The GOP Congress votes Paris Hilton $91 extra million dollars

[motivez]

I wouldn't, I just disagreed with your assessment of her as some sort of savvy business woman who's "earned" what she has

[Diesel66]

Originally Posted by Scrumtralecent

I must be jealous if I can't see how hard Paris Hilton worked to earn that inheritence?

edit - and perhaps you should aim your post at the subject and not the poster like the rules state.

That money was already taxed by whoever earned it. What gives us the right to tax it again ?

Originally Posted by Scrumtralecent

In that case my employeer should be able to give me money without paying taxes on it as well.

Your employer doesnt pay taxes on your income.

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by Diesel66

Your employer doesnt pay taxes on your income.

Yea they do.

[Diesel66]

Originally Posted by JaJae

Yea they do.

Salaries are a write off.

[7960]

Originally Posted by Scrumtralecent

Then why is their limit 5 million?

Because they are rich?

EVERYBODY'S gift limit is $12,000 (I believe...it used to be $9,999)

EVERYBODY'S death tax is raised to $5M

[7960]

Originally Posted by SpicyMcVoodoo

I think this sentence explains the mentality of a lot who support tax free inheritances. You said people should go out and earn their own millions, then they'd understand...the implication being that anyone, should they chose, can go out and earn millions. In other words, if you're not a millionaire with an estate to pass on, it's because you were lazy or unambitious.

No. But keep putting words in my mouth.

In such a situation, it doesn't make as much sense to allow people keep all those millions locked up forever, tax free, when it was just the luck of the draw which got them rich in the first place.

And this explains the mentality of the socialists who would like to take the money from people "who can afford it" and give it to people "who need it."

Who gives a shit how they got the money? Why does it matter? I can't believe I'm going to agree with donkey but "Why tax any of it to begin with? Whether it's $5.00 or $5 billion?"

[7960]

Originally Posted by Diesel66

Salaries are a write off.

In order to "write it off" it first has to come "out of your pocket."

[Donkey®]

Originally Posted by 7960

I can't believe I'm going to agree with donkey but "Why tax any of it to begin with? Whether it's $5.00 or $5 billion?"

To me, that is the problem with all this. It seems that this program ONLY benefits the rich...however they may make their money. Why not benefit everyone by not taxing anything at all? Why tax the little people more? Let's say someone leaves an estate of 10 million. Only 5 million of that is taxed. That's a benefit to the rich. Let's also say another person leaves 40 thousand. ALL of that is taxed. Doesn't seem fair and that's my complaint with it.

[motivez]

The interesting thing is that they used the minimum wage increase as leverage to push this through

Years from now, how many people will credit them with increasing the minimum wage but forget that this is the only reason it actually happened after they shot down the idea?

[Scrum]

Originally Posted by motivez

The interesting thing is that they used the minimum wage increase as leverage to push this through

Years from now, how many people will credit them with increasing the minimum wage but forget that this is the only reason it actually happened after they shot down the idea?

And what happened to the people who thought that wage increase would be so horrible for the economy?
I guess that was just political currency they could spend here.

[motivez]

Exactly. This goes to show once again that Republicans have completely abandoned their fiscal conservative roots and don't really give a shit about them unless they believe it'll actually net them some votes.

There's a thread on the tax cuts here: Republicans tie minimum wage to tax cut

[Diesel66]

Originally Posted by 7960

In order to "write it off" it first has to come "out of your pocket."

?

You own a business and have 2 employees. You pay their check, it comes out of your pocket. That amount that you paid out is not claimed as a profit, it is an acceptable business expense and is deductable.

Originally Posted by Donkey®

To me, that is the problem with all this. It seems that this program ONLY benefits the rich...however they may make their money. Why not benefit everyone by not taxing anything at all? Why tax the little people more? Let's say someone leaves an estate of 10 million. Only 5 million of that is taxed. That's a benefit to the rich. Let's also say another person leaves 40 thousand. ALL of that is taxed. Doesn't seem fair and that's my complaint with it.

