Skip to main content

View Diary: Warren Buffett's latest op-ed will bring mutters of 'class traitor.' But he doesn't go far enough (117 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Hear, hear. (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Eric Nelson, countwebb, Aunt Pat, TFinSF

    I suggest:

    Over $2.5M = 10%
    Over $10M = 20%
    Over $25M = 30%
    Over $50M = 40%
    Over $100M = 50%

    The Class, Terror and Climate Wars are indivisible and the short-term outcome will affect the planet for centuries.

    by Words In Action on Mon Nov 26, 2012 at 06:33:27 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  In addition I want 90% on any income offshored or (5+ / 0-)

      income made from offshoring U.S. businesses! Current economic condition makes making money off these things almost treasonous. At the very least, unpatriotic.

    •  In fact, inheritance taxes were 50% all the (4+ / 0-)

      way down to the bottom of your list -- and even below that amount -- for many years.

      50% is the minimum for wealthy people, imho.  Leaving $1,000,000 to your heirs is enough.  

      Besides, there are all sorts of trusts and other schemes by which the taxes are avoided - always by the richest, of course.

      50%. Period.

      "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

      by YucatanMan on Mon Nov 26, 2012 at 08:35:06 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  How much should someone inherit just for being (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jmcb132oprn, tofumagoo

      born to rich parents? Why should they inherit anything? Heck, their parents already probably provide them with a great education, cultural enrichment, connections, etc.

      I'd start with 100% of everything over $1 million and then, perhaps, bargain down to:

      Over $1M = 50%
      Over $5M = 60%
      Over $20M = 70%
      Over $50M = 80%
      Over $100M = 90%

      •  Why should they inherit anything? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        tofumagoo

        We have assumed for may centuries (in Western culture) that there is some right to inherit.  But where would that right come from?  There are certainly some good reasons to allow some wealth to pass on.  The welfare of a surviving spouse or disabled child; the continuity of businesses which provide needed services, products and economic activity, are arguably good reasons.  Would $5 million in allowable inheritance cover all those concerns?  Perhaps there is another schema.  But at some point, there is no good reason to protect the larger inheritances.  Once we decide an amount to be protected, the rest should be taxed at 100%.    

        BTW the estate tax and the gift tax, as they currently exist, are a tax imposed on the transfer of property without consideration.  They are not a death tax or an inheritance tax.  

        •  Good points (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          tofumagoo

          But note:

          On firm continuity: the people who work for the firm should inherit the firm, not the idiot son or the crazy niece of the owner.

          On surviving spouse: estate taxes usually don't apply until both spouses have died.

          Disabled child: why should the disabled children of rich parents be treated better than the disabled children of the poor?

          On the other hand, being able to help your children does motivate people to work hard, so passing on some wealth has some valid social benefit. But I think $1 million should be a pretty good incentive.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site