"bpnjensen" wrote in message
...
On May 20, 5:22 pm, "Sid9" wrote:
"bpnjensen" wrote in message

...



On May 20, 4:04 pm, "Sid9" wrote:
"bpnjensen" wrote in message

...

On May 20, 3:17 pm, dave wrote:
ZNUYBV wrote:
On May 19, 11:30 am, DEFCON 88 wrote:
On May 19, 8:59 am, dave wrote: ∅baMa∅ Tse
Dung
wrote:
One of the many shallow statements that sound good-- if you
don't
stop
and think about it-- is that "at some point, you have made
enough
money."
. . . . . . . . . . . . .

Amassing wealth beyond your needs is immoral and Unamerican.
Nonsense. Restricting people's freedom to acquire as much wealth
as
they want (unless obtained through criminal activity) is immoral
and
Unamerican, and reeks of the typical jealousy of success
exhibited
by
the Communist liberal/"progressive" left.

Family dynasties are Unamerican.
You mean like the Kennedys?

The Kennedy's got their wealth honestly. The Kennedy's inherited
their wealth.

Inherited wealth is the worst kind. Restore the inheritance tax
back
to
Ronald Reagan era levels.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I won;r argue the basic point, although I have my reservations...but
assuming this is correct...

With one cautionary note -

When people are land-rich and money-poor (forest owners, ranchers,
farmers, wetland owners, other fundamentally responsible stewards),
a
large inheritance tax frequently forces the inheritor (who legally
has
no choice) to rapidly liquidate the good land to pay the tax bill -
sometimes farmland, sometimes natural habitat or even de facto
wilderness, and this turns it into subdivisons or other
nonproductive,
non-habitat land. This unintended consequence has been repeated
countless times, and some provision should be made to forestall this
problem.

.
.
Got any statistics for this claim?

This sounds like the "family farm" story.

Here is at least one website that mentions this effect. If I can, I
will look for others with more substantial details. It is not hard to
imagine this happening; as I mentioned family ranches here in Alameda
County and some sustainable timber lands have been lost to inheritance
tax.

http://www.klt.org/tax.htm

Bruce Jensen

.
.
These look like exemptions and benefits given to prevent what you claim
is
happening

Maybe - so what is wrong with preventing it from happening? That's my
whole point.

Look, I told you I am not going to make a big deal of this. You may
be right or wrong, but to me point this is irrelevant. I do not have
time to scour the internet and every other resource finding you
examples. All I want is a law protecting the land from ever falling
victim to this problem. If it never happens, it never happens, but at
least the law is there in case it does. End of story.

Bruce
..
..
It proves the "inheritance tax" which Republican characterized as the "death
tax" treated taxpayers in fair manner by providing large exemptions..

The heirs could just as well deed the land to the government for such
purposes as you suggest. But, that never happened or happened only rarely.

This tax goes back almost to the founding of our country.......until
recently when it was repealed by very clever Republicans protecting wealthy
estates...nest con job in recent history!