america was built on the foundation of being tax free. we even threw a tea party over it back in the day. now however, people have houses taken from them, inheritances taxed so greatly they lose everything. i knew a farmer who died and left his land to his three sons. they had no money and nothing besides the land they worked on all their lives. the government came and told them the value of the land for inheritance tax. they were unable to pay it and lost everything. not every case is as big as this but it is important you realize this happens everyday. any working american is taxed, losing about 15-20% of what they make before they even are paid. we are a nation with a high poverty level while politicians and government officials live with all the luxeries. we need to realize this as a country. what does everyone else think?
2007-08-05
02:33:57
·
11 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Business & Finance
➔ Taxes
➔ United States
jefferson said "the government that governs best, governs least." Yes there is a need for some things, but we are paying for much more than a clean country and roads to get to work. in my opinion, there should be no b/s takes like inheritance, property, etc. but just enough to keep our great country alive without making politicians rich and the rich near untouchable. after hearing a few opinions i think most would agree, but i want to hear all your voices, not just a few americans but america as a whole and beautiful country. i love the land we live in but it is dire need of reform, and in more areas than just taxes.
2007-08-05
02:54:05 ·
update #1
i never said they taxed it 100%. i simply said they could not afford to keep the land their father left them, which they worked on all their lives. i know them personally, and while 2 are still struggling on after this happened 2 years ago, one, the youngest, couldn't live with it anymore. the world is not about money, but love and family above all else. if you can't see that, what do you have in your life?
2007-08-05
03:21:39 ·
update #2
as for history, "taxation without representation" is exactly what i am talking about. you speak for one group, but what of the rest of us? we certainly don't feel properly represented.
2007-08-05
03:24:31 ·
update #3
to answer even more questions and statements, the world census is not by far accurate but set at numbers which have to be approved. also, the level they judge poverty at is also wrong. a family must make at least 40,000 a year to support both parents and 2 children. that is bare minimum. poverty level is set at about 20,000 per family, or aprox. 10k for each parent. look at those numbers and tell me what the real poverty level is.
2007-08-05
03:30:52 ·
update #4
Most estates do not pay an estate tax, since the federal limit is currently $2,000,000. We didn't revolt because we wanted to be tax-free, we revolted because taxes were being passed left and right without any consultation of the persons being taxed. I do agree that the current tax system is not fair with all the tax loopholes, and gifts to favored donators, but right now it's all that we have to work within. If someone has a more fair way of taxing, please, let's hear it.
2007-08-05 10:23:26
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Where do you get the idea that "america was built on the foundation of being tax free" (SIC)?
Nothing could be further from the truth. Please go back and read up on your American history. The primary trigger for the American Revolution was over representation, not some wild-eyed idea that the colonists should not pay taxes. They were quite happy to pay their fair share, they just wanted some sort of say in how it all came together.
Taxation without representation is what the colonists were protesting against, NOT taxation per-se. Had old King George and Parliament listened to the colonists and allowed for a few MPs to represent their interests at Parliament it's highly likely that the American Revolution never would have happened. Heck, we might all still be Royal Subjects to this day, flying the Union Jack on our flagpoles putting "petrol" in our cars, singing "God Save the Queen" at football (soccer) and cricket matches, and swanning off to the pub after work for a few jars of good English Bitter if King George had used his head for something other than a crown rack.
Your story of the "farmer" doesn't add up. Sure, there have been a few small family farms that were sold off to pay inheritance taxes but the government does not just step in and assign a value and confiscate the property for non-payment. The property is sold -- it brings whatever price that the market dictates -- and the taxes are paid and whatever is left (usually well over half of the net estate value, BTW) is divided among the heirs. If this happened 2 years ago as you say, at least $1,000,000 was left untaxed as that was the Estate Tax exemption at the time. If it was divided 3 ways, each of them received at least $333,333.33 and paid no tax on that at all. If they've blown that all they have only themselves to blame. My net worth is approaching that level and I'm about ready to declare myself "set for life."
If you know of a better way than taxes to fund the services that government provides, I'm all ears. But tossing out rants full of half truths and outright misstatement of fact does nothing to validate your position and marginalizes your argument into oblivion.
2007-08-05 03:36:18
·
answer #2
·
answered by Bostonian In MO 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Taxes are redistribution of wealth and I agree that it is wrong for the government to take money by force from some to give to others.
