Obama Likely to Veto Republicans’ Estate Tax Repeal Bill

April 15, 2015

  • April 15, 2015 at 9:38 am
    Ron says:
    Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 145
    Thumb down 186

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    • April 15, 2015 at 1:41 pm
      CO Meteorologist says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 105
      Thumb down 90

      Well to be fair, Obama will veto ANY bill that the Republicans pass because although he preaches bi-partisanship, what he really means is “Republicans need to agree with me, end of story.”

    • April 15, 2015 at 1:43 pm
      Destro says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 68
      Thumb down 55

      Well to be fair, Obama will veto ANY bill that Republicans pass because although he preaches bipartisanship, what he actually means is “Republicans need to agree with me, end of story!”

      • April 15, 2015 at 2:31 pm
        Agent says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 203
        Thumb down 165

        Destro, he is also likely to be viewed as the worst President in US history and the worst on economics since Carter. The leftists have never seen a tax they didn’t like so they can fund their never ending entitlement programs.

        • April 15, 2015 at 6:01 pm
          Destro says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 53
          Thumb down 6

          I liked what Maine did in making people essentially exhaust all options in getting a job or doing volunteer work in order to qualify for food stamps. They had previously had 12,000 able bodied people who just weren’t working and getting hundreds upon hundreds of dollars each for doing nothing. After they enacted their new legislation they cut that number from 12,000 to 2,500; and people are now actually working and volunteering in their community instead of just loafing around waiting for a gub’mint check.

          • April 15, 2015 at 6:07 pm
            Agent says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 77
            Thumb down 50

            Destro, some states are considering drug testing before an applicant is able to get their “benefits”. Boy, would that make the weed smokers, the crack heads mad. You mean I have to be clean to get my food stamps, welfare, housing allowance, disability? That is not fair. I am going to march in protest.

          • April 16, 2015 at 8:51 am
            Rosenblatt says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 32
            Thumb down 19

            And what they can purchase with their “free” money should also be limited so, for example, someone collecting government handouts won’t be able to buy themselves Prada shoes and an authentic Louis Vuitton bag.

          • April 16, 2015 at 11:04 am
            Destro says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 27
            Thumb down 5

            I would absolutely be for drug testing of welfare recipients if it weren’t extremely cost-inefficient and/or unreliable.

          • April 16, 2015 at 11:17 am
            Agent says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 36
            Thumb down 25

            Hey Destro, what is wrong with peeing in a bottle and testing for drug use. If it works for professional athletes, it should work for welfare applicants. The State Health Department could get off their lazy butts and do it.

          • April 16, 2015 at 1:39 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 26
            Thumb down 1

            I don’t want to answer on behalf of Destro, Agent, but I’m guessing what he thinks is wrong with instituting drug testing is that it’s “extremely cost-inefficient and/or unreliable.”

          • April 16, 2015 at 4:29 pm
            Agent says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 74
            Thumb down 54

            So Rosenblatt, please provide me with examples of any government entity at any state level that is concerned with cost effectiveness or efficiency. They bump their budgets all the time. They should work for their daily bread just like the rest of us do. Get those bottles out and send them to the lab. My guess is that the dufus entitlement people might not show up if they knew they would be drug tested to get benefits.

          • April 16, 2015 at 4:43 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 21
            Thumb down 0

            Ummm, no – I will not do that Agent. You asked Destro a question. I copied and pasted what he wrote in the post immediately preceding your question. Those were literally his words, not mine.

          • April 16, 2015 at 6:36 pm
            Destro says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 12
            Thumb down 0

            What Rosenblatt said. Also, when they have drug tested means-tested welfare recipients they find that about 1% of them test positive for drugs. But drug tests can be cheated/beaten as it is so they are unreliable in the first place.

            My point with Maine’s solution in forcing people to work for their gov’t money and failing that provide community service is a much better way to go about it and has resulted in around a 78% decrease in welfare recipients due to the fact that they actually have to get off their butts.

    • April 15, 2015 at 1:57 pm
      bob says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 155
      Thumb down 140

      Ah, so remind me:

      You support smaller government and lower taxes right?

      Of course that’s what you LIE and say to appear moderate, but then here we are with a tax cut that is actually good (see my other comment here as to why) and you spill some crap about it benefiting the top .2%.

      First and foremost: If anything, the reduction would increase revenues. For the reasons I stated below. All they do is do a one time sell off of the estate. It is wrong as is, that is owned by the family and you want to steal it without representation. It leads to a society that thinks they can take what they want from the rich. They can’t. It is called work hard and live with what you have. Even $50k a year is easy to to do, and is a livable wage. You don’t need any further revenues past that.

      • April 15, 2015 at 7:51 pm
        Reality_based_community says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 201
        Thumb down 110

        Bob, you don’t appear to be making much sense.

        1. You seem to suggest that the assertion that the estate tax cut will benefit the top 0.2% is “crap.” Of course, it’s not. The current estate tax leaves the first $5 million completely untaxed – 0% rate. The proposal eliminates the tax only on inheritances over $5 million. That will, as the article states, impact only 0.2% of estates.

        2. The assertion that eliminating federal revenue actually increases revenue is just…well…I won’t resort to name calling. I think anybody with half a brain, or even just the remnant of the reptilian portion of their brain, knows you are just wrong. Decreasing revenue actually does result in a decrease in revenue…

        3. It’s not owned by “the family.” It’s owned by whoever owns it. Usually it’s a parent. A spouse receives the estate entirely tax free. Anybody else who doesn’t own it and does own it after the death of another is taxed (but only after the first $5 million).

        4. While I just received a substantial inheritance tax free, I, like the vast majority of people, would be far better off if my income were taxed less and the inheritance taxed more. To tax income from productive labor far more than a person who simply inherits the money is absurd, and rewards idleness and punishes work.

        • April 29, 2015 at 5:48 pm
          Wayne says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 0

          So, your comment is that mom and dad own the 350 acre farm 800 head of cattle, 2 barns, silo farm house and main house and the 5 kids work the farm but have no interest in it when mom and dad die?

          I understand that because my dad had an insurance agency that I ran for more than a decade and when mom and dad passed, it had to be sold to pay the taxes even though it was my tripling the business in that decade that subjected it to the tax.

          Sounds fair to me…

          • April 30, 2015 at 8:48 am
            KY jw says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            Why didn’t your parents sell you the business before they passed?

    • April 15, 2015 at 2:00 pm
      bob says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 196
      Thumb down 171

      And here are some numbers for you:

      Even if it created 26.9 billion of revenues per year…

      That is pennies, and it actually robs people the ability to pass on what is theirs. It isn’t worth it. Not by any degree.

      On the contrary encouraging stealing what people own to get a 26.9 billion lower deficit, is so insane to encourage (aka you, not republicans) I have to question your mental state that you would encourage a tax that steals owned property to get such low revenues, instead of an income tax change for example which even low marginal rate changes “supposedly” result in a 1% revenue change…Or…1.6 trillion over 8 years. Makes total sense. Doesn’t it Ron?

      • April 15, 2015 at 2:28 pm
        Stan says:
        Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 45
        Thumb down 83

        Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

      • April 15, 2015 at 3:21 pm
        Sally Ann Fannymaker says:
        Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 50
        Thumb down 70

        Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

        • April 15, 2015 at 4:43 pm
          Agent says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 165
          Thumb down 151

          Wrong Sally Ann, we live in a Constitutional Republic. Your side wants to call it a Democracy ie Democrats, but try to read the Constitution sometime. We do have a system of checks and balances between Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches. If we had a true Democracy, there would be anarchy. Sometimes I think we already do with what is going on in this country.

          • April 16, 2015 at 5:32 pm
            Reality_based_community says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 77
            Thumb down 19

            Agent, your reply is rather silly. Of course we live in a democratic republic. Our system of representative democracy and separation of powers is simply one species (or type) of democracy. Other types would include participatory democracy, plebiscitary democracy, and many other varieties. Why are you trying to redefine words that possess a generally accepted meaning?

          • April 17, 2015 at 11:36 am
            Stan says:
            Hot debate. What do you think?
            Thumb up 37
            Thumb down 37

            Because he is an idiot.

    • April 15, 2015 at 6:16 pm
      Celtica says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 83
      Thumb down 42

      Forget all these taxes and deductions and just go to a flat tax across the board for everyone based on income, including from Social Security and Welfare.

  • April 15, 2015 at 10:04 am
    David says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 141
    Thumb down 122

    “It takes away from their ability to grow their business to actually create jobs in this country,” Scalise said

    Yes, if we would just let the richest 5,400 families keep concentrating their wealth, eventually some of it will trickle down to us plebeians, right? Give me a break. The only thing repealing the Estate Tax accomplishes is further cementing an aristocratic class, something that the Founding Fathers abhorred.

    • April 15, 2015 at 11:53 am
      Josh says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 132
      Thumb down 28

      The founders also abhorred overreaching government, redistribution of income, and excessive taxation in general… hence why they did not enact an income tax or welfare system. For a good chunk of our history our country drew revenues from only excise taxes and tariffs on imports.

      2014 was a record year for federal tax revenues…the most ever! Yet we still manage to run a deficit.

      The estate tax is less than 1% of federal tax receipts.

      • April 15, 2015 at 12:19 pm
        David says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 136
        Thumb down 103

        “A power to dispose of estates for ever is manifestly absurd. The earth and the fullness of it belongs to every generation, and the preceding one can have no right to bind it up from posterity. Such extension of property is quite unnatural.” Thomas Jefferson

        “There is no point more difficult to account for than the right we conceive men to have to dispose of their goods after death.” Adam Smith

        Who is going to pay for this tax cut for the wealthiest 0.2%? It has to come from somewhere. The Republicans certainly aren’t going to take it out of defense spending or from subsidies to their corporate donors. As usual, they will try to cut back on programs for the poor and middle class so that the wealthiest 5400 families can keep more of their money and pass it on to someone who didn’t earn it.

        • April 15, 2015 at 1:17 pm
          Tony says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 189
          Thumb down 159

          Defense spending has been decimated under the Obama Administration and oddly enough, it’s one of the very few actual responsibilities of the federal government. No where is the redistribution of wealth covered in the Constitution, which is what the government has been doing since FDR.

          How about expanding the base? There are a massive amount of citizens who not only pay 0 taxes, but get a “refund” (or redistribution). They use the public services, shouldn’t they contribute?

          You know what they say about liberalism and communism: Sooner or later, you run out of other people’s money.

          • April 15, 2015 at 2:35 pm
            Agent says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 173
            Thumb down 160

            Tony, Ron hasn’t paid any federal income tax for years although he brags about doing better and has a record salary. I just sent my taxes in and I paid the taxes he doesn’t pay yet again.

          • April 15, 2015 at 7:58 pm
            Reality_based_community says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 233
            Thumb down 213

            Tony, defense spending hasn’t been “decimated.” In fact, excluding the wars, defense pending peaked in 2010, and has only slightly declined since then.

            What is it with you small government conservatives that support ever more outlays for defense, perhaps the most wasteful and inefficient government program in existence? What exactly are we defending *against?* The Soviet Union collapsed, and we were promised a “peace dividend.” Now we have to have a military that dwarfs virtually the rest of the planet combined? Just to “defend” against scary men with beards hiding out in caves?

            Until you conservatives stop pushing ever higher levels of wasteful spending that accomplishes nothing, you can’t call yourself “small government” conservatives.

          • April 17, 2015 at 7:59 am
            Ron says:
            Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 21
            Thumb down 46

            Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

          • April 17, 2015 at 8:00 am
            Ron says:
            Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 4
            Thumb down 26

            Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

  • April 15, 2015 at 10:28 am
    Celtica says:
    Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 59
    Thumb down 104

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

  • April 15, 2015 at 11:23 am
    Josh says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 84
    Thumb down 57

    You people would all do well to read “Cost And Consequences Of The Federal Estate Tax.” Google it.

    “Abstract:
    This study examines the arguments for and against the federal estate tax, finding that benefits of the tax are often overstated, and in any case are far smaller than the documented costs. On balance, the analysis finds that the costs imposed by the estate tax outweigh any potential benefits that the tax might produce. In light of this finding, there is no compelling reason to keep the tax, and a number of reasons to reduce or abolish it.”

    • April 15, 2015 at 12:40 pm
      David says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 230
      Thumb down 168

      The estate tax is an important source of revenue, and abolishing it will only result in the poor and middle class paying more to offset it. No matter how you spin it, this is a redistribution of wealth from the bottom 99.8% to the top 0.2%.

      Here’s Ten Facts You Should Know About the Federal Estate Tax:
      http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=2655

      • April 15, 2015 at 1:54 pm
        bob says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 238
        Thumb down 222

        A: Any tax on owned property is damaging. Taxing income is always better.

        B: Same as the first only not all taxes are created equal. Some taxes actually harm the economy and this is one of them. You would essentially by taxing estates risk running a business estate transfer into the ground. That will be paid for by laying off half the company, or selling off half the company. Both are bad things. Whereas if you tax that wealthy kid’s income as he inherits the estate, you get 15 years worth of tax without destroying the business at the point of transfer. Get the point?

        Farms mainly fall into this category.

        C: And this is the most important: Passing a law that is essentially stealing owned property, without representation…Is wrong. End of story. You won’t even allow the wealthy to have a vote or say in owning their own property and passing it on to their kids. Well guess what? Morality wise, that makes you worse than any thief, or wealthy person.

        Own your issues kiddo. You are so envious the redness has spread from your face to your pants, and it stinks like chlamydia. As in: You’re passing filth around.

        • April 15, 2015 at 2:48 pm
          David says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 194
          Thumb down 179

          This isn’t about envy, it’s about pragmatism. Taxing income discourages work. Taxing inheritance discourages hoarding.

          Wealthy kids can pull themselves up by their bootstraps and work for what they get, just like their parents did and just like everyone else does. They will still have a massive head start in the form of $5.4 million in untaxed inheritance and 60% of everything else after that.

