Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
If Democrats were the party of cruelty If Democrats were the party of cruelty

09-06-2017 , 10:45 PM
If dems governed like repubs they'd let hundreds of thousands of dreamers get deported just to make trump and republicans suffer the political consequences
09-07-2017 , 12:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet
The difference to me is if it's the home you've been living in that you inherit. If you haven't been living there, then it's exactly the same as inheriting cash. If it's your home, I think it should be treated differently. If your parents bought a house for $10k and it's "worth" $500k now, as long as you're just living there and not selling it or getting a loan against it I think it's fine to treat it as $10k. Not everything is a commodity and if you aren't treating your personal home (where you've been living) as one, then neither should society. Also, this should have limits imo. A modest home is perfectly social and natural even in societies without explicit property rights. A giant estate is anti-social and requires state intervention to be allowed to exist at all. Codifying this might not be simple and might require some arbitrary lines be drawn, but that's the way life is. Something necessitating fuzzy rules isn't a reason to adopt inferior well defined rules.

I propose either tax based on your parent's original home purchase price and then you can be taxed on the profit if/when you sell, or like I said, treat it as income, spread it out over 10 years or so. In theory I think I like the first option best now. Borrowing against the equity in the house would also trigger taxes (on the amount you borrow).

I think a business, including a farm, is different.
Currently, almost $5.5m of assets can be left to heirs without a penny of federal estate tax. Worrying that estate taxes are going to get the kids kicked out of their ancestral home is just silly.

The lowest level in any state when any estate taxes kick in is $675k. I'm gonna say that is also a silly thing to worry about. If the kids can't afford the estate tax on the extremely modest $675k home in Patterson, NJ, they are going to have to sell the house anyway since they won't be able to afford their annual real estate tax bill.
09-07-2017 , 12:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverman
Mandatory drug testing for directors and officers of all companies claiming the business interest deduction, all owners of farms receiving farm subsidies, all sports team owners and executives whose teams' stadiums were financed with tax free bonds, all religious leaders whose places of worship claim the religious tax exemption, possibilities are endless here really.

Massive taxes on all private aviation to offset environmental impact.

Drug testing for disability recipients along with quarterly review of disabled status with a doctor chosen at random by the government.

National sales tax on services including legal fees, accounting, etc.

Carbon tax on NASCAR, paid via ticket surcharges.
09-07-2017 , 12:55 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianTheMick2
Currently, almost $5.5m of assets can be left to heirs without a penny of federal estate tax. Worrying that estate taxes are going to get the kids kicked out of their ancestral home is just silly.

The lowest level in any state when any estate taxes kick in is $675k. I'm gonna say that is also a silly thing to worry about. If the kids can't afford the estate tax on the extremely modest $675k home in Patterson, NJ, they are going to have to sell the house anyway since they won't be able to afford their annual real estate tax bill.
It was a theoretical debate. I'm not worried about it and would protect inheritance from tax much less than it currently is. But, I'm still interested in the leftist on leftist debate on protecting that ancestral home.
09-07-2017 , 01:12 AM
Mandatory voting - OR - no one on public assistance can vote, which includes Medicare.

Electoral college re-weighted by average income.

Force all networks like History and Science to go back to their original missions and stop airing reality TV. All remaining reality shows are PPV-only. All proceeds go to racial and gender studies programs at elite liberal arts colleges.

Each minority vote gets an "oppression multiplier". Whites get 1 vote. Asians get 1.3. Latinos get 2. Blacks get 5. Native Americans get 7000.

All Facebook posts and chain emails are fact-checked. 3 violations = a one month ban. 10 violations = 1 year.

Finish the Reconstruction.

Replace Teddy Roosevelt with Obama on Mt. Rushmore.

Ban the mention of girls, beer, and pickup trucks from country music.

Re-carve stone mountain with Susan Rice, Loretta Lynch and Maxine Waters. Replace the laser show with modern interpretive dance.

Create a cabinet-level Bureau of Racists Affairs. Appoint Colin Kaepernick chief for life.

Mandate that all nativity scenes include at least one obviously transgender participant.

All guns must be pink or powder blue with the word Princess painted in neon letters down each side. AR-15 owners must by law wear a tiara any time they operate their gun. Gun owners must take a 12-week course on radical feminism and toxic masculinity created by Oberlin college. They are required to re-take the course with each new gun purchase.

Anyone caught flying the confederate flag has to write a book report on Eat, Pray, Love. If they can't read, an audio-book will be provided.

Rename the Justice Department to Social Justice Department, appoint this woman Czar:



Make sure she's in the public eye 24/7 - wall to wall talk shows, Oprah, Ellen, etc.