To discuss taxes, you have to start with defining the proper purpose of government. Most people in this country will say that the government should help people in need, build roads, finance research, give money to disaster victims, pour money into the UN, whatever. As long as there are a majority of people (or strong special interest groups) that want the government to provides these services and donations, there will be taxation.
We all talk about how free we are here in the US - but we aren't. There is an economic freedom scale that I have seen and we are falling fast.
Most Americans have an entitlement mentality. They want the government to take care of them. The government produces nothing, so where will the government get money? Taxation.
2007-08-05 03:11:17
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I respectfully disagree with most of your thesis.
I believe that your basic premise is flawed. Per the Declaration of Independence, the USA was not built on the foundation of being tax free, but that a people being taxed and otherwise being put upon by a government deserved representation in that government.
Some kind of tax is necessary in any system of government. Otherwise, where does the government get money to provide for the common good of the country? The military, police, fire, and EMS need money to operate. We cannot very well hand that over to private industry. Infrastructure such as roads, ports, and airports are vital to the economy and emergency services. When we tried a "voluntary" system under the Articles of Confederation, one of the issues was that there was not enough money to sustain vital services.
As to the idea that we have a "high poverty level," the Census department puts the US poverty level at 12.6%. The World Bank indicates that just over 21% of the world population lives in poverty, some countries it's as high as 80%. While we do not have the lowest poverty levels, we are far better than most of the world.
Do politicians and government officials live in luxury? Well, they don't live in poverty for the most part, but they also have jobs. Being gainfully employed is the single biggest factor to whether one lives in poverty. Many politicians on the national scale also had money before they entered politics or earned most of their current net worth outside of their jobs (Kennedy, Bush, Pelosi, Edwards, Kerry, etc.). Many people outside of government have a high quality of life as well. Industry executives and professional athletes have levels of income orders of magnitude higher than even the President of the United States.
Now I do agree that a large percentage of our tax dollars are not spent wisely. We need to demand that government accounting be held to the same standards as corporate accounting. If they needed to follow the GAAP standards required of publicly traded companies, we would be able to see how our money was being spent and vote accordingly. We also need to stop allowing politicians and talking heads to separate us into the "left" and "right" camps and instead concentrate on our common goals.
2007-08-05 03:16:21
·
answer #4
·
answered by Rob B 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Well, for starters, your story about the three sons is totally incorrect. The government does NOT tax inheritance at a rate of 100%, plus a certain portion of the estate is tax exempt. They may have been forced to sell the land to cover the inheritance tax, but I guarantee you they each also walked away with a sizeable cash payment after they sold the land.
Taxation is a necessity in order for the government to run. Some of what the government spends seems rather useless, but it's all part of the game.
While it's currently popular to whine about our tax system, you'd be crying wildly if there were no taxes to support the infrastructure to which we have become accustomed.
2007-08-05 03:07:06
·
answer #5
·
answered by acermill 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Taxes suck. Taxes are arbitrary. We do need taxes for such things as roads and the military. Unfortunately, there is a lot of waste at the local, state , and federal level and people game the system to get out of paying their fair share. The government and taxes should be set to a minimum and interfere with our lives as little as possible. When I take someones money against their will it is called theft or robbery, when the government does it, it is called taxes. President Bush is an idiot he gave tax breaks to the ultra rich and spends money like a crack fiend.
2007-08-05 02:46:36
·
answer #6
·
answered by stephen t 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
America was NOT built on being tax free. Get your history straight. The motto was "No taxation without representation"
The Boston Tea Party was to protest the British tax on Tea that was established by the British Parliament at which the American colonies did not have representation
2007-08-05 03:08:42
·
answer #7
·
answered by Mark S 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
How else can you run the country? You got to have taxes. I do agreed that our tax system needs to be thrown out and everyone pays a head tax. No more exemptions, deductions or refunds. Plus you can do away with the IRS. I am for term limits on politicians, no more career ones like Ted Kennedy. Our representatives should not get any more pay raises.
2007-08-05 02:51:43
·
answer #8
·
answered by Gary 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
Taxes are wonderful! Without them I would not have a job!
2007-08-05 04:27:56
·
answer #9
·
answered by ? 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
They suck. Support politicans that are behind the FairTax.
2007-08-05 02:41:38
·
answer #10
·
answered by Concerned 2
·
0⤊
1⤋