          Your bit about taxation without representation is laughable. The wealthy are by far the most represented in our government as the median congressman is a multimillionaire. Any one of the top 0.2% can pick up their phone and call their congressman and get a direct response. Average Joe is lucky to get a staffer.

          The diatribe about stealing is funny too, as the same logic could be used to justify all taxes as stealing. Unless you want anarchy, taxes are necessary and have to come from somewhere. I’d rather tax unearned income than earned income.

          The Republicans aren’t saying where this $26 billion per year will come from. They will either have to increase deficit spending (bad), cut back on discretionary government programs which overwhelmingly benefit the poor (worse), or make the middle class pay more (worst). No matter how you slice it, the poor and middle class will have to tighten their belts to pay for this tax cut that only benefits the top 0.2%.

          • April 16, 2015 at 4:33 pm
            Agent says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 107
            Thumb down 49

            Giving entitlements discourages work. Food stamps, housing allowance, free phones, welfare for having babies out of wedlock, free healthcare, abortions. All contribute to no work ethic. Why work if you can get “free stuff”?

          • April 22, 2015 at 10:06 am
            kev1n says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 1

            Giving entitlements does discourage work. What do you think an inheritance over $5,000,000 is? It’s an entitlement. Sure, coming from daddy instead of Uncle Sam, but you think the poor are the only ones having children out of wedlock? Or have no work ethic due to having everything given to them?

        • April 15, 2015 at 6:21 pm
          Agent says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 129
          Thumb down 103

          Bob, at the rate the government is spending, the $29 Billion will pay for about 10-12 days of operation. Back in the day, the late, great Everitt Dirksen said, a billion here and a billion there and pretty soon you are talking about serious money. Now, it is in Trillions being spent and a billion is miniscule.

        • April 15, 2015 at 8:00 pm
          Reality_based_community says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 95
          Thumb down 79

          Bob, you realize that the estate tax was passed *with* representation, right? Please tell me you know this.

      • April 15, 2015 at 2:09 pm
        integrity matters says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 209
        Thumb down 190

        David: you said “No matter how you spin it, this is a redistribution of wealth from the bottom 99.8% to the top 0.2%”.

        This property/money NEVER belonged to the bottom 99.8%. It ALWAYS belonged to the 0.2%. Therefore, no matter how you SPIN IT, the redistribution is coming from the wealthy to the poor.

        FYI…the estate tax is not an important source of revenue. It is insignificant compared to the waste that takes place. I love how the media tries to “prop” up the number ($269B over 10 years). That is less than $27B per year. I think Obama and Michelle waste close to that by themselves with their vacations and individual trips.

        Lastly, David, when you use quotes from our framers, please include the context in which they were used. The majority of the context pertained to the stewardship of the land, meaning, the land belongs to “everyone” from a nature perspective. They wrestled with whether the “land” should be able to be passed generationally. They concluded that the improvements to the land could be inherited. There was no intention (or documentation that I could find) pertaining to “wealth”.

        The government has no “Right” to confiscate a persons wealth just because a person dies. That wealth should be allowed to be given to whomever the owner desires to will it to.

        Income, as defined by our culture, means:

        The amount of money received during a period of time in exchange for labor or services, from the sale of goods or property, or as a profit from financial investments.

        Inheritance should not be considered income.

        Question…how many $Billions did the government waste on supplying cell phones to the poor. Was that really a necessity?

        • April 15, 2015 at 3:08 pm
          David says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 163
          Thumb down 134

          I get it, you want to tax income and discourage people from working. The government absolutely has a right to levy taxes and I’d prefer they get them from sources that don’t discourage work and productivity. Inheritances are one such source.

          The Founding Fathers wanted to abolish the aristocracy. Getting rid of the Estate Tax is just another way of reestablishing it, by allowing the wealthy to pass their wealth and power down their bloodlines unfettered just like the nobles of old.

          It’s funny that you moan about poor people getting subsidized cell phones. How short sighted can you be? How do you expect poor people to climb out of poverty and find jobs when they can’t get or receive calls from employers?

          • April 15, 2015 at 8:12 pm
            Yogi Polar Berra says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 103
            Thumb down 84

            Taxing income on a flat tax basis, with very few income exemptions, encourages greater work ethic and effort, to earn more $ than someone earning less.

            If the income exemptions were socially beneficial, such as mortgages for home ownership – with limits, and charitable donations, that also encourages behavior that benefits the nation as a whole.

            A FLAT tax produces the greatest motivation for hard work as compared to a graded tax scale – with no taxes paid by a huge % of workers, and the highest percentage of taxes paid by a very small percentage of income earners.

            Tax planners scheme to help clients avoid earning more income as it approaches a boundary of tax rates. THAT is not efficient, nor does it rewards greater work effort.

        • April 16, 2015 at 5:41 pm
          Reality_based_community says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 199
          Thumb down 138

          Integrity_matters stated “Income, as defined by our culture, means:

          The amount of money received during a period of time in exchange for labor or services, from the sale of goods or property, or as a profit from financial investments.”

          No..that is not what income means, that’s just apparently your own extremely idiosyncratic and ideologically-tinged definition. As generally accepted in our culture (and in virtually all areas of law and by the IRS), income means any money or wealth that comes into a person’s possession that wasn’t in their possession previously – whether from labor, or gambling, or capital gains, or inheritance. If at time ‘t’ you did not possess, and at time ‘t+1’ you do possess it, it is income. The government has as much authority to “confiscate” (i.e. what normal people call “tax”) inherited wealth as they do to tax the fruits of my labor. Your inherited money is not superior to my wages. Stop trying to make arguments by sleight-of-hand and redefining words, and just make your argument about why taxing work is good policy and taxing unearned income is bad policy.

          • April 17, 2015 at 1:24 pm
            integrity matters says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 57
            Thumb down 26

            Reality bozo –

            First, that was not my definition of income, it came from Dictionary.com

            Modern Language Association (MLA):

            “income.” The American Heritage® New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, Third Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, 2005. 17 Apr. 2015. .

            Second, The IRS makes the rules so they can define “income” anyway they want to. It doesn’t make it right. Gifts are not taxed under a certain amount per the IRS rules. This basically means they do not care if it is less than $10K (I think) but anything higher than that, they feel they should get a piece of the pie.

            Third, even if it should be taxed, why 40%? What is the normal tax rate not good enough? (Basically, they are recouping the $5+MM that is allegedly “untaxed”).

            Please note that I have never inherited anything nor will my children get anything close to significant. I’m a regular “Joe” and feel that whatever someone EARNS and WORKS for, they should be able to CHOOSE who to GIVE it to, without any concern that SOMEBODY ELSE (aka..the IRS) is going to diminsh my GIFT.

            To answer your final question, taxing work is good policy because it provides the tax payer with a sense that they are participating in funding the necessities that an individual cannot do for themselves (i.e. roads, airports, police and fire protection). I agree we need to fund these things. I do not agree that we should be funding people to be lazy and dependent UPON the government.

            Taxing unearned income depends on how you define unearned income. Gambling gains should not be taxed. The individual risked their own money, they should not be taxed on their winnings. The IRS does not allow you to deduct your losses unless you have winnings to offset them. If the IRS participates in the gain, they should participate in the loss.

            By your statement, the sponges that live off the government (obtain unearned income via food stamps, welfare, etc) should be paying income tax. Do you agree?

            Why can’t you admit that the REALITY is that the govt is perpetuating the problem by encouraging people to receive entitlements? Can’t you REALIZE that these people are becoming SLAVES to the govt and are being pigeon-holed into a class and circumstance that they cannot get out of? The govt is making them just comfortable enough so that they do not want to work harder to improve their circumstance.

          • April 17, 2015 at 1:48 pm
            Reality_Based_Community says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 74
            Thumb down 48

            Integrity Matters

            1. No, the IRS can’t define income “the way they want to.” They have to adopt definitions pursuant to authority granted in statute, and consistent with statute. The estate tax is a statute, not some IRS regulation with no basis in law.

            2. Why 40%? Don’t know. Any percentage is going to be somewhat arbitrary. Can you make a better case for a higher or lower rate? Why are taxes on income or property or sin taxes set at their respective levels? You tell us – what is the non-arbitrary percentage, assuming, as you say, “it should be taxed.”

            3. Taxing work is not good policy if work is *overtaxed* and unearned income is not taxed. Such a system clearly establishes the wrong priorities – if you have to work for a living, you are taxed significantly more than if you just inherit all of your income. If we agree that taxes tend to discourage the thing taxed (at least at some level), aren’t we discouraging the wrong thing (i.e. work)?

            4. Of course, *everything* depends on how it is defined. However, the term “unearned income” has a generally accepted meaning. It means income not obtained through labor, and includes capital gains, gambling and lottery winnings, and inherited wealth, among other things. Only by your perverse priorities should work be taxed and gambling winnings not be taxed.

            5. Are food stamps equal to slavery? Really? Helping somebody feed their kids is equal to being kidnapped, shipped across the ocean on a voyage that in all likelihood you won’t survive, and then being sold as property to toil and extremely harsh conditions? Please look up the word “hyperbole.”

          • April 17, 2015 at 2:34 pm
            integrity matters says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 36
            Thumb down 3

            Reality – you said

            “If we agree that taxes tend to discourage the thing taxed (at least at some level), aren’t we discouraging the wrong thing (i.e. work)?”

            I’ll use your same logic with regards to entitlements from the opposite perspective…If we agree that entitlements tend to encourage the population to not fend for themselves (at least at some level), aren’t we encouraging the wrong thing (i.e. govt subjugation)?”

            The people who rely and expect to be taken care of by the govt have unwittingly become enslaved to the govt. Not to the sense of being beaten and abused, but certainly to a point that “if you don’t vote for the democrat, the republicans are going to take your welfare away”. They are relinquished to being submissive to the entitlement carrot that hangs over their head.

            Regarding the gambling winnings, the govt is already taxing the income that the casinos are making, which is far greater than any winnings that the people get from gambling. Another example of the IRS taxing on both sides of the coin.

            You didn’t answer my question…Should welfare recipients be taxed on the unearned income they receive via foodstamps, subsidies for healthcare, etc?

          • April 17, 2015 at 3:33 pm
            reality_based_community says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 97
            Thumb down 54

            Of course government assistance could, *at some level*, discourage work. If the gov’t offered to pay me $100k / year, I’d probably retire and live of the proceeds. The question is, are current programs designed to assist the poor given a such levels that such programs significantly discourage work? Ultimately, that is an empirical question. Most of the literature I’ve seen suggests that it doesn’t discourage work. In fact, most food stamp recipients actually do work, with food stamps supplementing their income. What I would suggest is that outfits like Walmart be required to pay their workers a living wage. WTH should my taxes subsidize their workers. I don’t shop at Walmart, and don’t even like having a Walmart around. Why do I have to pay to keep their workers alive?

            I’ll still humbly suggest that people who accept government assistance do not become “enslaved” to government. Again, look up the word “hyperbole.” For example, I was educated in a tax-funded public school, attended a tax-subsidized public university, received Pell Grants that helped cover tuition, etc. I don’t really consider myself as having been “enslaved.” Instead, the education led to a much higher earning job and the ultimate return to the government was more by way of taxes I pay than they spent.

            And to answer your question, no, welfare recipients shouldn’t be taxed (though of course they pay sales taxes, property taxes, payroll taxes on income, etc, just typically not the income tax). It doesn’t make much sense to tax people who have no money. Should retired people be taxed? Should full-time students be taxed? It might come as a surprise to you, but you won’t raise much revenue from people who have no money.

          • April 17, 2015 at 4:19 pm
            integrity matters says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 78
            Thumb down 35

            Reality –

            There is so much waste and fraud with the entitlement programs that it should make your head spin. The people I am talking about are those that get their sustenance from the govt.

            I am all for a “hand up” but not a “hand out”. Congrats to you for becoming successful.

            Regarding your Walmart comment, WHT should my taxes pay for two lazy able bodied adults to sit at home with their 4 kids doing drug deals on their Obama phone? At least the people at Walmart are working and trying to support themselves. I guess you also think McDonalds should pay their workers $15 an hour?

            Guess what genius, you’re going to end up paying for that anyway. Whether you shop at those places or not, the prices for the things you purchase anywhere (and subsequently the sales tax) are all going to go up. It’s called inflation.

            There is a cause and effect to everything. Unfortunately, Obama and the rest of you progressives seem to fail to consider the impact.

          • April 17, 2015 at 4:57 pm
            Reality_Based_Community says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 11
            Thumb down 8

            Integrity, I’m not sure how to interpret your last comment. Are you suggesting that low wages + the attendant tax dollars used to subsidize low wages via social programs is good because it also subsidizes cheap goods? That I don’t buy anyway? You people who buy worthless items at Walmart need to pay your own way, and not use my tax dollars to subsidize your prices. For may part, I try to buy as little as possible from anywhere, and when I do buy, it sure ain’t from Walmart.

  • April 15, 2015 at 12:38 pm
    Wally says:
    Hot debate. What do you think?
    Thumb up 61
    Thumb down 60

    After paying taxes on my income, on my assets, on my real estate, on my gas, and even my beer; now my government is getting ready to tax what I want to pass down to my children. I plan to meet with a bloodsucker in a three piece suit next month so that does not happen. Funny thing, I got the bloodsucker’s name from an Obama supporter who is on my side of 60. He did the same thing as me, and for the same reason

    • April 15, 2015 at 12:48 pm
      David says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 69
      Thumb down 57

      Unless you have assets in excess of $5.4 million dollars, the estate tax doesn’t apply to you. If you do, then congratulations! You are a very successful person and you should be proud. Your kids will have an extremely good head start with $5.4 million of tax free inheritance and 60% of everything after that coming their way.

      • April 15, 2015 at 12:59 pm
        Wally says:
        Hot debate. What do you think?
        Thumb up 45
        Thumb down 48

        You are correct. In fact the $5.4 million effectively doubles, as I understand it, with a simple type of trust set up. However my state has a much lower threshold. Maybe I can become a resident of Florida, just like Senator Kennedy’s mother Rose, so that I can avoid the state tax as well. If it is good enough for the Kennedys, it is good enough for me.

