Let's be honest about how we live.

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by evince View Post
those numbers you cited are from people owning property and now that property is NOT worth what is was worth and many of those people LOST some of their property in the mess as well

But there is still no evidence to show that "most" rich people inherited their money. That is pure bunk.

Hmmm,

http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2011/09/22/are-we-entering-the-age-of-inherited-wealth/?mod=WSJBlog

 

[The Dude]

That's laughable it's really just the Walton kids.
Buffet didn't
Gates didn't
Ellison didn't
80 percent of millionaires don't

 

[The Dude]

Lots of people apparently use that as a crutch to not try!

 

[canceled.2021.1]

I don't recall saying anything that racist, but that didn't stop you from calling me one. And, as I recall, you continued to refuse to provide any evidence.

But yes, I did provide evidence of my assertions.

I like Deshy's spelling of assertions better

 

[Big Money]

Desh made another claim she cannot prove?

Does she hate facts?

Is she fact-averse?

 

[Mott the Hoople]

This is what stood out for me. I haven't seen any evidence that every rich person is a Paris Hilton. And I also agree that my descendants should be able to reap what I have worked to achieve....which in my case really ain't much but I may invent something when I retire. I've never understood the desire to take everything a person has earned (or at least a great portion of it) when he dies.

Well in the first place the inheritance tax doesn't kick in until you inherit $3 million. Which last I saw wasn't exactly chump change. In the second place after the first $3 mill when it does kick in it doesn't take all that's left but it does take a sizeable sum and in the third place the inheritance tax has two purposes, to put money into circulation and to prevent a handful of influential families from dominating the nations wealth and to prevent them from turning our Republic into an oligarchy. I would respectfully suggest researching the history of Republics, and what becomes of them, when they become oligarchies. It's not good. At least for the Republic.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

For some the idea that most wealthy people have earned their money is tough to take. It actually ruins the idea that the rich are evil and the poor are only poor because they were taken advantage of by the rich.

That's just simply not true. It's to prevent wealth from becoming concentrated into the hands of only a few.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

I think they also have the misconception that all rich kids are spoiled rich kids. I always remember Ann Richards talking about George W. Bush being born with a "silver spoon" ... so what. That made me want to vote for the guy even more the first time around. I hear a lot these days about the Walton heirs. I might wish I was lucky enough to be one of them but I'm not. But I don't begrudge them what they have and they continue to employ a lot of people. But it seems that some would make em paupers and disperse their capital on society...and be happy while doing it. That might would work for a while but it wouldn't last. I am for social safety nets and for funding for the public good, but I am also hesitant to be a "take from the evil rich and give to the noble poor" type of person.

Well no right minded person is for Robin Hood. The Waltons are a perfect example of what the inheritance tax is intended to do. It's to prevent a few who inherit tremendous wealth from creating an Aristocrat/ Serf economy and if you look at what the Walton's have done with their predatory and exploitative business practices, that is exactly what they are doing. Who in their right mind would want to work for Wally World unless you're absolutely desperate for a job. Less than 10% of Wallmart employees make a living wage and Wallmart does little to invest in the communities where they exist. They earn tremendous profits, use their clout and economy of scale to avoid paying local taxes. Exploit local labor with jobs that don't pay a living wage. They devastate small businesses in a community by riding a thin line on the Sherman antitrust act. In short, they are not good neighbors or members of the community. It's why I don't shop there. It's also why Wallmart stays out of metropolitan areas. They know they can't undermine local main street economies because of their size and diversity and because, to be honest, they sell for the most part crappy merchandise. Nor can they exploit labor in the larger cities as they do in rural communities. Study the records of what happens to a small towns economy when Wallmart builds a superstore. It's almost always a story of economic decline because Wallmart undermines local small business and the profits they earn are not invested locally as they are with community based small businesses. It is this behavior that inheritance taxes are meant to limit.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

I'm more of the opinion my descendants need to earn their own money. If I have anything left when I die, minor amounts are going to stepkids and nephews; most of it is going to charities.

I think that's what Bill Gates is doing. Each of his kids will inherit like a million dollars (not sure the exact figure) and the rest of his fortune he intends to spend on charity and philanthropy. If he can. Even since he retired he still can't seem to stop making billions of dollars.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

Just pointing out the obvious error on most wealthy inheriting.

The whole argument is a canard. Only about 0.6% of the population will pay inheritance tax at anytime but the fact is that you could have a 75% inheritance tax and it wouldn't affect the wealthy hardly at all because in and around 1986 lobbyist for the wealthy convinced most State legislatures around the nation to eliminate "rules against perpetuities" meaning that trust funds set up in those States permit trusts to exist in perpetuity, thereby allowing the trusts to own new businesses, real-estate and much else. These dynasty trusts even allow the beneficiaries to avoid paying creditors when in debt or when they have caused accidents and injuries.

http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

 

[Mott the Hoople]

But there is still no evidence to show that "most" rich people inherited their money. That is pure bunk.

Well let's define wealthy or rich as being in the top 1% of household incomes and net worth. Approximately 15% of the wealth of the top 1% is inherited directly. That is direct transfers of wealth from one to another. Another 30+% is provided indirectly through trust funds, preferred stock options, family and social connections in business, etc,etc. So no, most rich don't inherit wealth directly but most rich don't exactly earn it on their own either. Only about 50% do.

http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

 

[Mott the Hoople]

Got yourself a couple sheep of your own, have you?

Life is good!

 

[Boris The Animal]

Well let's define wealthy or rich as being in the top 1% of household incomes and net worth. Approximately 15% of the wealth of the top 1% is inherited directly. That is direct transfers of wealth from one to another. Another 30+% is provided indirectly through trust funds, preferred stock options, family and social connections in business, etc,etc. So no, most rich don't inherit wealth directly but most rich don't exactly earn it on their own either. Only about 50% do.

http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

So why the hell should it be anybody's damned business what families do with their money???

