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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Katelew who wrote (218478)	2/14/2007 4:25:51 PM
From: Proud_Infidel	Respond to of 281500

So you are in favor of the inheritance tax? Or taxes to support govt funded healthcare? These are not favored by republicans, and as such, the world is not nearly as black and white as you seem to believe.

To: Katelew who wrote (218478)	2/14/2007 4:41:29 PM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

By the way i am for an indexed inheritance tax much like it is in 2007 under the new law but i am not for its abolition--same law. I have no problem taxing dead folks. I gather you dont think anyone should tax your inheritance just my earnings. Tax the workers but not the rich folks who sit home, clip coupons and post on SI in the guise of eco gurus.

To: Katelew who wrote (218478)	2/15/2007 1:41:06 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

The AMT goes back to 1969 - way before Reagan. I would have liked the Republican Congress to kill the AMT. I'm guessing there were too many RINOS's to allow that. At any rate, I find it a hypocritical question for a liberal to ask - we know any move to kill the AMT would have been denounced as yet another "tax cut for the rich." Frankly I think every American who votes Democratic is voting against themselves. Including economically. Maybe minimum wage earners would be an exception - as long as the particular minimum wage earners job doesn't go away due to the raise.