        • April 15, 2015 at 4:37 pm
          Agent says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 120
          Thumb down 87

          Wally, Joe Kennedy made his fortune running illegal liquor during prohibition. He never heard of an estate tax and they had the lawyers set everything up so all the Kennedy’s would inherit with no problem. Taxes are just for working folks, not the entitled liberals. John Kerry had to be coerced to pay his yacht taxes in Massachusetts after he tried to hide his yacht in Rhode Island hoping to avoid the taxes on it. He and his ketchup queen wife are super wealthy and will be that way from now on.

          • April 15, 2015 at 8:07 pm
            Reality_based_community says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 165
            Thumb down 132

            Yes, Joe Kennedy distributed liquor. The Bush patriarch, on the other hand, made a considerable sum by illegally funneled money to the Nazis. I prefer the rum runner myself.

          • April 16, 2015 at 11:20 am
            Agent says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 69
            Thumb down 51

            Bush Sr was a young pilot shot down in the Pacific in WW2 and rescued. I hardly think he was helping the Nazi’s in any way.

          • April 16, 2015 at 1:43 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 63
            Thumb down 5

            Agent – it wasn’t Bush Sr who had ties to indirectly financing the Nazi party, it was Bush Sr’s father, Prescott Bush.

            “The central charge against Prescott Bush has a basis in fact. In 1942, under the Trading With the Enemy Act, the U.S. government seized several companies in which he had an interest. Prescott at the time was an investment banker with Brown Brothers Harriman (BBH), which had funneled U.S. capital into Germany during the 1920s and ’30s. Among the seized companies was the Union Banking Corporation (UBC) of New York, which was controlled by German industrialist Fritz Thyssen. Thyssen had been an early financier of the Nazi party — in fact, in 1941 he published a book entitled I Paid Hitler. Ergo, Prescott helped finance the Nazis.”

            http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2434/was-president-bushs-great-grandfather-a-nazi

          • April 16, 2015 at 2:44 pm
            Agent says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 97
            Thumb down 59

            Wow Rosenblatt, what a stretch. How far do Liberals go back blaming the Bush family for all the ills of the world?

            By the way, I believe Harry Reid had an ancestor that was hung for cattle rustling. Thievery runs in that family.

          • April 16, 2015 at 4:51 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 45
            Thumb down 0

            Agent – once again, your reply is misdirected at me.

            Reality_based_community made the comment about the Bush patriarch having illegally funneled cash to the Nazi’s.

            You said you didn’t think Bush Sr would have been involved in something like that.

            I replied in agreement with you that it wasn’t Bush Sr who was accused of funneling cash. I pointed out it was Bush Sr’s father who had been doing what R_B_C mentioned.

            Don’t get on my case about “stretching” to blame the Bush family —- all I did was agree with you that Bush Sr had nothing to do with what R_B_C was saying the Bush patriarch had done.

          • April 16, 2015 at 5:27 pm
            Reality_based_community says:
            Hot debate. What do you think?
            Thumb up 88
            Thumb down 90

            Agent, ya know, getting all of your information exclusively from right-wing propaganda organs such as Fox News [sic] certainly won’t afford you an understanding of history.

            My assertion is correct and factual. The Bush patriarch, which would be *Prescott Bush*, a Senator and W’s grandpappy, does have Nazi connections. The company over which he was a director, was seized under the Trading With the Enemies Act for its dealings with Nazis in violation of US law, *and* after the US had entered the war.

            Please use your google machine before making unfounded assertions.

          • April 16, 2015 at 5:44 pm
            Reality_based_community says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 94
            Thumb down 60

            Agent – “Wow Rosenblatt, what a stretch. How far do Liberals go back blaming the Bush family for all the ills of the world”

            I dunno. You began the discussion by bringing up Joe Kennedy, who was a contemporary of Prescott. So Iguess you mean “how far back to conservatives have to go to blame all the ills on the world on liberals?”

          • April 17, 2015 at 9:46 am
            Rosenblatt says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 52
            Thumb down 0

            R_B_C – your “Fox News [sic]” piece of your reply was a hilarious use of that designation. Not sure how many other people got it, but I sure did.

            PS – Yes, Agent, I would have found it equally as funny had he written “Cable News Network [sic]” or made that reference to some other left-leaning news station.

  • April 15, 2015 at 1:12 pm
    Tony says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 97
    Thumb down 8

    Like most articles about taxation, this one also focuses on an alleged “loss of revenue” for the government and how it increases the deficit.

    Why not have an article about how the deficit is out of control and still the government continues to live well beyond its means?

  • April 15, 2015 at 1:32 pm
    Captain Planet says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 155
    Thumb down 136

    I’m so old, I remember when the Republicans acted like it was important to reduce the deficit. Perhaps they don’t like the fact that this President actually has reduced it, and they’ll do whatever they can to make it appear as though he hasn’t. Get your veto pen ready, Mr. President.

    • April 15, 2015 at 2:22 pm
      integrity matters says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 147
      Thumb down 120

      Hey Planet, Try looking at the bigger picture regarding the DEBT that your incompetent president has burdened us with.

      The deficit is a 1 year picture and it is still $486B. Guess what it is actually UP $16B over last year.

      http://news.yahoo.com/us-budget-deficit-running-slightly-above-last-years-180436402–finance.html

      The DEBT keeps growing, now at an astounding $18+ TRILLION and grows by at least $2.25Billion a day.

      http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

      All of you progressive, liberal, Obama lovers are IDIOTS!!

      • April 15, 2015 at 3:39 pm
        ComradeAnon says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 93
        Thumb down 79

        What was Bush’s last deficit? What was the National Debt when Obama became President? How much of the National debt is attributed to something Obama pushed? How much of the Debt is due to the tax cuts of the 2000s, 2 wars, Medicare Part D?

        • April 15, 2015 at 7:27 pm
          Reality_based_community says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 125
          Thumb down 96

          That’s exactly right, Comrade. Conservatives will never ever ever admit to the disaster of the Bush administration. And the current deficits are still driven by “legacy costs” from Bush II – large tax cuts targeted at capital, the unfunded wars, and the unfunded Medicare Part D program. These items are easily quantifiable, and without them we’d still be running the surplus that Clinton left. Conservatives cannot admit this.

          • April 15, 2015 at 7:29 pm
            Reality_based_community says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 139
            Thumb down 102

            And of course one should add the dramatic decline in federal revenue due to the Bush Depression.

          • April 15, 2015 at 7:31 pm
            Reality_based_community says:
            Hot debate. What do you think?
            Thumb up 127
            Thumb down 118

            The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities: “If not for the Bush tax cuts, the deficit-financed wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the effects of the worst recession since the Great Depression (including the cost of policymakers’ actions to combat it), we would not be facing these huge deficits in the near term. By themselves, in fact, the Bush tax cuts and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will account for almost half of the $20 trillion in debt that, under current policies, the nation will owe by 2019. The stimulus law and financial rescues will account for less than 10 percent of the debt at that time.”

        • April 16, 2015 at 12:42 pm
          integrity matters says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 55
          Thumb down 38

          Comrade/Reality:

          Get ready for it…Bush’s Administration AND the democratic controlled congress during his last two years are to blame for the runaway govt spending during his term.

          However, just because they did it, it does not give Obama AND the democratic controlled congress the right to “double down” on the irresponsible spending. “Stupid is as stupid does.” Forrest Gump

          By the way, its no wonder you believe the load of crap that the Center on Budget and Policy Prioities puts out. Per Wikipedia, they are:

          “an American think tank that analyzes the impacts of budget policies from a progressive viewpoint.[1][2] It was founded in 1981, and is based in Washington, D.C. The Center describes itself as a “policy organization…working at the federal and state levels on fiscal policy and public programs that affect low- and moderate-income families and individuals”.[3]

          CBPP is organized as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit. Though it describes itself as non-partisan,[4] journalists have characterized it as liberal or left of center.”

          You must be pretty naive (or stupid) to believe that the Bush tax cuts and wars are going to cost close to $10 TRILLION dollars.

          I’d bet on the latter.

          • April 16, 2015 at 5:47 pm
            Reality_based_community says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 110
            Thumb down 76

            Integrity – tell me how Obama can cut the spending for Bush’s wars until he actually ends the wars? How can Obama stem the revenue loss from Bush’s Depression until he reverses the Depression. Again, these are legacy costs. Quite frankly, we will be paying for the disastrous Bush administration for many years to come; quite possibly for generations.

          • April 17, 2015 at 1:49 pm
            integrity matters says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 47
            Thumb down 34

            Reality –

            1) How did ending the Iraq war work out, especially with the Commander in Idiocy telling the enemy when we are going to leave? Question…is the war really ended?? We keep sending troops and bombers. Is that budgeted? The only thing he did was remove the troops so the enemy could reestablish themselves. I bet he would be the worst chess player, ever.

            2) How does he end the Recession? Logic tells me that you DON’T go into more DEBT. He, ALONE, added over $10 TRILLION.

            3) We have not even felt the effects of Obamacare and won’t until he is out of office. The states participating in the exchanges are already scrambling for money. The generational impact is enormous.

            4) Let’s not forget about the illegal aliens and Obama’s idea of giving the welfare. How much is that going to cost?

          • April 17, 2015 at 2:39 pm
            reality_based_community says:
            Hot debate. What do you think?
            Thumb up 46
            Thumb down 38

            I – “You must be pretty naive (or stupid) to believe that the Bush tax cuts and wars are going to cost close to $10 TRILLION dollars”

            You must be pretty delusional not to believe it. As I said, the source of the enormous debt actually is

            1. unfunded Bush wars.
            2. unfunded new Medicare Part D program
            3. tax cuts and subsequent drop in revenue
            4. the most significant economic downturn since the Great Depression.

            Obama’s primary spending program was the stimulus, which was made necessary by Bush’s economic depression. Without it, we probably would have slid into a full-blown Depression, as virtually every reputable economist will tell you. And the stimulus I a tiny component of our national debt, and a one-time deal that does not entail continuing costs. Obamacare actually reduces the deficit, as per CBO analysis.

            You can believe whatever you choose to believe. These facts are well documented. If you don’t like my source, look at any non-partisan economist. Or…you can just make stuff up.

          • April 17, 2015 at 2:47 pm
            reality_based_community says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 86
            Thumb down 45

            Integrity, re your later post:

            1. How did the Iraq war work out? Frickin’ disaster from beginning to end and every point in between. Remember, Obama voted against the war, while Bush was getting all cod-piecey (compensate much?) and declaring victory. Perhaps we shouldn’t have gone into Iraq in the first place, esp. since the entire case for the invasion was built upon a pretty transparent series of outright lies and fabrications. But I remember it was *your* side that declared *my* side a bunch of traitors and were out burning Dixie Chicks albums and calling them traitors and everybody who questioned Bush was a traitor and we had to go to war before Iraq nuked Chicago. I’m still waiting for an apology from your side, which was so disastrously wrong about pretty much *everything*. No, there is no graceful way to end the war, and we’ll continue paying for it for some time to come, and not just in $s.

            2. How to end a recession. I’m not sure what your logic tells you, or even what your “logic” entails. However, deficit spending does have a stimulus effect on the economy, just as Keynes said and which has been proven time and time again. We can see how the austerity measures in Europe are working, with their emphasis on balanced budgets and cutting services during a recession. Not very well, really.

            3. We are already seeing the impact of Obamacare. The uninsured rate is at its lowest level as far back as the surveys go. The rate of health care inflation is at the lowest rate its been in years.

            4. Illegal aliens and welfare are a bit off-topic. Can we stay on topic?

          • April 17, 2015 at 3:55 pm
            integrity matters says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 23
            Thumb down 1

            Reality

            1. The U.S. war in Iraq has cost $1.7 trillion with an additional $490 billion in benefits owed to war veterans, expenses that could grow to more than $6 trillion over the next four decades counting interest, a study released on Thursday said. (Reuters)
            http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/14/us-iraq-war-anniversary-idUSBRE92D0PG20130314

            That $6T is over 4 decades and is an estimate. Obama added $10T in debt in 6 years.

            2. Unfunded Medicare Part D – Did Obama do anything to stop or reduce it? No. He added to it and wants to include the illegal aliens!

            3. tax cuts and subsequent drop in revenue –
            FY 2001 Revenues=$1.99T, Surplus $128B, Debt $5.77T,
            FY 2008 Rev=$2.52T, Deficit $458B, Debt $9.9T,
            FY 2014 Rev=3.02T, Def $484B, Debt $17.8T
            http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/year_revenue_2001USbn_16bs1n#usgs302
            As you can see, revenue increased despite the tax cuts.

            4. Agree with the statement. The actual impact to the debt is not quantifiable.

            I’ve cited my sources. Please cite yours.

            It seems like you are the one making this stuff up!

          • April 19, 2015 at 10:08 pm
            Reality_based_community says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 78
            Thumb down 55

            Integrity, your last post doesn’t make much sense. As you admit, the Bush wars cost trillions, and then complain that those costs grew under Obama. That’s exactly what I said. It’s a structural part of deficits that are legacy costs that will continue under Obama, and past Obama, regardless of who the next president is.

            RE. your comment that Obama want’s illegal aliens on Medicare Part D. Integrity, that’s…just…stupid. It’s flat out false. At least one of us is making stuff up. I did the Venn diagrams. It’s not me. There is no intersection between the set which contains me and the set in which stuff is being entirely made up out of thin air.

            My sources. Try the CBO. Note Figure 1: without the factors I cited (for review, Bush tax cuts, wars, recession, and new government programs), there would be virtually deficit and possibly the surplus that was gained under Clinton. If your position entails denying basic reality, perhaps you should reassess your position. It’s rather like conservatives’ position on climate change.