 

[The Dude]

Mott that's weak sauce, the 50 percent who didn't heritage it didn't work for it!
They must have bet against Ohio slow

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by leaningright View Post
I think they also have the misconception that all rich kids are spoiled rich kids. I always remember Ann Richards talking about George W. Bush being born with a "silver spoon" ... so what. That made me want to vote for the guy even more the first time around. I hear a lot these days about the Walton heirs. I might wish I was lucky enough to be one of them but I'm not. But I don't begrudge them what they have and they continue to employ a lot of people. But it seems that some would make em paupers and disperse their capital on society...and be happy while doing it. That might would work for a while but it wouldn't last. I am for social safety nets and for funding for the public good, but I am also hesitant to be a "take from the evil rich and give to the noble poor" type of person.

Well no right minded person is for Robin Hood. The Waltons are a perfect example of what the inheritance tax is intended to do. It's to prevent a few who inherit tremendous wealth from creating an Aristocrat/ Serf economy and if you look at what the Walton's have done with their predatory and exploitative business practices, that is exactly what they are doing. Who in their right mind would want to work for Wally World unless you're absolutely desperate for a job. Less than 10% of Wallmart employees make a living wage and Wallmart does little to invest in the communities where they exist. They earn tremendous profits, use their clout and economy of scale to avoid paying local taxes. Exploit local labor with jobs that don't pay a living wage. They devastate small businesses in a community by riding a thin line on the Sherman antitrust act. In short, they are not good neighbors or members of the community. It's why I don't shop there. It's also why Wallmart stays out of metropolitan areas. They know they can't undermine local main street economies because of their size and diversity and because, to be honest, they sell for the most part crappy merchandise. Nor can they exploit labor in the larger cities as they do in rural communities. Study the records of what happens to a small towns economy when Wallmart builds a superstore. It's almost always a story of economic decline because Wallmart undermines local small business and the profits they earn are not invested locally as they are with community based small businesses. It is this behavior that inheritance taxes are meant to limit.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Quote Originally Posted by Mott the Hoople View Post
Well let's define wealthy or rich as being in the top 1% of household incomes and net worth. Approximately 15% of the wealth of the top 1% is inherited directly. That is direct transfers of wealth from one to another. Another 30+% is provided indirectly through trust funds, preferred stock options, family and social connections in business, etc,etc. So no, most rich don't inherit wealth directly but most rich don't exactly earn it on their own either. Only about 50% do.

http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

So why the hell should it be anybody's damned business what families do with their money???

It's called paying your fair share into the system that we ALL use (aka "the commons"). Also, there's this underlying attitude of "elitism"....as if every member of the 1-3% wealthy in this country actually earned their wealth through brains and hard work (which is just not the case).

 

[The Dude]

It's called paying your fair share into the system that we ALL use (aka "the commons"). Also, there's this underlying attitude of "elitism"....as if every member of the 1-3% wealthy in this country actually earned their wealth through brains and hard work (which is just not the case).

Yup 99.9999 percent inherited it
The other guy bet on LSU vs Ohio slow

 

[Boris The Animal]

It's called paying your fair share into the system that we ALL use (aka "the commons"). Also, there's this underlying attitude of "elitism"....as if every member of the 1-3% wealthy in this country actually earned their wealth through brains and hard work (which is just not the case).

Ahh yes, soak the rich. I bet you are an avowed Communist. And just how much is their "fair share" (as If I'll get any honest answer from the resident Communists here)

 

[Taichiliberal]

Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
It's called paying your fair share into the system that we ALL use (aka "the commons"). Also, there's this underlying attitude of "elitism"....as if every member of the 1-3% wealthy in this country actually earned their wealth through brains and hard work (which is just not the case).

Ahh yes, soak the rich. I bet you are an avowed Communist. And just how much is their "fair share" (as If I'll get any honest answer from the resident Communists here)

First off, "soak the rich" is an old and discredited talking point that even George Bush Sr. pissed on when he put forth a 10% luxury tax. Do some honest research and you'll see that not only did it NOT destroy industries like yacht building, but those businesses actually did better during the time folk like you were parroting such drivel as you are now.

As to "how much"...let's start with eliminating "corporate welfare" and tax breaks for corporations that out source jobs.....that will put a hell of a lot more money into the country's revenue coffers. Then you could re-instate the transaction tax on Wall St., great for NYC.

Note that Obama gave in on the proposed additional tax on income above $250K and moved it to $450K. To date, I don't hear of massive business failure or exodus from the country.

Remember....YOU are NOT rich. And the Rich folk DID NOT create jobs, nor did their wealth "trickle down" to you.

 

[Boris The Animal]

First off, "soak the rich" is an old and discredited talking point that even George Bush Sr. pissed on when he put forth a 10% luxury tax. Do some honest research and you'll see that not only did it NOT destroy industries like yacht building, but those businesses actually did better during the time folk like you were parroting such drivel as you are now.

As to "how much"...let's start with eliminating "corporate welfare" and tax breaks for corporations that out source jobs.....that will put a hell of a lot more money into the country's revenue coffers. Then you could re-instate the transaction tax on Wall St., great for NYC.

Note that Obama gave in on the proposed additional tax on income above $250K and moved it to $450K. To date, I don't hear of massive business failure or exodus from the country.

Remember....YOU are NOT rich. And the Rich folk DID NOT create jobs, nor did their wealth "trickle down" to you.

More Communist talking points and yes it is the RICH that create jobs, you moron!