Thursday, September 02, 2010

It's Not Your Money!

Nope, your father might have earned it. You yourself might have earned it. You dutifully paid taxes on it...exorbitant taxes as your success in life increased. Yet, when it comes to the convolutions of the mind of the true liberal, it really isn't your property when they determine a greater need. They only let you have it temporarily and when you pass on they claim it rather than your children. The moral of the story is don't be successful.

Return the Estate Tax Because We Want It

It would be hard to make that sort of opinion piece up as a satire. It is so outrageous that it defies fiction. It is real and they are deadly serious. I've got to think, however, that the editorial staff of the Wall Street Journal had be be chuckling softly to themselves as they congratulated each other on their balance in reporting. Simply letting the lefties have the podium does the job of making the argument quite nicely.

We both believe that the estate tax should be a component of any federal tax system. Our government is always going to collect and rely on tax revenues to pay for the activities that our citizens want and need government to perform. A key criterion in choosing taxes is to have the least negative impact on economic activity. The estate tax, in our opinion, meets that test.


You are outnumbered. The "citizens want and need government" therefore government will take your money. They benevolently desire "the least negative impact on economic activity" so since you are dead, they feel comfortable that you won't be generating much of that. All of that accrued capital just eats away at their communistic little livers.

An estate tax can provide revenue—with little, if any, adverse supply-side economic impact—to fund deficit reduction, additional public investment or added assistance to those affected by the economic crisis. Used for public investment that has a rapid spend out, or applied to assistance for economically displaced citizens, the net effect will be to increase demand.



I love that! "...added assistance to those affected by economic crisis" and "economically displaced citizens"! Lemme see now, if dad was going to leave me and mom a $100 million dollars and I've just been hijacked for half of that am I now "economically displaced"? Double-talk!

Can you stand more? This may top the foolishness:

We also share the view that the estate tax is grounded in powerful philosophical underpinnings. Our nation views itself as a meritocracy and a land of opportunity and we have a proud legacy of upward mobility. An estate tax helps us promote this legacy, by avoiding the accumulation of inherited economic—and political—power that is antithetical to this historical vision of our society and to the vitality and dynamism that has contributed so much to our success.


Don't you feel good about that? Opportunity and meritocracy and upward mobility are enhanced by generational thievery of your property so that wealth can never be accumulated and you can never have the security of knowing that your personal assets are immune to confiscation. Vitality and dynamism contributes so much to the success precisely because we can do well and leave our children and heirs better off than we were.

There might be a positive here. What I see is that children would be motivated to prolong the lives of their parents so as to delay the thievery. I'm thinking that with enough money you could get the old man wired up to some medical machinery that could keep the tax man from the door for a couple of hundred years.

4 comments:

wilko said...

Medical machinery? That should fit perfectly with Obamacare.
I can't wait until November...

Ralph said...

Raz is on to something. This could be a great option for those of us who are north of age 60 and are blessed with kids. I’d like to sign up for an extra 75 years, since I don’t expect to need the full 200 year allocation. But is such a life-extending machine do-able? Hard to say, although they once had doubts about sending pictures through the air with television.

Let’s consider possibilities. Suppose a highly regarded Chicago-based firm named BHO Industries develops a MedMachine that can indefinitely extend life and eliminate all pain. Sounds too good to be true. And one would not expect the feds to promote a product that would cost the Treasury millions in tax receipts, but with Count Rahm and Dame Valerie on board it should be okay. Yet questions remain, especially when it turns out that BHO Industries never actually manufactured anything, and their engineers earned degrees in drama and sociology. What if the unproven MedMachine fails and I don’t receive all those extra years of pain-free living? Would the secretive manufacturer or the government-owned insurance company be liable for their defective product or false advertising? General Eric doesn’t think so, and sees no need for concern.

I may delay signing up for the MedMachine after all. I know that is a risk, but I have my doubts. And I want to avoid fines from ObamaCare’s Family Registration Directorate or the Ministry of Euthanasia. Best to wait until after President Palin takes office in 2013.

Ed Rasimus said...

The "years of living" are of maintained heartbeat and respiration. That technology exists today. They aren't years of active living, normal activity or even brain waves.

immagikman said...

The basic concept they just cannot grasp is that the MONEY does not belong to THEM, the Government or any other entity, it is your property and taking it is thievery plain and simple.