          • April 19, 2015 at 10:09 pm
            Reality_based_community says:
            Hot debate. What do you think?
            Thumb up 21
            Thumb down 14

            Figure 1 and other figures can be found here: http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3036

      • April 15, 2015 at 4:18 pm
        Celtica says:
        Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 75
        Thumb down 92

        Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

  • April 15, 2015 at 1:59 pm
    earlybird says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 427
    Thumb down 393

    The “Comment” section continues to amaze. Rather than independent business people, self starters, commission earners, who are used to making their own way, the comments would lead me to believe that the readers of Insurance Journal are mostly ACLU members, government bureaucrats and other left wing “progressives” that want to get there hands in my pockets. My parents made it possible for me to get an education, for which I am forever grateful. They had no monetary assets to leave to me. My “estate,”assuming that one is left after the “wage police” get through redistributing, should belong to whomever I wish to have it. I earned it, no matter how meager or how large it may be. You leftists, populist, and those of similar ilk, need to read the US Constitution. Or maybe you have and don’t like it. yep, that is probably it!

    • April 15, 2015 at 3:02 pm
      Agent says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 243
      Thumb down 222

      Trust me earlybird, there is not one business owner among the Progressive Democrat posters on this site. They are either peons working for a company or broker. They didn’t have the gumption to self start or sell or take a risk and are generally unhappy with their bosses that they haven’t advanced and don’t have the opportunity to buy in. They also don’t share contingency bonus with the boss who did take the risk and invest. They vent constantly on this blog so yes they are after anyone who has been successful. It is very tiresome.

      • April 15, 2015 at 3:29 pm
        David says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 203
        Thumb down 157

        Warren Buffett and Bill Gates both want to keep the estate tax. Next.

        • April 15, 2015 at 6:16 pm
          Agent says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 194
          Thumb down 164

          Yes Connie, I have read a lot of Dr. Thomas Sowell who is among the best of the living economists in this country and he has been at Stanford a long time. He makes far too much sense for some of the leftists on this blog to understand. They seem to like Keynes a lot and think massive government spending and taxation is the way to go.

        • April 15, 2015 at 8:44 pm
          Yogi Polar Berra says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 17
          Thumb down 4

          Bill and Warren have multiple assets which can be sold piecemeal, unlike a farm, without requiring their heirs to liquidate the primary asset. Both are already donating assets to charity, and their estates are welcome to pay what was a ‘formerly required’ inheritance tax, if they so please.

        • April 16, 2015 at 12:48 pm
          integrity matters says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 27
          Thumb down 0

          I’m sure they already have their trusts set up to minimize the impact. Even if not, they are so stinking wealthy that they would not even feel it.

          Either way, good for them! They worked hard for most of what they have.

      • April 15, 2015 at 5:57 pm
        Connie says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 140
        Thumb down 80

        Agent, are you familiar with Thomas Sowell? Here’s an excellent Sowell quote:

        “Among the many other questions raised by the nebulous concept of “greed” is why it is a term applied almost exclusively to those who want to earn more money or to keep what they have already earned—never to those wanting to take other people’s money in taxes or to those wishing to live on the largess dispensed from such taxation. No amount of taxation is ever described by the anointed as “greed” on the part of government or the clientele of government. . . .

        Families who wish to be independent financially and to make their own decisions about their lives are of little interest or use to those who are seeking to impose their superior wisdom and virtue on other people. Earning their own money makes these families unlikely candidates for third-party direction and wishing to retain what they have earned threatens to deprive the anointed of the money needed to distribute as largess to others who would thus become subject to their direction. In these circumstances, it is understandable why the desire to increase and retain one’s own earnings should be characterized negatively as “greed,” while wishing to live at the expense of others is not.”

    • April 16, 2015 at 11:43 am
      Stan says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 90
      Thumb down 76

      Earlybird, do you have more than 5.4mm in assets? If not, your shitty estate will pass unimpeded to whatever red-blooded kids you happen to gay-adopt.

  • April 15, 2015 at 2:09 pm
    TX Agent says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 67
    Thumb down 40

    Current National Debit as of this morning:
    $18,359,841,666,000

    Happy Tax Day Everyone!!! (btw: It was $8,000,000,000 when Obama took office. He has added $10 trillion in just 5 years!!!!! Broke a record there!!!!

  • April 15, 2015 at 2:20 pm
    agent2 says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 76
    Thumb down 21

    The whole estate tax thing starts with a presumption that it isn’t really yours to begin with….so, we will take much of it after having done nothing to produce it’s value and after having already taxed whatever resources used to create it. I’d call that theft.

    • April 15, 2015 at 3:15 pm
      Agent says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 192
      Thumb down 159

      Thieving Democ(rats)is the proper term. They have a President who famously said not long ago to business owners, if you are successful, you didn’t do that or if you built a business, you didn’t build that. Right behind him we have the ethically challenged Hillary saying – everyone knows that businesses don’t create jobs in this country. A Progressive Socialist believes that everything belongs to the state and they can abscond with people’s private property even if it has been paid for with blood, sweat and tears and taxes paid for 50-60 years. Hey, let’s just tax it again. How about that?

      • April 16, 2015 at 12:49 pm
        integrity matters says:
        Hot debate. What do you think?
        Thumb up 21
        Thumb down 19

        Hey Agent – Just remember, you can’t spell Hillary with the word LIAR!

        • April 16, 2015 at 2:36 pm
          Agent says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 45
          Thumb down 26

          Yes Integrity, I saw a new one today – Hil”liar”y – 2016

          • April 22, 2015 at 3:29 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 1

            You can’t spell Hillary without Hi
            You can’t spell Hillary without Ray
            You can’t spell Hillary without Hill
            You can’t spell Hillary without Rally

            Anagrams mean nothing. Got another game to play?

      • April 20, 2015 at 6:41 pm
        reality_based_community says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 118
        Thumb down 53

        btw, agent, you are misrepresenting reality (again, I’m shocked! /* snark off) and misquoting the president. What he said is that business owners are successful in part because of the public infrastructure, a workforce educated primarily in public educational institutions, and other public investments (i.e. those are the things the business owners didn’t build). The point being that they should want to give back some to improve the very things that made them successful. Seems like a valid point to me.

        And keep in mind that you are communicating on infrastructure created by government, which did indeed invent the internet (cf. DARPA). Hell, I heard that government even won WWII and put a man on the frickin’ moon, though that last one is probably a hoax invented by Al Gore.

  • April 15, 2015 at 3:13 pm
    FFA says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 111
    Thumb down 83

    Don’t we get taxed on the money we take in during our life time?
    Is the Estate Tax a form of 2 x taxation? I get taxed on it while I am alive and get kicked again after I am dead too?

    Tx Agent…. Wait till you see what Hillary does to the debt. I’ll bet the Ten Trill is nothing compared to what she is going to do.

    • April 15, 2015 at 3:45 pm
      RetiredUW says:
      Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 68
      Thumb down 86

      Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

      • April 15, 2015 at 4:16 pm
        FFA says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 28
        Thumb down 2

        Not me retired uw. Il Govt bodies and the feds are making sure of the simple fact I will not have to concern myself with that.

        • April 15, 2015 at 5:28 pm
          Agent says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 26
          Thumb down 7

          FFA, what about those kids/grandkids you are now raising? What about their future? I shudder to think about what my kids and grandkids are facing in the very near future.

          • April 15, 2015 at 5:57 pm
            FFA says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 45
            Thumb down 4

            Agent, us folks living in IL are experiencing what you fear on a smaller scale. Now, the entire country is going to live the life like we have. Outrageous cost. Sky High Taxes.

            I don’t what people were thinking when they voted for this guy. A Crook County politician sitting in the White House. About ten years from now, everyone will realize what living in Il is like. I just hope I make it to retirement some day.

          • April 15, 2015 at 6:11 pm
            Agent says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 151
            Thumb down 104

            FFA, I think you know that Hillary is an entitled Chicago native. She is every bit as bad as Obama.
            Is there something in the water up there that breeds these crooks and dirty politicians. They pretend they are trying to help the common folk and they end up ripping off everyone.

          • April 16, 2015 at 11:05 am
            Rosenblatt says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 22
            Thumb down 0

            “They pretend they are trying to help the common folk and they end up ripping off everyone.” You just described the majority of politicians irrespective of their party affiliations.

          • April 16, 2015 at 11:41 am
            Agent says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 134
            Thumb down 114

            Hey Rosenblatt, I would agree with you on the politicians if you are talking about Progressives in both parties. RINO’s are just about as bad as Progressive Democrats in taxation policy because they really love to spend money they don’t have. If they have a lot more revenue coming in, they just make sure they spend half a trillion more to keep that debt ceiling going up and we are likely to see $20 Trillion in public debt before Obama leaves office. True Conservatives want to see spending go down and taxes go down and keep fighting to do a balanced budget. We haven’t had a true budget since Obama has been in office and his buddy Reid made sure to just do spending bills to keep the government running. That hides the massive waste and corruption they are famous for.

          • April 16, 2015 at 4:54 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 15
            Thumb down 0

            “Hey Rosenblatt, I would agree with you on the politicians…” Great. I’ll take it. We agree. Good enough. Done & done.

    • April 15, 2015 at 7:35 pm
      Reality_based_community says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 102
      Thumb down 74

      FFA, no you don’t get taxed after you die. Anyone who inherits gets taxed because it’s income. And taxed at far lower levels than people who actually work for a living.

      • April 15, 2015 at 7:36 pm
        Reality_based_community says:
        Hot debate. What do you think?
        Thumb up 66
        Thumb down 63

        In other words, if you buried all of your money and assets with you upon your death, and nobody inherits it, it’s not taxed.

      • April 15, 2015 at 8:55 pm
        Yogi Polar Berra says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 48
        Thumb down 33

        Taxing the heirs is exactly the same as taxing the decedent. It’s disingenuous to argue the heirs are taxed on ‘income’ when the income was not generated by them. When you take home pay each week, do you consider the part you give to your kids to be their income or their ‘allowance’? I never got an allowance as a kid because my parents had conservative principles. I earned a small amount of ‘wages’ doing chores. Those who were given ‘allowances’ as kids without doing chores to earn it most likely grew up to now expect entitlements from their Uncle Sam.

        • April 16, 2015 at 12:55 pm
          integrity matters says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 33
          Thumb down 18

          Well said, Yogi! Reality is apparently living in a dream world.

        • April 16, 2015 at 5:54 pm
          Reality_based_community says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 119
          Thumb down 88

          Yogi – “Taxing the heirs is exactly the same as taxing the decedent”

          Yogi, seriously, that statement is just silly. But you are right about one thing, the heirs did nothing to generate their inherited income, other than outlive the decedent. But I think that’s precisely the point progressives are making. It is bad policy to tax productive labor at far higher rates than unearned income.

  • April 15, 2015 at 3:16 pm
    Wally says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 22
    Thumb down 3

    It is a mistake to view this one tax as if there were no others. A few years ago the legislature in my state started to apply the sales tax to liquor, wine and beer. Thing is, there was already a separate sin tax on those beverages, so they were applying a tax to a tax. I earn a dollar and I pay a tax on it. I spend some of what is left, and I pay a tax on that too. If I have any left I invest it, and guess what? I pay a tax if I make money. When I die, no problem, the government can take their share if I have what they deem enough. Any of these taxes, by itself, might be reasonable. Together I think they are unreasonable.

    • April 15, 2015 at 3:58 pm
      David says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 17
      Thumb down 1

      It heartens me to read reasonable discourse. Everyone knows that our tax system is fubar and needs a complete overhaul. I won’t be holding my breath on this Congress doing anything to ameliorate the mess we have now though. I’m partial to Milton Friedman’s negative income tax system. Makes things simple and fair.

    • April 16, 2015 at 5:57 pm
      Reality_based_community says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 64
      Thumb down 43

      Wally, what you should be asking yourself is why you are paying all of those regressive taxes. Why did Mitt Romney only pay a rate of 15%? Why does Warren Buffet acknowledge that he pays a significantly lower tax rate than his secretary? Hint: all of this has something to do with why the tax code is so complicated. It’s riddled with loopholes drafted by corporate interests.

      • April 17, 2015 at 1:53 pm
        integrity matters says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 23
        Thumb down 0

        Don’t blame the taxpayer that is following the rules. Blame the rulemakers and change the rules.

        • April 17, 2015 at 2:49 pm
          reality_based_community says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 53
          Thumb down 16

          Integrity matters – “Don’t blame the taxpayer that is following the rules. Blame the rulemakers and change the rules.”

          Except, in this instance, the “taxpayer that is following the rules” and the “rulemakers” are the same people.

  • April 15, 2015 at 3:22 pm
    David says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 95
    Thumb down 55

    Money is taxed every time it changes hands. It gets taxed when your employer pays you, when you spend it to buy something, when shareholders receive dividends, etc.

    You aren’t being taxed twice. You’re being taxed once when you earn your money, and then your heirs will be taxed once if/when they receive an inheritance over $5.4 million.

    • April 15, 2015 at 5:30 pm
      Agent says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 120
      Thumb down 88

      David, did you know there are 74,000+ pages to the Federal Tax code currently? Did you know it has tripled since 1984? Our lawmakers have been busy, haven’t they?

      • April 15, 2015 at 5:42 pm
        David says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 158
        Thumb down 125

        Did you know that the vast majority of these arcane tax laws are created by and for wealthy individuals and corporations to take advantage of? But let’s keep shoveling money their way by eliminating the Estate Tax, they obviously aren’t quite done extracting all of the wealth from the bottom 99.8% yet. Maybe we can reinstate the corporate jet tax deduction to help keep the gravy train flowing to the top.

        • April 16, 2015 at 9:57 am
          Agent says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 115
          Thumb down 100

          David, you should be blaming Progressive Socialist lawmakers who wrote the tax laws and have been taking money from lobbyists for years for favorable treatment. They are also tax avoiders, ie Charlie Rangel and others. Double taxation on business is not the answer to recover the economy.

          • April 20, 2015 at 6:22 pm
            reality_based_community says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 42
            Thumb down 21

            The term “double taxation” makes no sense in this context. It’s purely an ideological term.

