not imply authoritarian totalitarian government. 100% inheritance tax does. Work out the details yourself. Why? What is the taxation level where the government is automatically authoritarian? 99%? 90%? 80%? You can't just assert things and then not provide a causal chain. What makes double taxation an unmitigated evil? Sales taxes are double taxes, as are taxes on corporate dividends. Yet I don't hear people railing about how they're symptomatic of an authoritarian regime. > Another would be that taxing inheritance destroys capital base, which no society really wants. How does it "destroy" capital base? Redistribution of wealth does not equal destruction of wealth. I agree that many governments do manage their capital poorly. Instead of having government hold on to the capital, I'd say we should collect all estate taxes and channel them into an annual basic income for all citizens. Let the living decide how to use the money. > p.s.: How is me remarking that you have poorly thought out positions an ad-hominem? It's not attacking the merits of the argument but instead the thinking of the arguer. I have actually thought about this quite a bit.
      - JanezStupar 10y ago
        I am not going to engage in this discussion anymore as you have convinced me that you are arguing in bad faith. p.s.: for readers - see what Milton Friedman had to say on the very topic, to a person that seems very much on the same level as some of the contributors to this thread: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRpEV2tmYz4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRpEV2tmYz4