Wednesday, July 27, 2005

Tell Your Senators to Keep the Estate Tax!

Do you think the US doesn't need 30 billion dollars in tax revenue per year?

Do you think Paris Hilton deserves to be rich more than someone who works 50 hours per week, just because of her last name?

Did you know that the Estate Tax (AKA Death Tax to Republicans) only affects estates worth over 1.5 million dollars?

Did you know that the Estate Tax never exceeds 50% no matter how rich someone is?

Did you know that the Estate Tax only affects approximately 2% percent of the entire population, but this small percentage accounts for over 45% of the wealth in this country?

Did you know that 8 of the 15 richest people in this country inherited all of their wealth, and never worked a day in their life for it?

Did you know that in 1982 the wealthiest 400 individuals in the "Forbes 400" owned $92 billion? By 2000 their wealth increased to over $1.2 trillion.

Did you know that Bill Gates alone has as much wealth as the bottom 40% of all U.S. households? (He is one of the few who actually worked for it)

Did you know that you will never be this rich and that you personally will never have to pay an Estate Tax?

Would you whine and complain if someone handed you a free check worth over $750,000?

Did you know that because of this country's lax trade policies, its defeat of European Communism, its lenient tax laws, and its welfare system which protects rich people from hordes of poor people roaming the streets looking for their next victim, that rich people in this country get richer every year, and are only allowed to do so because they live in this country to begin with?

Don't you think it's about time they show a little gratitude and realize they owe their success to the United States of America and the American workers?

If so, click this link below and tell your Senators to keep the Estate Tax in place!



http://www.usalone.com/estatetax.htm

The repeal has already passed in the House of Representatives!

21 comments:

Nölff said...

I told him.
I'm not a big fan of Reganomics.
Damn lobbyists.

NewsBlog 5000 said...

I'm pretty sure that this estate tax thing guarantees that small buisnesses close, family farms are lost and we all go to hell, so I have to be against it.

Toad734 said...

RE 5000

I dont see how?

If a business is incorporated, which any one can do, then the business can keep going as a separate entity.

As far as farms go, the only farms that are worth over 1.5 million are the ones that are owned by ADM, even if they are owned by a family you can incorporate it as I said above.

We have had an estate tax for as long as I remember, I still see small business and I still see farms.

This is personal wealth we are talking about here.

Sandi said...

I'm with you Toad.

KentuckyShade said...

gotta disagree with you toad. i think the estate tax is just a money grab by the gov. and I'm not so sure that giving them more money is gong to solve their budget problems.

Toad734 said...

RE: Kentucky

Of course it's a money grab, what do you think taxes are? Without money grabs like this we would never be able to fund wars like Iraq. Hmmm...

Well less money is not going to solve the budget problems either and as I always say if you can't tax dead rich people who can you tax?

Besides I am not talking about more taxes, I am talking about keeping the taxes the way they are. This is a tax that is already in place and as you can see Paris Hilton, the Walton family the Kerry / Heinz family, and the heirs of the Mars fortune are not hurting. If these people were all on food stamps I would agree with you.

Besides we will need all that money for food stamps and unemployment since CAFTA just passed through the House.

BRUISER said...

Punish the CAFTA 15

Enough. Enough. Enough. If we ever want to make politicians take us seriously when it comes to important laws touching the lives of workers, we must punish the 15 so-called Democrats who voted for the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA)--and punish them hard.

Not a single one of those cowardly 15 should receive a dime more of labor money. Not a single phone call should be made on their behalf. No labor endorsment should grace their re-election literature. They must pay.

Not just on behalf of American workers. But, on behalf of the millions of workers who live in Central America for whom this is a bad deal, too. If we're going to talk about global solidarity, this is where we can practice it. If we're going to send letters to the Democratic Party and talk tough, we have to follow through.

So, here is the roll-call of the 15 so-called Democrats, with their office telephone numbers. Print this list out and send it to everybody on your lists:

Melissa Bean, Illinois (8th District): 202-225-3711

Jim Cooper, Tennessee (5th District): 202-225-4311

Norm Dicks, Washington (6th District): 202-225-5916

Henry Cuellar, Texas (28th District): 202-225-1640

Ruben Hinojosa, Texas (15th District): (202) 225-2531

William Jefferson, Louisiana (2nd District): (202) 225-6636

Jim Matheson, Utah (2nd District): (202) 225-3011

Gregory Meeks, New York (6th District): (202) 225-3011

Dennis Moore, Kansas (3rd District): (202) 225-2865

Jim Moran, Virginia (8th District): (202) 225-4376

Solomon Ortiz, Texas (27th District): 202-225-7742

Ike Skelton, Missouri (4th District): 202-225-2876

Vic Snyder, Arkansas (2nd District): 202-225-2506

John Tanner, Tennessee (8th District): (202) 225-4714

Edolphus Towns, New York (10th District: (202) 225-5936

So, here's how to make it real:

1. Today, on the last day of the AFL-CIO convention, delegates should demand that a new resolution pass which states simply (with all the obvious "whereas" stuff): Resolved, no labor resources, financial or human, shall be expended on behalf of the 15 Democrats who voted for CAFTA.