  • April 15, 2015 at 4:04 pm
    John Burnett says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 7
    Thumb down 5

    I would like to know if the study took into consideration that $269 million that wouldn’t go to the government would be spent on commercial goods and services or invested in the market. Either spending or investing would generate more tax revenue over the 10 year period than the initial $269 million from estate tax. If the aforementioned points were not addressed and answered, then this is an example of 1/2 truths, omission and misguided politicians and readers that don’t know to ask the question.

    • April 17, 2015 at 10:29 pm
      reality_based_community says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 55
      Thumb down 27

      John, your supply-side take on economics has proven to be disastrously wrong.

  • April 15, 2015 at 7:15 pm
    Reality_based_community says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 107
    Thumb down 87

    WTH should a person who inherits their money get it tax free while those who work for wages are taxed to death? Currently, the inheritor get’s the first $5 million tax free. What horrible priorities to reward idleness and tax productive labor.

    • April 16, 2015 at 8:47 am
      agent2 says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 120
      Thumb down 99

      One more time…..because the taxes have already been paid, that’s why. It’s left to the family. And so every family is idle sloth? Most estates that large are family businesses and liquidity becomes a problem and the gov doesn’t give a damn how you come up with it. So now those workers/families have another tax problem and usually it is a death blow. How’s that for progressivism? And the lazy kids that do get inheritance? That’s just life and at times it’s unfair but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t belong to them.

    • April 16, 2015 at 10:39 am
      FFA says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 63
      Thumb down 31

      Because its already been taxed…

      • April 20, 2015 at 2:41 pm
        Agent says:
        Hot debate. What do you think?
        Thumb up 24
        Thumb down 24

        FFA, I saw an interesting clip on Scott Walker while he was out campaigning. He said “people don’t just want someone to fight for them, but fight and win. He has a good record fighting and winning, right?

    • April 16, 2015 at 1:04 pm
      integrity matters says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 50
      Thumb down 24

      Hey Reality – Maybe if you considered the inheritence as a gift, that would make more sense why it shouldn’t be taxed again.

      A parent who works hard so that their children can have a better life should not have to be concerned with the govt taking (stealing) a portion of that gift, regardless of the amount.

      • April 16, 2015 at 3:12 pm
        Taxes are theft says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 17
        Thumb down 2

        Integrity,

        I hate to break it to you, but gifts over $12K are taxed as well.

      • April 16, 2015 at 6:01 pm
        Reality_based_community says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 101
        Thumb down 72

        Integrity matters: “A parent who works hard so that their children can have a better life should not have to be concerned with the govt taking (stealing) a portion of that gift, regardless of the amount”

        or…A person who works hard to earn wages should not have to be concerned with the gov’t taking (stealing) a portion of those wages, regardless of the amount. btw, gifts *are* taxed. I hope you aren’t providing anybody with tax of financial advice. http://www.irs.gov/Businesses/Small-Businesses-&-Self-Employed/Frequently-Asked-Questions-on-Gift-Taxes

        • April 17, 2015 at 1:58 pm
          integrity matters says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 22
          Thumb down 3

          To Taxes and Reality –

          I was trying to make an analogy with my statement.

          I know that gifts are taxed above a certain amount (I thought it was $10K). Even so, I do not think gifts should be taxed at any amount (see my previous post further up the chain).

    • April 17, 2015 at 9:28 am
      Agent says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 178
      Thumb down 104

      Reality, most of us on this blog are getting a bit tired of your Democratic populist message.
      “Those who work for wages are taxed to death”. Where did you get that drivel? The ones who work for wages aren’t taxed at all and get refunds. Aren’t you happy with last year’s refund? Didn’t you get the maximum subsidy under Obamacare?

      • April 17, 2015 at 1:26 pm
        Reality_Based_Community says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 146
        Thumb down 104

        Agent – “Those who work for wages are taxed to death”. Where did you get that drivel? The ones who work for wages aren’t taxed at all and get refunds.”

        What, you don’t have an income tax on your planet? Here on Earth in the US, wages are taxed quite significantly.

        • April 17, 2015 at 2:50 pm
          Agent says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 120
          Thumb down 59

          Yes, I know. I am the employer that pays taxes on the wages of employees. I also pay self employment taxes as well. Ask Ron if he pays Federal Income tax after he claims all his deductions. He gets a refund. I don’t get refunds, just more taxes to pay for him.

          • April 17, 2015 at 3:45 pm
            reality_based_community says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 70
            Thumb down 53

            I don’t get refunds either, Agent. It really wouldn’t bother me, except I know for sure that many corporations are not only not pay any taxes, but on net receive millions of tax dollars. As do many individuals. Perhaps I’ll go into the not farming business. I hear people who are paid to let their fields stay fallow. I think I’ll start off small by not raising 20 head of cattle, and expand to perhaps not raising hogs, and not planting crops.

          • April 17, 2015 at 3:57 pm
            Agent says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 80
            Thumb down 16

            Well, what we do know reality is that Jeffrey Immelt didn’t pay taxes on GE and he moved entire divisions to China. Warren Buffet doesn’t seem to have many tax issues, I wonder why. Don’t get me started on the Agriculture Dept who pay farmers not to grow or who get incentives to grow corn for ethanol. By the way, the typical small farmer tends to go out of business with the inheritance taxes the kids inherit when it cannot be passed on to them.

          • April 17, 2015 at 4:44 pm
            Reality_Based_Community says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 148
            Thumb down 136

            Agent, c’mom, now your are just making stuff up. The *typical* farm does not go out of business due to the estate tax. In fact, the US Dept. of Agriculture estimates that only 0.6% of farm estate pay *any* estate taxes. On the reverse side, farms are rather notorious for sucking at the gov’t teat.

            It would be much easier to converse with you if you confined your comments to basic facts and reality.

          • April 20, 2015 at 2:44 pm
            Agent says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 25
            Thumb down 0

            Reality, please share with all of us if you are a business owner or an employee. If you are an employee, you have no idea what the business owner pays in taxes or the hassles and expense involved with running a business. My guess is that you are an employee given your posts.

          • April 20, 2015 at 3:15 pm
            Ron says:
            Hot debate. What do you think?
            Thumb up 60
            Thumb down 58

            Agent,

            Do you own an insurance agency or a farm?

            Reality_Based_Community is ONLY speaking of the estate taxes that apply to and extremely small percentage of farms.

            For once, please try to comment based on what other people are actually saying and not make things up.

          • April 20, 2015 at 4:15 pm
            reality_based_community says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 39
            Thumb down 21

            Agent, are you asserting that the DOA figures are wrong? Please provide the correct figure, and cite your sources.

          • April 20, 2015 at 6:43 pm
            reality_based_community says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 47
            Thumb down 14

            I really didn’t think Agent had evidence to the contrary. Agent, you need to reexamine your relationship to reality.

  • April 15, 2015 at 7:46 pm
    Robin says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 54
    Thumb down 16

    Same old excuse – if you enact it people will lose their businesses. Truth is that people will lose their businesses in response to many things they don’t like having to pay, including the rising costs of insurance, utilities, and just about everything else. This is a capitalistic society. It is expected of business owners that they will respond to increasing costs by growing their businesses to keep up, not by asking for welfare from their employees or the government. Those who fail to grow their businesses will go out of business. This is how it has always been in capitalism, and the consumers benefit because better companies replace the ones that go out of business. For all their alleged concern about the deficit I am surprised the GOP is trying so hard to prevent those who have billions and millions from paying their taxes knowing that will hurt the entire country. And if there really are any people who are going to have a problem with paying this tax, then maybe a more responsible way for the GOP to handle it is to pass a bill that allows them to pay over a few years instead of all at once. That will make it easier on anyone who really does have a problem paying without increasing the deficit.

    • April 20, 2015 at 9:54 am
      Agent says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 62
      Thumb down 10

      Hey FFA, I have a good one for you today to get the week off to a great start. Title is “Things that I trust more than Hillary Clinton”.
      1. Mexican Tap Water
      2. A rattlesnake with a “pet me” sign
      3. OJ Simpson showing me his knife collection
      4. An elevator ride with Ray Rice
      5. Taking pills offered by Bill Cosby
      6. Michael Jackson’s doctor
      7. An Obama Nuclear deal with Iran
      8. A Palestinian on a motorcycle
      9. Gas Station Sushi
      10. A Jimmy Carter economic plan
      11. Brian Williams news reports
      12. Loch Ness monster sightings
      13. Prayers for peace from Al Sharpton

    • April 20, 2015 at 5:15 pm
      Agent says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 37
      Thumb down 6

      Well, I have my proof now. Reality is no more a business owner than Ron. They just spout off and know absolutey nothing about how to run a business, pay the bills, make a profit and think the Progressive Tax Code and Estate taxes are just fine because it doesn’t affect them in any way. I am afraid they don’t know what they don’t know.

      • April 20, 2015 at 6:05 pm
        reality_based_community says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 107
        Thumb down 69

        Agent, do you honestly think being a business owner gives you some sort of privileged epistemological understanding? It doesn’t. I could just as easily say “You have never had a government job, so what the hell would you know about government?” or “You didn’t fight in WWII, what could you possibly know about it?” It’s just a dumb argument to make.

        You still haven’t answered my question. You disputed the DOA’s estimate that well less than 1% of farm estates pay *any* estate taxes. Yet you’ve not provided any alternative estimates or sources. You may very well be a successful business owner, but you utterly fail at basic evidentiary based thinking, reason, and logic.

  • April 16, 2015 at 10:45 am
    FFA says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 44
    Thumb down 0

    Agent asks “Is there something in the water up there that breeds these crooks”.

    Two new Fed investigations broke on the news this AM. Superintendent of CPS and a community college – COD.

    We had a good run, about three weeks, with out something happening to a dirty politician.

    • April 16, 2015 at 11:44 am
      Agent says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 67
      Thumb down 37

      FFA, I think we would agree that Rauner has his work cut out for him in Illinois. Hard to get rid of all that corruption for a first term Republican. The other side is entrenched.

      • April 16, 2015 at 11:53 am
        FFA says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 46
        Thumb down 18

        I was watching some footage of a hearing regarding the budget cuts. The damn dems were just tearing into this guy that was forced to make the decisions. Finally, a Rep stated ” This is the same as the arsonist complaining to the firemen about how they are potting out the arsonist fire”.

        I have never seen such a horrible display of our Law Makers at work. Everyone of them dems need to go. Throwing knifes at the person that’s forced to clean up their mess. Disgusting.

  • April 16, 2015 at 11:28 am
    FFA says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 29
    Thumb down 0

    After this is all done, its just going to be political fodder.
    “We tried to cut taxes, but they wouldn’t let us”.

    I am watching for more tax cuts that wont happen just for that reason only.

    • April 16, 2015 at 5:41 pm
      Agent says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 105
      Thumb down 39

      FFA, I read an interesting article published by the Wall Street Journal on taxation. The title was – Top 20 Percent of Earners pay 84% of Income Tax. The article went on to say that the top 1 Percent of earners pay almost half of income taxes. We get only half of federal revenue from income taxes. The rest is made up of all kinds of other taxes they collect. How Progressive of them!

      On average, most developed countries only get one third of their revenue from income taxes. Many have imposed national consumption taxes, such as a value added tax, that raise as much tax revenue as the income tax. Obama says the rich aren’t paying their “fair share” and the bottom 40% are paying the burden. Actually, the bottom 40% get refunds and many who pay no tax get a refund. How fair is our system? The easy answer is not very. 74,000 pages of drivel and yes it is a rip off.

      • April 17, 2015 at 9:54 am
        Rosenblatt says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 11
        Thumb down 0

        I get your point Agent, and I read that article too, but there’s more to it than just what you state. Knowing these additional points helps tell the whole story.

        “The pressure on the U.S. income tax has prompted lawmakers on both sides of the aisle to seriously consider a national consumption tax. But liberals worry that such a levy could unduly burden the poor, while conservatives fear it would be too easy to dial up the rate and collect more revenue.

        Why is the share of income taxes negative for 40% of Americans? In recent decades Congress has chosen to funnel important benefits for lower-income earners through the income tax rather than other channels. Some of these benefits, such as the Earned Income Tax Credit and the American Opportunity Credit for education, make cash payments to people who don’t owe income tax.

        People receiving such payments do pay other federal taxes, of course, such as those for Social Security and Medicare. If these taxes are included, the share of federal taxes paid by the lowest two quintiles turns positive

        The share of tax paid by the top 20% of Americans also changes when such social-insurance levies are included: It drops from more than 80% of income taxes to about 67% of all federal taxes.”

        http://www.wsj.com/articles/top-20-of-earners-pay-84-of-income-tax-1428674384

        • April 17, 2015 at 11:02 am
          Agent says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 116
          Thumb down 49

          I get your point Rosenblatt, but do you agree we have been lied to by this redistribution President saying that the well off are not paying their fair share of taxes? It is very clear who pays the majority of taxes in this country and the system with a code numbering 74,000+ pages is very screwed up. We should have gone to a flat or fair tax a long time ago, eliminating the loopholes Warren Buffett and Bill Gates have taken advantage of and put in some kind of modest consumption tax so that all Americans would have a little skin in the game. I am tired of paying Ron’s taxes. You should see my quarterlies I have to send in as a business owner. You might get nauseous as I do.

          • April 17, 2015 at 11:59 am
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 6
            Thumb down 0

            “…the system with a code numbering 74,000+ pages is very screwed up.” I definitely agree with this point!

        • April 17, 2015 at 12:14 pm
          Agent says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 56
          Thumb down 1

          Rosenblatt, as long as you are increasing your education about taxes, there is also a good article on todays Townhall.com regarding Obama’s lie about “fairness”. Scroll down to it and read it. It will open your eyes.

          • April 17, 2015 at 12:42 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Hot debate. What do you think?
            Thumb up 25
            Thumb down 20

            I read that article as suggested. One thing I find missing is the answer to “at what rate are each income group being taxed at?”