Huh ? If your parents give you $1.5mil worth of property/money as an inheritance, it is not taxed. That limit is rising through 2009 where it will be 3.5mil. 2010 there is no limit and 2011 it will revert to the old system at 1 mil.

[7960]

Originally Posted by Donkey®

Let's say someone leaves an estate of 10 million. Only 5 million of that is taxed. That's a benefit to the rich. Let's also say another person leaves 40 thousand. ALL of that is taxed. Doesn't seem fair and that's my complaint with it.

Up to the first $5M is not taxed, so if somene leaves $40,000 NONE of it is taxed.

[7960]

Originally Posted by Diesel66

?

You own a business and have 2 employees. You pay their check, it comes out of your pocket. That amount that you paid out is not claimed as a profit, it is an acceptable business expense and is deductable.

But in order to deduct it you first have to pay it out. When you deduct it you do not get back the amount you paid out.

[Donkey®]

Originally Posted by 7960

Up to the first $5M is not taxed, so if somene leaves $40,000 NONE of it is taxed.

Then I have no issue with it. I thought it said something different on the news. DOWN WITH FOX NEWS!

[SpicyMcVoodoo]

Originally Posted by 7960

I can't believe I'm going to agree with donkey but "Why tax any of it to begin with? Whether it's $5.00 or $5 billion?"

Because someone has to pay for all this shit?

[motivez]

Originally Posted by SpicyMcVoodoo

Because someone has to pay for all this shit?

What shit?

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-earnedmoney.htm

Myth: I earned that money; it's mine!

Fact: The free market in which people make their money wouldn't even exist without government support.

Summary

No one truly makes 100 percent of his money by himself. Individuals depend on a wide array of government services to support the very free market in which they earn their money. Without these supports, there would be no free market in the first place.

Argument

Many conservatives and libertarians have argued that the government has no right to tax their money; they earned it, and the government has no right to "steal" it.

However, these individuals could not have made a dime on the free market without any of the following government supports of the free market:

* Printing the very dollar bills with which people trade.
* Public roads.
* Rural electrification.
* Government subsidized telephone wiring.
* Satellite communications.
* Police protection.
* Military protection.
* A criminal justice system.
* Fire protection.
* Paramedic protection.
* An educated workforce.
* An immunized workforce.
* Protection against plagues by the Centers for Disease Control.
* Public-funded business loans, foreclosure loans and subsidies.
* Protection from business fraud and unfair business practices.
* The protection of intellectual property through patents and copyrights.
* Student loans.
* Government funded research and development.
* National Academy of Sciences.
* Economic data collected and analyzed by the Bureau of Economic Analysis.
* Prevention of depressions by Keynesian policies at the Fed (successful for six decades now).
* Dollars protected from inflation by the Fed.
* Federal Emergency Management Agency.
* Public libraries.
* Cooperative Extension Service (vital for agriculture)
* National Biological Service.
* National Weather Service
* Public job training.

"Why shouldn't the American people take half my money from me? I took all of it from them."

Edward Albert Filene (1869-1937)

Oh.. That shit.

[Diesel66]

Originally Posted by motivez

What shit?



Oh.. That shit.

Pretty sad list you got. Money printing is a profitable business. The $100 bill cost like 3 cents to make.

Most of those are funded by local taxes that are usually straight forward.


Plus it ignores the great business that existed before most of that shit existed. People can only be successful in socialist societies

Originally Posted by 7960

But in order to deduct it you first have to pay it out. When you deduct it you do not get back the amount you paid out.

And ?

[7960]

Originally Posted by Diesel66

And ?

And what? He said "just deduct it" like that means it doesn't count. If I spend $10 on my business and that $10 doesn't make money for me, even if I "just deduct it" it I'm still out most of that $10.

[ballz2wallz]

actually most republicans and conservatives KNOW that taxes are a must. the 'religious right' that you speak of know that the Bible actually says to also pay taxes. it's the amount of taxes that republicans have contention with.