2. Every CLC and State Federation should, at their very next meeting, pass a similar resolution, send the text to the pathetic so-called Democrat and take out an ad in the local newspaper which includes the text of the resolution and the reasoning behind it.

3. Look for people who stand up for workers. Let's find primary opponents to run against every one of the 15 so-called Democrats--knock off just one or two and watch the party tremble...you want to play in politics, it's time to get rough and bloody some noses.

Fitch said...

Toad. I don't care how little of a pittance I wind up leaving when I die. I see no reason why the government should take ownership of a significant chunk of someone's estate when they die. On what basis does the government lay claim to it. Why should I support state sanctioned thievery just because it only affect really rich people. I don't see the logic involved here. So what if it won't apply to me. It's not the government's money. They should keep their greedy hands off of it. I oppose the "estate" tax.

Toad734 said...

RE: Fitch

It's no more their money than the money from my pay check is their money, but they still take that.

And by the way, the 100 million that of that tax money which goes to logging companies, is not the logging companies money, the 800 billion in agriculture subsidies doesn't belong to them, the subsidies they give to rich oil companies don't belong to them but they still get it. What's the difference?

Fitch said...

You make a good point. The fact is, I am against all taxes, including income tax. I am also against subsidies. If a business can't thrive on its own... Tough! That's capitalism.

Craig said...

Does Paris Hilton deserve to be rich because of her last name?

Probably not.

Do her parents deserve to have the money they earned confisgated by the government at the time of thier deaths, rather than being able to leave it to whomever they wanted?

Definitely not.

I bet the biggest single winner in the repeal of the estate tax is the non-profit 'charity' sector.

Of course all of you class warfare jerks who get pissed because someone else might have something you don't would never look that far into it...

You're all stuck in knee-jerk reaction mode.

Toad734 said...

No and that's another reason to keep the Estate Tax, how many charitable organizations, churches and orphanages included, will lose their main source of donations?

All I want is for that money to be used for something other than continuing a legacy of spoiled brats who don't work or contribute to society.

If all this money was tied up into the economy that would be one thing but to let it sit in the bank is ridiculous. The only reason these people got rich in the first place is because they live in American and they never paid their fair share of taxes when they earned it. They owe us.

Cole said...

It doesn't matter how much you don't like Paris Hilton.

It doesn't matter how much money rich people have or how much richer they're getting, as long as the are doing so legally.

It doesn't matter if people become rich through inheritance and never work.

It's still THEIR MONEY. Not the government's.

You have not listed any persuasive warrants for the estate tax, in my opinion. All you've said is "Tax them because they have a lot of money that they either didn't work for or don't deserve anyway, and they can afford to be taxed besides."

Those are not good arguments.

Toad734 said...

I think they are great arguments considering the state of our budget. So I guess you have no problem with people on welfare not working and getting free money as well right?

And it isn't their money, it was their parents money, who may or may not have earned it legally.

Cole said...

People who inherit or earn money through free enterprise are receiving private money. Private money is none of our business, as long as it's gained legally. If you want to argue and prove that people are getting money illegally, that's completely different from arguing that rich people shouldn't have all their money because they're rich and others need it. That's no argument at all.

I definitely believe people who receive welfare should be placed under public scrutiny, because their money is public money. Public money is our business.

Toad734 said...

But where is the public money we give to the poor supposed to come from if we can't tax rich people and corporate tax burdens have dropped 55% since 1940? The annual tax burden on the top 1% of income earners in this country has decreased by over $46,000 since the late 70s while the tax burden for the middle class has risen over $300 per person.

It doesn't make much since to tax the poor whose only income is our tax money to begin with.

It's not like I am saying add more taxes, I am just saying lets keep it how it has been for years. Everybody has to pay their fair share.

I would say we either have to keep the estate tax or quit starting expensive wars. How else are we going to balance the budget, besides not voting Republican?

Cole said...

Where is public money supposed to come from, you ask? From donations and charitiy and corporate giving, of course. That's legal and honorable. The government taking my money away from me and saying "I can spend it better than you" is morally reprehensible.

For that reason, I say let's stop voting Republican and vote Libertarian.

Toad734 said...

So you can rely on Corporations and Charities during any type of economy?

And yes the government is full of waste and fat but look at what people spend their money on; $6000 shower curtains, 2 million dollar birthday parties and spinning rims. It makes paying $100 for a toilet seat look pretty reasonable.

I like where you are going with the Libertarian thing, it's a good start but I would recommend reading their platform a little more carefully; it sounds great for an individual but a government of our size could never sustain itself or the people in a libertarian society.

TheLoneAmigo said...

Jeez, I cannot believe the arguments against this tax. What the heck are you thinking?

City Troll said...

I love when fools speak or express their point of view, it's always such good entertainment.

keep posting toad.

Kevin said...

Thanks for the heads up. I emailed both my Senators and let them know that I favor a repeal of the Estate Tax.

I would definitely like to see the government learn to live without an extra $30 billion per year. The less money they have, the less damage they can do.