            For example: if people making >$250k pay only 2% of their pay as taxes, that’s at least $5,000 each (if they make exactly $250k, so that # doesn’t even consider those who make more than $250k).

            If people under $100k pay a tax rate at double of the rich’s rate (4%), that’s at most $4,000 each (if they’re making exactly $100k, which we know not everyone is).

            In that fake scenario, of the $9,000 collected, >$250k are paying more than half of the total and the others are paying less than half of the total, yet THE RICH ARE BEING TAXED AT HALF THE RATE OF THE POOR.

            Agent “…We should have gone to a flat or fair tax a long time ago”

            I agree with that — what is fair to me is that everyone pays the same tax rate regardless of earnings.

            Yet even with a flat tax, the top earners will still be contributing more to the overall number because they’re making more, and I’m sure they’d argue that’s not fair too.

            As there appears to be no solution to make everyone happy, I say let’s just level the playing field, be fair to all, and tax everyone at the same rate regardless of earnings.

          • April 17, 2015 at 1:29 pm
            Reality_Based_Community says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 131
            Thumb down 121

            Spot on Rosenblatt. I hear the “rich pay the majority of federal taxes” ploy all the time, which would seem to imply the rich have a higher tax burden than others. Of course, as you noted, the very rich often times pay at significantly lower rates than others, which would seem to be a better indicator of tax burden.

          • April 17, 2015 at 2:09 pm
            integrity matters says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 63
            Thumb down 26

            I agree that a flat tax on everyone would be most fair.

          • April 17, 2015 at 2:26 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 36
            Thumb down 17

            So far, here are the people who have agreed a flat tax system would be better than what we currently have:

            Agent
            Reality_Based_Community
            integrity matters
            Rosenblatt

            Anyone else?

            I mean, if bob, Ron, Stan and a few others post a reply and say they think a flat-tax solution is better than what we have, I bet that would make history: an unprecedented consensus agreement from the posters on IJ!!

            Can it be true – did we finally find something that we can all agree on?

          • April 17, 2015 at 2:40 pm
            integrity matters says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 18
            Thumb down 0

            Rosenblatt –

            If so, I’m glad winter is over because we would certainly have a blizzard!

            Actually, we just need to find a candidate that would actually implement it. Although, I am sure the rest of his/her policies would stir some disagreement.

          • April 17, 2015 at 2:53 pm
            reality_based_community says:
            Hot debate. What do you think?
            Thumb up 37
            Thumb down 29

            Wait, Rosenblatt…I didn’t say I favored a flat tax.

          • April 17, 2015 at 2:57 pm
            Ron says:
            Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 7
            Thumb down 24

            Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

          • April 17, 2015 at 3:13 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 5
            Thumb down 0

            My apologies, R_B_C. When you replied with “Spot on Rosenblatt” to my APRIL 17, 2015 AT 12:42 post, I inferred your agreement to the entirety of what I was saying. My mistake, then.

            Updated list: Agent, ron, integrity & myself.

          • April 17, 2015 at 3:14 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 6
            Thumb down 0

            edit: Updated list *of those who think a flat tax is more fair than our current tax system*: Agent, ron, integrity & myself.

          • April 17, 2015 at 3:49 pm
            reality_based_community says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 4
            Thumb down 4

            Wait, I do agree that a flat-tax would be more fair than the current system. Warren Buffet should pay *at least* the same rate I pay. I tend to evaluate proposals as between all possible tax systems, though.

          • April 17, 2015 at 4:46 pm
            FFA says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 14
            Thumb down 0

            Rose, I’m in!

          • April 17, 2015 at 5:20 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 11
            Thumb down 0

            updated/updated/updated list of people who agree that a flat tax system would be more fair than our current tax system:

            Agent
            FFA
            integrity matters
            Reality_Based_Community
            Ron
            Rosenblatt

            Anyone else want to get in on a potential “we may actually have found something that everyone on IJ can agree with”?

            Personally very interested to know if bob in on board or not.

          • April 17, 2015 at 10:34 pm
            reality_based_community says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 26
            Thumb down 2

            btw, does your flat-tax apply to all sources of income?

          • April 20, 2015 at 8:03 am
            Ron says:
            Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 173
            Thumb down 198

            Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

          • April 20, 2015 at 10:48 am
            KY jw says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 21
            Thumb down 0

            Hey, Rosenblatt, I’d accept a flat tax as better than what we have now. It’s a win-win if it also eliminates government agencies.

            Sure, some accounting companies may have to downsize or close, but those working for industry would still be employed. The rest will find jobs eventually, surely.

          • April 20, 2015 at 11:05 am
            Ron says:
            Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 28

            Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

          • April 20, 2015 at 2:55 pm
            Agent says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 26
            Thumb down 0

            Rosenblatt, some on this blog obviously misinterpreted my Flat or Fair Tax proposal and the only thing they comment on is the “Flat” tax. The flat tax is only one proposal where everyone pays at the same rate whether rich, middle income or poor. The Fair tax has also been floated as an alternative as well. There may be two or three rates starting with the low income paying a very nominal rate and the middle class a little higher and the rich higher still. In any case, the rate would be far less than the terrible Progressive code which is so one sided with the rich paying for up to 80% of all taxes and the bottom 60% paying only 2%. That is why it would be fair for everyone.

  • April 16, 2015 at 12:16 pm
    FFA says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 34
    Thumb down 0

    ” Hard to get rid of all that corruption for a first term Republican. The other side is entrenched”.

    These are the people that think us agents need Ethics Ce. How hypocritical.

    • April 16, 2015 at 12:44 pm
      Agent says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 59
      Thumb down 0

      Well FFA, there is not a week that goes by that we don’t see a story on IJ about fraud in our industry. I am not sure where the ethics went in doing business. Customers trying to defraud companies by filing false claims, agents defrauding customers by selling bogus coverage and absconding with the money. It is pretty sickening. I am afraid the whole country is descending into not knowing right from wrong. It starts at the top of government and bleeds down into society. Everybody seems to want something for nothing and the work ethic and honesty have gone by the wayside.

    • April 17, 2015 at 2:46 pm
      BS says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 17
      Thumb down 0

      Not just Ethics CE. Live, in-classroom Ethics CE. I swear, it’s a scam.

      I went to my first one for my last renewal, and was blown away by how much I DIDN’T learn. The ‘teacher’ came in, gave a few opening remarks, and passed out a couple worksheets. Each page had a scenario, representing a different ethical dilemma. He had us break up into groups to discuss how we thought they should be handled. While we were ‘discussing,’ he just left the room. 20 minutes later, he came back, and had us tell the class what conclusion we’d come to. But there was no discussion about it, or why that decision was right or wrong. Just, “Good. Next group.” Once that was done, he had us move onto the next scenario, and left the room again. This went on for the entire class. I think we were there for 3 hours or so, and he couldn’t have been in the room more than 45 minutes, total. I learned absolutely NOTHING.

      The state has GOT to be getting kickbacks on theses classes.

      • April 17, 2015 at 3:26 pm
        Agent says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 20
        Thumb down 0

        BS, surely you didn’t pay good money for a class like that just to satisfy your CE. You should demand your money back. Perhaps they just have Progressive Socialists teaching now since they don’t seem to know right from wrong and would have no clue how to teach it.

        • April 17, 2015 at 4:55 pm
          BS says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 12
          Thumb down 0

          Thankfully, my company paid for it, so I wasn’t quite as pissed as I would have otherwise been. :) My license is coming up for renewal, and I’m going to have to go to another one of these classes next Wednesday. Hopefully, it will be a little more informative that the last, but I’m not holding my breath.

        • April 17, 2015 at 5:10 pm
          Agent says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 15
          Thumb down 0

          BS, does your company owner/President know what a waste of time it was or was he/she just satisfied that you got credit for it? I don’t know what state you are in, but IIAT in Texas puts on good CE courses on a variety of subjects. When I went to Ethics classes back in the day, they weren’t as interesting as the insurance courses, but they were far better than what you describe. The one that gave me some nightmares was the E&O classes. Many examples of what happens on a claim or problem and if the agency is properly documenting conversations with clients/claimants. Sometimes an agent can do everything right and it still happens. At least we have the backup information to provide.

          • April 17, 2015 at 5:51 pm
            BS says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 8
            Thumb down 0

            I doubt the company bigwigs had any idea, (or to be honest, would have cared even if they did know) that the class was a waste of time. They would have cared more if my license had lapsed because I didn’t take the class. As long as I get the 3 hours of in-classroom Ethics CE that IL requires for license renewal, and do through a state-approved class, they don’t care how useless that class might be.

          • April 17, 2015 at 6:08 pm
            Agent says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 15
            Thumb down 0

            BS, please don’t tell me you are in Illinois, the land of liberals and crooks that FFA goes on about all the time. You have a tough row to hoe in that state. At least there has been some progress made with the election of Rauner. Apparently, he has stirred up some hornets nests with the unions up there.

          • April 20, 2015 at 11:59 am
            BS says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 7
            Thumb down 0

            Morning Agent. Yep, I’m in IL, too. :)

            I’m still not sure how I feel about Rauner. I didn’t vote for him*, but I’m not the type to root for his failure because ‘my guy’ didn’t win. I really do hope he’ll be able to do some good for the state.

            I don’t really have a strong opinion on the unions. I think they can be useful and very helpful to their members in some situations. But, I also think they can make things far more difficult and drawn out than they need to be when it comes to things like negotiations. There’s no question in my mind that some sort of reform would be good. However, I don’t think it was the smartest move to jump in and start working on the unions so soon after being elected. There are other issues that he could have focused on first, that had he fixed, would have made people more receptive to discussions about the unions, and willing to work with him on them.

            *not because I necessarily liked Quin, but because of the lawsuit and allegations against GTCR Golder Rauner re: their asset transfers to avoid liability

          • April 20, 2015 at 1:59 pm
            FFA says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 15
            Thumb down 0

            BS, I don’t think he jumped in. I think he just put a toe in the water – Public Employees don’t have to join the union if they don’t want to. Seems testing waters.

            The display that took place last week in Springfield was just disgusting. Quinn Admin passes a budget with a 1.6 bill gap in money vs expenses. Then the dems put a kid that was part of the decision making process on what to chop in the hot seat. One of the Dems went as far as telling him he cared more about money then he does about kids. Made me want to vomit watching that footage. Then I jump on the FB page of my senator and another Dem is bitching at him on face book for the cuts that had to be made as well as saying the Repb got the tax cut that was supposed to be rolled back when the tax hike took place. Rauner has some hard decisions to make because of the likes of Blago & Quinn. People will suffer because of them two.

            Our Law makers are just too stupid to even grasp the concept that you cant spend more then you have. Meanwhile, my house sits dead on the market, more of my business clients are closing their doors and they just don’t care.

          • April 21, 2015 at 10:23 am
            FFA says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 10
            Thumb down 0

            Il has got so bad that even Opra is moving out… She is auctioning off her possessions and send the proceeds to her school in Africa. So much for helping the poor in her home town.

    • April 17, 2015 at 2:58 pm
      Agent says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 42
      Thumb down 2

      So Rosenblatt, are you saying that even Ron would have to pay some tax under the Flat or Fair tax? He is pretty happy with the Progressive tax code where I pay his and he pays nothing and gets a refund. I think whatever the fair rate is, there should be at least a 1% consumption or value added tax to pick up some revenue from all the illegals who are off the books currently and they strain the system on healthcare, schools and public safety.

      • April 17, 2015 at 5:28 pm
        Agent says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 34
        Thumb down 1

        Rosenblatt, I am sure you read in the Townhall article that the bottom 80% pays 15% of the taxes and the bottom 60% only pay 2% of the taxes. How does that sit with you? It infuriates me! Yes, a flat or fair tax would be best for the country at a fairly low rate with no loopholes and no outs for the Ron’s of the world. A value added tax of 1% on goods and services would bring in a lot of money to balance the budget and force the illegals into paying some tax.

        • April 21, 2015 at 10:27 am
          Rosenblatt says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 1
          Thumb down 0

          If you do not remember what I said about that article, please re-read my APRIL 17, 2015 AT 12:42 PM post. I refuse to answer a question that I already answered.

    • April 17, 2015 at 3:36 pm
      Agent says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 70
      Thumb down 6

      Rosenblatt, how about filling Ron in on what a balanced budget would mean to the economy, employers hiring again, offshore jobs coming back to the country, GNP going up. He seems to be real worried about where the money goes. In addition, he is real worried about the IRS agents and CPA’s. The 93 million unemployed might actually find work and lessen the burden of entitlements that our taxes have been paying all along. Of course, we will have to hold politicians in both parties accountable and let them know that we will no longer accept continuing resolutions for massive spending with no real budget.

    • April 20, 2015 at 10:00 am
      Agent says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 47
      Thumb down 0

      Hey Ron, how about making an intelligent comment on this blog instead of going into your usual Progressive diatribe? I brought out two articles on taxes to support my argument and you have nothing as usual. Several others agree with me that the Flat or Fair tax is the way to go. I am waiting for your article to show the other side and to continue to avoid paying taxes.

      • April 20, 2015 at 10:17 am
        Ron says:
        Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 22
        Thumb down 41

        Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

        • April 20, 2015 at 11:16 am
          Agent says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 49
          Thumb down 1

          Ron, I can’t help it if you are too dumb to read the comments and see what was offered as proof that the well off are paying a disproportionate share of taxes in this country. Many others on this blog “got it”, but you obviously didn’t. By the way, I don’t dislike you, just your thinking. How about putting forth the reasons why you think the screwed up Progressive Tax Code is the most “fair” for the country.

          • April 20, 2015 at 11:40 am
            Ron says:
            Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 29
            Thumb down 53

            Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

          • April 20, 2015 at 12:37 pm
            Agent says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 98
            Thumb down 47

            Hey Ron, how many Progressives does it take to change and Obama light bulb? Ron and 5 others that think like he does.

            I have warned you before about demanding answers to your list of stupid questions. Apparently, it didn’t sink in because you are still doing it. Who has the reading comprehension problem?