Last edited by suzzer99; 09-07-2017 at 01:39 AM.
09-07-2017 , 10:06 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DVaut1
By the way, I'm not saying 100% estate taxes are necessarily great policy.

But: that TiltedDonkey and a bunch of Scandanavians are reporting their leftist parties are apprehensive about highly progressive inheritance taxes shows that I have the correct answer to the OP's question, that it's exactly the sort of spiteful and damaging policy designed pretty precisely to burden people who don't vote for them. I think the ultimate problem is actually that it casts the net too wide: as we see here, it burdens the people who vote for leftist parties too. The median, petite bourgeoisie soft leftist can support progressive income taxation on rich bozos but the summer cottage is too much, that's my birthright. Consider the ways this would infuriate people without leftist impulses.

It's also interesting that the psychology of taxing income seems defensible for more people but taxing your ancestors stuff on the event of their death seems like really cruel and beyond the pale when imo the principled justifications for taxing estates in a hugely progressive way is way more sound than the principled justifications for taxing income, which seems more of a second-best and practical compromise precisely because of how revolting estate taxes are to elites.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DVaut1
Inheriting a home gives someone a cheap way to get home equity credit to start a business or make other capital investments with at a low interest rate, etc. This is basic Piketty / 21st Century Capital stuff imo: so long as capital and real estate grow in value, secured credit is cheap, and labor value grows incredibly slowly in most sectors -- people who own homes are hitting a life jackpot, and owning that kind of asset gives someone a huge advantage over someone who doesn't, and the ability to perpetuate that advantage to future generations is one of the basic hallmarks of perpetual inequality.

As I said, this is a diversion from "let's troll the right" but I am wary when the left starts fretting about the cash poor being tossed out of their home in some environment with a huge inheritance tax. That *will* happen in some set of cases; given millions of instances of something, you'll always get exotic examples, just as the right seizes on the family farm to demand the current estate tax environment in the US is a huge burden on humble farmers. If you let those examples drive your values and lose sight of the bigger/meta picture then forget it, just give the right what they want from the start. No point in having the fight if we're going to quit if even a few sympathetic people are disadvantaged vis a vis the status quo.
Yeah, the bolded, pretty much, and also, regarding the merits of a 100% estate tax:

If you're really far left and trying to ~eliminate income and wealth inequality then sure, I guess it is a reasonable idea. I don't think that there are too many people interested in doing this however.

I'm certainly not against a modest to moderate increase in top bracket income taxes, and I would also be perfectly fine with subjecting inheritances to income taxes (in fact, I think this would make sense. I like Microbet's idea here).

I imagine it is fairly rare for people to inherit their primary residence (?), but a carve out for that seems good. If you inherit a home that isn't a primary residence than tax can be due immediately imo.
09-12-2017 , 11:39 AM
Easiest way to do this is tax policy. For instance:

1. Rather than a state or local tax deduction, make state and local taxes a dollar-for-dollar tax credit against federal taxes similar to the way that non-US taxes are treated. This would be a huge boon for people in high-tax, blue states (NY, NJ, CA).
2. Benchmark tax brackets and tax thresholds by cost-of-living. So, if you make $100k in a high cost jurisdiction (i.e. coastal cities) you pay less tax than if you made the same amount of money in a low cost of living jurisdiction.
3. Make student loan interest a tax credit rather than a deduction. Would benefit the college-educated and those who went to post-college schools.
09-13-2017 , 02:29 AM
So you want to cut taxes for the already wealthy?
09-13-2017 , 11:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by stinkubus
So you want to cut taxes for the already wealthy?
That wasn't the question (though I live in NYC and would love to be able to credit my state and local taxes). Question is how to harm people who didn't vote for you. Tax cuts for people who did is one way.
09-14-2017 , 12:16 AM
If they were really cruel, they'd make a deal with Trump to make DACA the law of the land.
09-14-2017 , 12:23 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet
It was a theoretical debate. I'm not worried about it and would protect inheritance from tax much less than it currently is. But, I'm still interested in the leftist on leftist debate on protecting that ancestral home.
Protecting up to the median price of homes in Cleveland seems appropriate. Tax at same rate as earned income if the heir(s) ever want to sell it or rent it out.
09-14-2017 , 12:28 AM
Ironic thing is many of the things listed thus far intended as jokes are things extremist left wingers in this country actually want to do and just can't (yet).
09-14-2017 , 12:45 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cotton Hill
Ironic thing is many of the things listed thus far intended as jokes are things extremist left wingers in this country actually want to do and just can't (yet).
I don't think that I made any jokes re: policies

      
m