3 ms·

Inheritance tax per say does not imply authoritarian totalitarian government. 100% inheritance tax does. Work out the details yourself. Your conflation of inco

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

> 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