            If the current tax code has helped the country, explain how. I don’t think the private sector has failed, just the government that taxes unmercifully. If the country as a whole had a more fair tax, why would that not benefit the country overall? Why are you so unwilling to pay tax Ron? Inquiring minds want to know.

            By the way, we have 93 million unemployed in this country sopping benefits off the working folks. If you put the majority of them to work, they become tax payers, not tax takers. A balanced budget would cure a lot of ills by keeping government off our backs and create incentives for business to hire and succeed.

            Why are you harping on the poor IRS agents given their record of misdeeds? A lot of them owe back taxes. Regarding the CPA’s, bookkeepers, they can find jobs in a healthier economy that is creating jobs. They are miniscule as a group considering how many unemployed there are in this country.

            I will let Rosenblatt give you the rate to charge. My guess is the country would do pretty well with fairly minimal rates if working folks were paying some tax. My question to you is if you can handle 5% on your record salary.

          • April 20, 2015 at 1:43 pm
            KY jw says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 34
            Thumb down 0

            Ron, I’m actually offended that you think IRS agents and CPAs would need training to get other jobs. Accounting degrees are very broad and can be used in any position. My degree is in accounting and I have done many things. There is no need to “re-train” accountants to be managers or other professionals in pretty much any industry. They will be fine.

          • April 20, 2015 at 2:12 pm
            I'm confused says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 9
            Thumb down 0

            I rarely post on these message boards because it is usually the same stupid “I’m better than you and you are just stupid for disagreeing with me” crap from both sides of the political spectrum. But this issue seems to be one that both sides seem to agree on (at least partially), so I feel OK stepping in with a comment that I hope will elicit a legitimate and thought-out response.

            Ron – your responses to the flat tax idea confuse me regarding your point about pulling money out of the private sector and into the government. While I agree with you that I would rather not have the governemnt take more money out of the private sector, how does a flat tax do that? I haven’t seen anyone in this flat tax discussion arguing for more tax revenue, just a different method of calculating how much each individual person pays. To me, that implies neither an increase or decrease in the amount of money taken out of the private sector, just a redistribution. I am not an economist, so I don’t claim to have any idea how a redistribution of taxes would affect the economy, but I don’t see how a flat tax necessarily increases the overall tax burden. Please eloborate so that I can better understand your position. Thank you.

            And for my 2 cents about the fairness issue…I don’t think their exists any one tax scenario that is 100% fair, but at least a flat tax would be easier to comprehend and administer and possibly harder for less scrupulous people to manipulate and cheat their way out of paying a ‘fair’ share.

          • April 20, 2015 at 3:38 pm
            Ron says:
            Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 50
            Thumb down 65

            Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

          • April 21, 2015 at 9:30 am
            Ron says:
            Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 18

            Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

          • April 21, 2015 at 12:39 pm
            KY jw says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 10
            Thumb down 0

            Hey, Ron, I’m serious, the transfer of skills from accounting to any other field is easy. You might be surprised by the number of CPAs who already have JDs or MBAs. It really isn’t a big deal. I’ve changed industries several times and had no problem doing my job.

          • April 21, 2015 at 2:48 pm
            KY jw says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 10
            Thumb down 0

            Let me add one thing, Ron. I’ve rarely actually worked as an “accountant.” My accounting degree opened doors in so many different parts of companies.

          • April 21, 2015 at 3:04 pm
            Ron says:
            Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 10

            Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

          • April 22, 2015 at 9:25 am
            I'm confused says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 11
            Thumb down 0

            Ron,
            Thank you for your response to my questions. While I don’t agree with all of your points, I now understand what your position is and the rationale behind your position. And more importantly, your response was directed at the questions I asked you, and in a civil manner. I wish more people on this forum would follow that model of directly answering questions posed to them without resorting to vitriol. OK. I will get off my soapbox now.

          • April 22, 2015 at 10:05 am
            KY jw says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 0

            Ron, I’m not sure how a glut of accounting professionals will affect the salaries.

            Some of those with the IRS or in an accounting firm will retire. Federal employees will first look for new jobs with the feds. Did you know the secret service and FBI recruit accountants?

            The rest may affect hiring/salary decisions. However, it could be a large or an insignificant change. I don’t have a clue.

          • April 22, 2015 at 11:17 am
            Ron says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 4
            Thumb down 3

            KY jw,

            The fact that nobody really knows the impact a flat tax would have is my biggest concern. That is why I ma asking the questions, to spur some deeper thinking beyond, “it would be so much easlier, ” and “it would mean less government jobs”.

            Complex problems are very rarely sovled with simple solutions without major unintended consequences.

          • April 22, 2015 at 11:21 am
            Ron says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 5
            Thumb down 5

            I’m Confused,

            Thank you.

            I will admit that I occassionally engage in some vitriol. Agent and bob have a tendency to bring out the worst of me.

            However, I take pride in the fact that I do try to answer questions directly and civilly. I just wish the same courtesy would be reciprocated.

  • April 20, 2015 at 2:34 pm
    Agent says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 48
    Thumb down 4

    Good comment KY. Ron is about the only one on this blog concerned about IRS agents possibly looking for actual private sector jobs. I agree that CPA’s and Accountants could transition easily and they can be controllers for companies, pay bills, make payroll and do P&L statements/Income Statements for the businesses. This is a foreign concept for Ron. He must have an IRS agent for a brother and they have been talking about how hard it would be on IRS agents after having the gravy train so long.

    • April 20, 2015 at 3:51 pm
      Ron says:
      Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 25

      Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

      • April 20, 2015 at 4:44 pm
        Agent says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 38
        Thumb down 0

        Ron, you really are one of those low information voters we have heard so much about. The IRS is nothing but a political arm of the Obama Administration now and targeted Conservative Groups ad nauseum while approving many left wing organizations. Have you not heard of Lois Lerner, who took the 5th Amendment rather than testify about her dealings? They are a very terrible bureaucracy and a disease on our society. Ted Cruz has it right saying it should be abolished entirely.

        By the way, I deal with a number of Controllers of companies who are CPA’s and Accountants. I assure you that they are not paid peon wages, live in nice homes and drive nice cars. I insure many of their Homes and Autos so I know what I am talking about. If we get this economy going and companies expand and hire, CPA’s and Accountants will be in demand. For IRS agents, perhaps not so much since their reputation is not so good.

        • April 20, 2015 at 6:30 pm
          reality_based_community says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 98
          Thumb down 47

          Agent, for all the superior wisdom that owning a business has engendered in you, you seem to get a lot of things factually incorrect.

          1. Please back up your statement that “the typical farm goes out of business because of the estate tax.” No evidence for this statement, and all evidence is to the contrary. Can’t you be big enough to admit when you are just flat-out wrong? C’mom, you run your own business!

          2. Re the IRS and conservative groups – the IRS didn’t target conservative groups any more than other political groups. That’s been investigated and well documented, all Fox News [sic] propaganda to the contrary. The fact is the US tax code and related statutes forbid political groups from getting the non-profit tax exempt status they were seeking. Unfortunately, the IRS has backed off enforcing the law – so its more unfair tax breaks for the ultra-wealthy and various Super PACs. Kind of like the estate tax under discussion here.

          • April 21, 2015 at 10:19 am
            Agent says:
            Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 70
            Thumb down 93

            Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

          • April 21, 2015 at 2:24 pm
            Stan says:
            Hot debate. What do you think?
            Thumb up 36
            Thumb down 32

            lol Agent, you couldnt be more of a hack if you tried. You really are a dipshit of the highest order. Re-read what you just wrote – – a comment you submitted in good faith even! – – and try to conclude that you have the slightest idea of what you are talking about.

            It cant be done!

            Texas, man I tell you…

          • April 21, 2015 at 2:59 pm
            Reality_Based_Community says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 309
            Thumb down 253

            Stan, you got that right. Agent, you are just repeating nonsense that you heard either on Fox News [sic] or AM radio. It’s not true.

            Agent: Tell me, why has the IRS commissioner visited the White House over 100 times in the past couple of years?
            Reality: The IRS did not visit the white house over 100 times, but just 11 times. See http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/05/the-fake-story-about-the-irs-commissioner-and-the-white-house/276399/

            The reason for his visits, as detailed in readily available public records (except apparently not so readily available to Fox News [sic]), pertained almost entirely to the implementation of the Affordable Care Act – http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2013/07/07/oops-it-turns-out-irs-commissioner-did-not-visit-the-white-house-157-times-after-all/

            Agent: Why has he lied in front of Congress….”
            Reality: Who is “he,” and what specific lies are you accusing him of making to Congress? Your accusation is so vague it can’t possibly be addressed.

            Agent – Why did Lois Lerner refuse to testify
            Reality – Probably on advice from her attorneys. I would probably respond exactly the same way when confronted by a witch hunt. US prosecutors cleared her of any wrong doing in taking the Fifth. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/02/us/lois-lerner-former-irs-official-wont-be-charged-for-refusing-to-testify.html?_r=0

            Agent: and lose her emails which have since been found?
            Reality: they were lost due to a hard drive failure, but have since been recovered on backup tapes. Are you aware of any evidence at all that the emails reveal illegal activity? Please share.

            Agent: This will come out on the targeting and Ms Lerner should be in a jail cell over it…There is no doubt about this except in yours and Ron’s brain.
            Reality: I’ve been waiting a long time for it all to “come out” Agent. So far, nada. Nothing. Zip. Zero. Null set. Unfortunately, the GOP House members have a long long history of hyping various fake scandals from which absolutely *nothing* comes. Ever. All available evidence indicates that the IRS was doing exactly what they were supposed to be doing – screening likely political groups to ensure they don’t receive tax exempt status in violation of the US tax code. IN fact, as many liberal groups were scrutinized as conservative groups, and *more* liberal groups denied tax exempt status than conservative groups. It’s hard to see any scandal here other than from the fevered imaginations of right-wing hacks. Of course, when you run out of policy ideas, I suppose fake scandal mongering is all you have left. eh?

          • April 21, 2015 at 3:13 pm
            Reality_Based_Community says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 86
            Thumb down 71

            Agent, I just wrote a long reply with links in relation to your fake IRS “scandal.” It got lost in the ether, and I’m not going to retype it all. Suffice to say, you observations are variously flat-out-false or simply wild-a$$ speculation based on no evidence whatsoever. So far, all evidence points to the fact that the IRS was doing exactly what is it charged by statute with doing – ensuring that political groups don’t receive the tax exempt status they were seeking. They targeted as many liberal as conservative groups, and in fact denied *more* liberal groups. As with all the other fake scandals conjured up in the fevered mind of the House teapublicans, I don’t expect anything to come of this either. How long have they been investigating this?

          • April 21, 2015 at 4:35 pm
            Agent says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 73
            Thumb down 37

            You know what Reality, you Progressive trolls were arrogantly saying that Conservatives were all wrong on Obamacare for 4 straight years when we predicted the disaster that it was and is, and how has that all worked out? You weren’t willing to look at it because your savior said 39 times on tape that if you like your plan, you can keep it and the average family would save $2,500 on premiums. Then, the brilliant MIT professor admitted it was a lie and the folks were deliberately deceived to get it through. Progressives are the most blatant liars we have seen in our lifetime and you lapped it all up. Progressive U professors gave you a thorough brain washing. Now, I suppose you will say Hillary has been honest and forthright in her dealings just like we heard about Obama. By the way, writing books for posts do not go over very well on this forum. Rosenblatt learned his lesson on that, perhaps you should do the same.

          • April 21, 2015 at 4:42 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 42
            Thumb down 0

            LEAVE ME OUT OF THIS, AGENT.

            I STILL WRITE LONG POSTS IF I DEEM IT NECESSARY.

            SEE THIS ARTICLE, MY POST AT APRIL 17, 2015 AT 9:54 AM

            SEE THIS ARTICLE, MY POST AT APRIL 17, 2015 AT 12:42 PM

            STOP INCORRECTLY DRAGGING MY NAME INTO YOUR REPLIES.

          • April 21, 2015 at 5:13 pm
            Reality_Based_Community says:
            Hot debate. What do you think?
            Thumb up 84
            Thumb down 84

            Agent, you should really change your handle to “Artful Dodger,” given you penchant for rapidly changing subjects every time you are called on you wing-nutty assertions. This thread started with the estate tax. When your assertions were shown to be clearly fabricated, we moved on to government assistance to the poor, then to the IRS “scandal,” and now Obamacare. Keep tap dancing my man, perhaps somebody will throw you some change. For me, I prefer to reside in reality.

        • April 21, 2015 at 9:39 am
          Ron says:
          Hot debate. What do you think?
          Thumb up 58
          Thumb down 64

          Agent,

          If you were 1/10th as smart as you think you are, you would realize that I have not expressed any support for the IRS as an agency.

          To think eliminating hundreds of thousands of accounting jobs, including IRS agents, instantly will not adversely affect all accounting professionals is extremely naive. What happens to price (salary) when there is an increase in supply without a commensurate increase in demand? Let’s see if you paid any attention in your Econ 101 class.

          Yes, controllers make good money, but those who pay bills, make payroll and do P&L statements/Income Statements for the businesses do not. In addition, the reason controllers make good money is because they minimize the business’s tax burden and save them a lot of money. What happens when there is no way to alter a business’s tax burden with a flat tax?

    • April 21, 2015 at 5:24 pm
      Agent says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 54
      Thumb down 10

      KY, how about that Ron getting everything backwards once again? In a healthy economy, employers compete for services of qualified applicants and actually starting salaries with benefits go up. In the poor Obama economy, there aren’t many jobs out there. Sounds like an upside down world we are living in. Back in the day, companies went to college campuses to recruit bright students to fill positions. That doesn’t happen anymore because of how the economy has been handled for the past 6-7 years. Employers do not want to hire because of the oppressive taxes imposed and Obamacare which has imposed so many other taxes and problems providing benefits.

