Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (700983)	9/9/2005 2:17:02 PM
From: HPilot	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 769670

A wealth transfer tax that affects a fraction of a percent of Americans? Huh? You mean almost everybody dies pennyless? Well maybe so, after taxes anyway.

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (700983)	9/9/2005 9:24:39 PM
From: Peter Dierks	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

"There is no morally defensible reason to retain the death tax." A wealth transfer tax that affects a fraction of a percent of Americans? I would think that morally it's on pretty solid ground when compared to taxes on INCOME, or SALES, or CAPITAL GAINS.... You are arguing based on the count of people, not the morals of impoundment of assets. Would it be ok it the government had a lottery in which every year after your twenty first birthday you had a cumulative 2% probability of having over half of your assets impounded for taxes? After all, only a few members of the population would be subject to it every year. Surely that would be ok with you? You never seem to answer the question. Even you would have to admit that this would be immoral. It would be just as immoral as a tax on cessation of respiration.