@snarlcakes I’ve got this Sammy moron threatening to ban me now 🤣. A guy who said no to free money from twenty and stoll to get off word press lol. I can’t snarl. Be well bubba. May our paths cross at 3Up
Right back at you buddy. Stay well.
Don't worry. He's not going anywhere.
@bulk-vh Why not? He told a poster today that "with any luck one of these thugs put one right between your eyes," and karma suggests that the poster "eats a bullet" with any luck.
This isn't the first time he's posted violent shit directed at another poster. No one else does this, and there should be consequences.
My fault. I left the word, "voluntarily" off the end of that sentence. See, you have the same power to ban another poster as me. Just hit the red triangle that says "Report" at the upper right corner of the offensive post, and the people with the real power will make the decision.
Go get him, Tiger.
.
But if the truly wealthy can still give it away at a rate benefitting them greater than the wealth tax at death, they will do that. The loopholes make NBA salary cap rules look like kindergarten math.Unless you are going to force the government to "true up" or payback excess taxes it previously took when wealth was higher.
Irrelevant for estate or really any excise tax, which can be tied to a particular taxable event.
I'm not really sure our financial problems can be fixed without massive economic expansion (AI, you're our only hope) and massive cultural change. We're creating the worst form of humanity now and we've been at it for a while. Something's going to give in the next 50 years. Should be interesting.
This (below) is a bombshell and could upend the Michigan race.
The Alaska controversy is likely hurting Peltola.
These two developments could keep the Senate red.
It looks like Israel trying to buy another Senate seat and could backfire. Rogers is still the underdog.
https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/2116965166860419560?a=9b0jTqMbuLQ7LmGvJfY&s=09
Are you a Muslim?
No. Are you gay?
Nope, not gay. I'd bang Haley Steven's on a short dry spell (bet you wouldn't @larsiu). I'm trying to figure out how dumb you are. Why do you give a sh#t if "the Jews" help a GOP non-Muslim senator win a seat? Isn't that a good thing for us non-Muslim conservatives? Also, wouldn't it mean "the Jews" are wasting their money doing things we like. Or is it always bad because "the Jews" did it?
🤢🤮 That voice
https://twitter.com/piersmorgan/status/2117231805661429817?a=8pC_2Jrx0eGE1rYZWhI&s=09
@dbmhoosier I see you're still falling for the globalists "it's the Jews" psyop. That makes me sad. Haley is beautiful and a boss b#tch. I love her and am thinking about changing my mind on abolishing the 19th. By the way you're on the side of David French and neocons. Congrats.
https://twitter.com/davidafrench/status/2116922234124014008?a=SB-b4cytxBoJNkMRjtc&s=46
Irrelevant for estate or really any excise tax, which can be tied to a particular taxable event.
The entire premise of that taxable event is based on paper wealth. Income is a matter of fact because it was cash.
But if the truly wealthy can still give it away at a rate benefitting them greater than the wealth tax at death, they will do that. The loopholes make NBA salary cap rules look like kindergarten math.Unless you are going to force the government to "true up" or payback excess taxes it previously took when wealth was higher.
Irrelevant for estate or really any excise tax, which can be tied to a particular taxable event.
I'm not really sure our financial problems can be fixed without massive economic expansion (AI, you're our only hope) and massive cultural change. We're creating the worst form of humanity now and we've been at it for a while. Something's going to give in the next 50 years. Should be interesting.
What you are proposing is enhanced Federal government control and influence, right? If most wealth transfers are taxable unless they go to non-profits (e.g., colleges and universities, research entities, welfare providers), you are really talking about removing the ability to gift wealth to causes you care about. Thus, the government would be reducing personal freedom and enhancing its own power, simultaneously. Are you okay with that? What if you get a Trump 2.0 or worse?
But if the truly wealthy can still give it away at a rate benefitting them greater than the wealth tax at death, they will do that. The loopholes make NBA salary cap rules look like kindergarten math.Unless you are going to force the government to "true up" or payback excess taxes it previously took when wealth was higher.
Irrelevant for estate or really any excise tax, which can be tied to a particular taxable event.
I'm not really sure our financial problems can be fixed without massive economic expansion (AI, you're our only hope) and massive cultural change. We're creating the worst form of humanity now and we've been at it for a while. Something's going to give in the next 50 years. Should be interesting.
What you are proposing is enhanced Federal government control and influence, right? If most wealth transfers are taxable unless they go to non-profits (e.g., colleges and universities, research entities, welfare providers), you are really talking about removing the ability to gift wealth to causes you care about. Thus, the government would be reducing personal freedom and enhancing its own power, simultaneously. Are you okay with that? What if you get a Trump 2.0 or worse?
No, more about any schemes that slowly bleed money to family/trusts, etc. while the wealthy person is still alive. I would assume there are smart people doing the math on this and developing plans to minimize all tax burden while living and dead. To be sure, I don't want more fed regulation unless it were to make it somewhat simpler.
AI is going to force even fewer people to pay taxes into the pot. That scares me. As far as charity is concerned. Yes. I think you should be able to give nearly freely to charity but then again these charities end being teh Clinton Foundation which is just a gigantic NGO with thousands of employees. Imagine the money get skimmed through that process.
@dbmhoosier I see you're still falling for the globalists "it's the Jews" psyop. That makes me sad. Haley is beautiful and a boss b#tch. I love her and am thinking about changing my mind on abolishing the 19th. By the way you're on the side of David French and neocons. Congrats.
https://twitter.com/davidafrench/status/2116922234124014008?a=SB-b4cytxBoJNkMRjtc&s=46
Where have you got her?
.
Irrelevant for estate or really any excise tax, which can be tied to a particular taxable event.
The entire premise of that taxable event is based on paper wealth. Income is a matter of fact because it was cash.
So what? Value at the time of death. Easy to understand and measure.
We're creating the worst form of humanity now and we've been at it for a while.
And we are crushing our best.
@snarlcakes I’ve got this Sammy moron threatening to ban me now 🤣. A guy who said no to free money from twenty and stoll to get off word press lol. I can’t snarl. Be well bubba. May our paths cross at 3Up
@larsiu I think they're going to have to tax AI agents and robots eventually. They need to stop taxing labor (at least at the lower to middle income levels). The problem with estate tax is it sounds good, but it only collects around 30 billion a year.
So what? Value at the time of death. Easy to understand and measure.
Because value is temporary and, in many cases, arbitrary for large estates. A significant portion of assets would be valued based on some accounting nerd, since they are illiquid. Value can change by billions in a short period. The government could also be detrimentally impacted by this. An estate could be transferred when Anthropic is private and not public, and the valuation differential is significant. Then it goes public and the estate avoids the tax.
Thinking this is black and white is reductionism at its finest. Nobody who advocates taxing wealth (whether alive or dead) has given this the proper thought it needs.