  • April 20, 2015 at 6:32 pm
    reality_based_community says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 222
    Thumb down 197

    So, Agent you can accuse others of being uninformed all you want. But you are downright *misinformed* Put down the Fox News [sic] and slowly back away!

    • April 21, 2015 at 10:12 am
      Agent says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 50
      Thumb down 2

      Reality, one thing you need to learn is that I don’t back down from Progressive trolls like you and Ron. Both of you have little support on this forum on this issue and most other issues.

      Re: Agri-Pulse Communications gave a compelling article of what happens to Family Farms with oppressive estate taxes.

      Consider the nature of farming and ranching. It is a capital intensive business that is relatively low margin with illiquid assets such as land and barns. A USDA 2010 economic survey revealed that 88% of all farm assets were illiquid. Moreover, most farms and ranches are family owned, and thus subject to estate taxes.

      Family farms and ranches are not only small businesses. Family farmers are also the caretakers of one of our nation’s most important natural resources – farmland, soil and the capacity to grow food, fiber and fuel. Excessive estate tax bills almost assure the break-up of multi-generational family farms, and the eventual loss of valuable farmland to development.

      The preferable policy options from American Farmland Trust’s point of view would be for estate taxes to exempt farms remaining in agricultural production or to exclude any development potential in appraising the land’s value if the land is intended to stay in agricultural production. That way, the estate would be taxes based only on the production value it holds – a more fair measure, and a much sounder conservation policy.

      Did this just sail over your head?

      • April 21, 2015 at 2:33 pm
        Reality_Based_Community says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 217
        Thumb down 158

        Agent, you apparently don’t back down in the fact of reality, facts, or evidence either. You have expended a lot of verbiage to completely ignore the question you are purporting to answer. Doesn’t matter if farm assets are liquid or illiquid or hydroponic or supersonic or catatonic or gin and tonic.

        If only 0.6% of farms estates pay any estate taxes, how is it that your assertion that the “typical” farm goes out of business due to the estate tax could possibly be true? Seems a simple enough question. Did it go over your head? Let me ask one more time, if only 0.6% of farm estates pay any estate taxes, how is it that the “typical” farm goes out of business due to the estate tax? Did the simple and straightforward question just “sail over your head?”

        • April 21, 2015 at 5:14 pm
          Reality_Based_Community says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 151
          Thumb down 135

          Agent’s response: *crickets* I assume everybody else on this thread knows that Agent just made that whole “the *typical* farm goes bankrupt because of the estate tax* thing up out of thin air.

        • April 21, 2015 at 5:26 pm
          Agent says:
          Hot debate. What do you think?
          Thumb up 60
          Thumb down 58

          I thought it would sail over your head and I was right once again. You are not into reasonable discourse, so I will disregard you just like I do with Ron.

          • April 21, 2015 at 5:38 pm
            Reality_Based_Community says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 141
            Thumb down 110

            Yet, you still haven’t answered the question: how can the typical farm go out of business due to the estate tax, if only 0.6% pay any estate tax at all?

            Seems like a simple enough question. Just answer the question. C’mom agent. Cat got your tongue?

          • April 21, 2015 at 5:42 pm
            Stan says:
            Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 88
            Thumb down 108

            Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

      • April 22, 2015 at 10:26 am
        KY jw says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 0
        Thumb down 1

        OMG, Agent!

        I found the article by Sara Wyant on Agri-Pulse regarding the damage to family farms. It was written before 2010 and referenced the BUSH changes to the estate tax. The previous exemption was $600K then $1M increasing to $3.4M and then reverting back to $1M. This article did not contemplate the $5.43M current exemption, which is tied to inflation and increases every year.

        • April 22, 2015 at 4:32 pm
          Agent says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 23
          Thumb down 3

          KY, I thought you had come around on taxes, but apparently not. The article pointed out how the oppressive estate taxes imperiled multi-generational family farms. Did you not get that?

          • April 22, 2015 at 9:17 pm
            Reality_Based_Community says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 93
            Thumb down 36

            I’d like to see the article too. Does *it* explain what agent can’t seem to explain? Namely, how does a tax that impacts only 0.6% of farms somehow imperil the family farm? How does the “typical” farm go out of business due to such a tax?

          • April 23, 2015 at 9:57 am
            KY jw says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 10
            Thumb down 1

            Actually, the article stated a permanent solution was necessary. In fact, it appeared to support a lower tax with a higher exemption. Which is EXACTLY what the new law does.

            This is the article I read:
            http://www.agri-pulse.com/uploaded/0410082.pdf

            This article also was written before the new tax law and references the 55% tax that Bush signed:
            http://www.agri-pulse.com/Estate-Tax-Increase-Jeopardizes-Future-Of-Family-Farms-Scholl-1252012.asp

            This March 2015 article provides the data that 98% of estate taxpayers are in the top 10% of income earners and “only 0.1 percent of deaths triggered the estate tax in 2013.” The exemption was $5.25M in 2013. It’s $5.43M now.
            http://www.agri-pulse.com/Death-tax-can-kill-a-farm-or-ranch-House-panel-told-03182015.asp

            Agent, I don’t know what you mean by “come around on taxes.” I’ve always thought a flat tax would be beneficial. However, until that time, I don’t have a problem with the estate tax.

          • April 23, 2015 at 11:11 am
            Agent says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 44
            Thumb down 6

            So for the record KY, you are in favor of double taxation on businesses and farms, correct? You must be in the 60% group that pays 2% of the taxes in this country.

          • April 23, 2015 at 11:14 am
            Ron says:
            Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 9
            Thumb down 35

            Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

          • April 23, 2015 at 1:47 pm
            KY jw says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            Until we have a flat tax, I’m all for taxing estates. If you think that’s double taxing, I won’t convince you otherwise, Agent.

            I’m not in the “60% group that pays 2% of the taxes in this country”. Not even close. My husband and I also donate 10% of our income to charity.

    • April 22, 2015 at 2:58 pm
      Agent says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 221
      Thumb down 107

      reality, I apologize on the remark about the IRS Commissioner visiting the White House around 100 times. Actually, Douglas Shulman visited the White House 157 times during the midst of the targeting scandal, email scandal and testified in front of Congress. It is on tape, by the way. One possible reason he gave was the Easter Egg roll so I will deduct one from the total of visits. Since you are wrong on that, it automatically makes you wrong on every other accusation you made. You and Ron are dufuses of the first magnitude.

      • April 22, 2015 at 9:32 pm
        Reality_Based_Community says:
        Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 77
        Thumb down 129

        Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

  • April 21, 2015 at 3:37 pm
    agent2 says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 47
    Thumb down 0

    forget the farm. What about small businesses? assets worth 5.4M taxed at 40%. How are they supposed to come up with that kind of money when $ is tied up in buildings and equipment? Govmnt just takes and spends too much. period. My home state estate tax starts at just 675k on top of federal.

    • April 21, 2015 at 4:24 pm
      Ron says:
      Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 71
      Thumb down 98

      Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

      • April 21, 2015 at 4:56 pm
        Agent says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 80
        Thumb down 2

        Ron, if you go on the Fair Tax, it would be on a Consumption tax of 23% for all goods and services and you wouldn’t have to worry about an income tax and the IRS would not exist. Of course, there are some breaks for the low wage earners like you and you would still get some exemptions.

        • April 21, 2015 at 5:42 pm
          Reality_Based_Community says:
          Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 212
          Thumb down 232

          Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

          • April 22, 2015 at 3:03 pm
            Agent says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 68
            Thumb down 0

            Just think Reality, you and Ron would not have to pay Income Tax, try to figure out deductions, hire a CPA to do your taxes, pay your Obamacare taxes etc. Most working Americans total taxes would go down. I know mine would.

          • April 22, 2015 at 9:42 pm
            Reality_Based_Community says:
            Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 98
            Thumb down 119

            Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

          • April 23, 2015 at 7:49 am
            Ron says:
            Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 95
            Thumb down 111

            Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

        • April 22, 2015 at 7:57 am
          Ron says:
          Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 64
          Thumb down 104

          Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    • April 21, 2015 at 5:18 pm
      Reality_Based_Community says:
      Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 168
      Thumb down 192

      Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

      • April 23, 2015 at 10:33 am
        agent2 says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 55
        Thumb down 1

        I’m complaining about double taxing. You or nobody else has claim on it because I die. BTW my estate isn’t worth 5.4M.

        Ron agrees with me about overspending but his and your outrage is about not taxing estates, not waste, fraud, abuse of power. You have it backwards. we shouldn’t be looking at taking more when we spend too much. Not just too much…..we spend obscene, disgustingly irresponsible amounts. One day the laws of economics will force a disastrous reality upon us caused by our government and it’s loyal supporters.

        When that happens you will need guns not money.

        • April 23, 2015 at 10:43 am
          Agent says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 77
          Thumb down 1

          Good one agent2. One thing is for sure, a Progressive has never seen a tax they don’t like if it doesn’t apply to them personally. Most of them are in the bottom 60% which pays 2% of the taxes so by all means, let’s make the top 20% pay almost all the taxes. This is commonly called “Redistribution of Wealth” which their President is famous for. After all, we know from him that “We didn’t build that or “We didn’t do that”. Therefore, we, the government are “entitled” to double tax when we see fit.

          • April 23, 2015 at 11:12 am
            Ron says:
            Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 23
            Thumb down 54

            Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

        • April 23, 2015 at 10:52 am
          Ron says:
          Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 41
          Thumb down 74

          Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

          • April 23, 2015 at 12:48 pm
            Agent says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 75
            Thumb down 1

            If you haven’t noticed it yet Ron, several of your colleagues have already endorsed the Flat Tax as a better and more fair system of taxation than your favored Progressive Tax Code which allows you to pay no Federal Income tax despite what you have bragged about in taking a record salary. We are the taxpayers and you are a part of the tax takers. Are you willing to pay your “fair share”, even if it is only a 5% rate?

          • April 23, 2015 at 1:02 pm
            Ron says:
            Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 43

            Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

          • April 23, 2015 at 2:45 pm
            Agent says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 79
            Thumb down 1

            So Ron, I take it you are for the government running half a trillion deficit each year due to wasteful spending. How about cutting spending by that half trillion and putting in a fair or flat tax so that a small percent of the population is not paying the lion’s share of taxes. A balanced budget would do a lot more for the economy by creating jobs, taxpayers and everyone would have a lower rate. Is that too much for your limited understanding?

          • April 23, 2015 at 3:55 pm
            Ron says:
            Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 21
            Thumb down 61

            Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    • April 21, 2015 at 5:25 pm
      Reality_Based_Community says:
      Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 195
      Thumb down 247

      Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

      • April 23, 2015 at 4:27 pm
        Agent says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 80
        Thumb down 1

        Hey Ron, did you miss the part about the US having the highest corporate rate in the world? Did you miss all the revelations about companies moving operations overseas to avoid the highest tax rate in the world and the ever present EPA regulations? Would companies consider moving business overseas if we had a more fair system of taxation and regulation? By the way, people demanding $15 per hour to flip a burger is another issue, but still important.

    • April 21, 2015 at 5:44 pm
      Stan says:
      Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 47
      Thumb down 152

      Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

  • April 29, 2015 at 1:42 pm
    Adjust This! says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 12
    Thumb down 0

    The hypocrisy of this administration is everywhere. If they truly had a conviction that inherited money should be taxed as they say, then why not tax all of it? How come only monies above $5.4M should be taxed? A dollar is a dollar and if it should be taxed when inherited then why a threshold? Obviously, as we all know, Obama hates the wealthy, hates any person or business that has, through hard work and ingenuity, become successful or any success of any sort that cannot be attributed to the government (which is basically all of them). This is nothing more than another attack on the creation of wealth which Obama has such a personal grudge about.

    • May 1, 2015 at 11:14 am
      Agent says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 15
      Thumb down 0

      Believe me Adjust This, if Obama could tax all of it, he would. He believes that a person should only make enough to live on and if there is a nest egg, it should be taxed.

      The Socialist in Chief famously said, at some point you have made enough. I think that goes against the Capitalistic system that anyone can make a fortune if they have the brains, drive and opportunity to do so.

  • April 29, 2015 at 2:04 pm
    Adjust This! says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 20
    Thumb down 0

    What seems lost in all this conversation is the fact that in every wealthy family/company someone along the line had to take the risk, come up with the idea, work hard, market, sell and efficiently produce to make a profit. Obama and the other communists talk about wealth like it was just dumb luck instructed by racism. True, most of these who inherit the wealth had nothing to do with that first courageous individual, but ask yourself; if you created a company and put your life into it to make it successful, are you OK with the government taking 40% of that from your grandchildren? Personally, I am not.

    • April 29, 2015 at 4:11 pm
      FFA says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 17
      Thumb down 0

      We are just ordinary average guys. Obama don’t give a crap about us.

      • April 29, 2015 at 6:02 pm
        Agent says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 20
        Thumb down 0

        FFA, more proof that the Obama economy is in the tank with his Socialist policies, heavy taxation and regulation.

        The economic figures just released shows a growth rate of 2/10ths of one percent. I didn’t use .2% because some on the left would think it was 2%. The economy struggles along at 1.5-2% annually and they think that is good. Job creation is just as bad with all their Socialist schemes and the Entitlement generation with no incentive to work and be productive.

        • May 1, 2015 at 5:46 pm
          FFA says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 9
          Thumb down 0

          Took a call about an hour ago. One of my former HH was cancelling as they moved down to TX.

          • May 4, 2015 at 5:40 pm
            Agent says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 14
            Thumb down 0

            Sorry FFA. It is true that people have been moving from the north Blue States to Texas for obvious reasons. There is just more opportunities, the cost of living is better and no state income tax. Add those in with the better climate and people are going where it is just a better situation all around.

        • May 5, 2015 at 2:53 pm
          Agent says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 14
          Thumb down 0

          I might also add we had a record trade deficit in April of $50 Billion. And Obama wants to negotiate a trade deal that he wants no one to know about. I am sure the deficit would be $75 billion per month on the new deal. Foreign countries want to import to us, but won’t let our goods into their country. Japan and China are the worst offenders.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*