Thursday, April 14, 2005

Death of the Death Tax?

Earlier today, the House of Representatives voted, by a substantial margin, to repeal the estate tax permanantly (the 2001 tax cut temporarily repealed until it sunsets in 2010).

Hopefully the Senate will follow the House's lead, but this is not likely (thanks Arlen Specter and John McCain). What will probably happen is the tax rate will be lowered to 15%, which is not a bad deal, but we still could do better.

Many libs say it makes no sense to cut taxes any further, because we're running huge deficits right now. But Ronald Reagan said it best in his first televised speech as President in 1981:

There were always those who told us that taxes couldn’t be cut until spending was reduced. Well, you know we can lecture our children about extravagance until we run out of voice and breath. Or we can cut their extravagance by simply reducing their allowance...


The answer to a government that's too big is to stop feeding its growth. Government spending has been growing faster than the economy itself. The massive national debt which we accumulated is the result of the government's high spending diet. Well, it's time to change the diet and to change it in the right way.


That's right. Cutting taxes "starves the beast" and gives the government less of our money to play with. Simple as that.

The fact of the matter is, the creation of wealth should only be taxed once. The super-rich manage to avoid paying this tax anyway, because of people like Stephen Leonard who will be paid to find loopholes in the code.

I think the code should be simplified, once and for all, with a national sales tax. And if that puts Stephen out of a job, so be it. He will still be a cheap asshole either way you look at it.

Happy April 15th everyone.

11 comments:

Anonymous said...

"those of you who think you know everything are annoying to those of us who do"

One might infer that a Congressional internship has taught nothing about politics. The tax law lobby is far too strong to allow total elimination. To say nothing of the fact that, while it may make sense to you, this is just another politically exploitable, populist issue. You're just on the "wrong side" of it.

And before we deify R.W. Reagan, remember: despite the quoted rhetoric (and all of the strong character traits he possessed), he sometimes had difficulty telling people "No." He usually had somebody else do it. To wit, look no further than how his kids turned out...and look at how your parents' kids turned out.

tim said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
tim said...

Once again, who's this queer?

Anonymous said...

typical response from someone who has read nothing, has worked nowhere, and will live off his parents until the money or self-insulation runs out.

those are lofty goals, bud.

"You can afford to be mighty proud of yourself" - Barney Fife

Patrick said...

First of all, none of us here watch "The Office," except Ryan.

Second, while I don't know everything, I DO know that a good president must do three things while in office: 1)cut taxes, 2)cut taxes, and 3)cut taxes.

Third, I'm trying to figure out where this "far too strong tax law lobby" was when Reagan easily overhauled the code with bi-
partisan support in 1986, closing virtually all loopholes, and establishing the two, simple 15% and 28% income brackets. It may well have been a populist issue, but it also worked.

My point is Congress can just as easily simplify things again, despite what Mr. "Brent," who continues to choose not to reveal his true identity, would have us believe.

tim said...

Hey, "your friend", too bad I am going to be your doctor one day. So, your right I am not very smart and have never read anything. So, as Michael Hooper would say, "He's queer"!

Anonymous said...

Hey "tim",
first of all, the contraction for "you are" is "you're" - try this - "you're right" instead of "your right I am not very..." I bet I know one thing that you didn't read.

And, YOUR immature response "I'm going to be your doctor one day" only confirms that you've read a few texbooks. Take it from me, there (see? not "their" or "they're") are some REAL LIVE dumbasses who have "M.D." after their (see? not "there" or "they're") names...going to school for eight years and learning anatomy is not a free ticket to Mensa or The Hoover Institute. If you'd like, I'll pull some names out of your beloved Savannah phone book that have filed for bankruptcy, been divorced numerous times, lost several malpractice suits, and sold their (see? not "there" or "they're") practice to the hospital or Phycor for pennies. Look under "Physicians & Surgeons".

You sad bastard, I bet everybody says what a one-dimensional, insecure clod you are behind your back and you're (see? not "your") TOO STUPID to see it.

Once again, YOUR reply, which never addresses my comments about work experience and daddy's money, fails in its attempt to refute lack of intellect.

With every post, you make my case for me.

tim said...

Here's my case buddy. You hide behind pseudonyms and an internet blog to make your points. How about you get from behind the computer to make your points if they are so valid. You are posting on a blog set up by a few friends as a joke. Your acting like this is Time magazine.

Patrick said...

"Hey I'm a huge loser, and I enjoy going on other people's blogs that I personally know but hide behind fake names because I'm scared they'll actually figure out who I am." - Barney Fife

Actually, Barney Fife never said this, but I did.

It's people like "your friend" who fail to realize that this country is run by "C" students, literally. The most important people in the world don't have the time or need to get out a dictionary or thesaurus to confirm that the way they're spelling a particular contraction is correct; they have more important things to worry about.

My daddy came from nothing, made straight C's through high school, went to Armstrong only because he could play baseball, and couldn't give two shits how he spells "their", but guess what, he worked his ass off and we live in the Landings now. So eat it.

All depends on your definition of the word "smart".

Maybe we don't spell everything correctly, and maybe the last full book I read was "The Babysitter" by R.L. Stine in 5th grade, but at least we don't hide behind fake names.

I'm John Patrick Holland, Jr. Who the hell are you?

Anonymous said...

I visit your blog from time to time and enjoy it immensely...a few thoughts for "your friend" ...
1) "texbooks" is spelled incorrectly (it's "textbooks")
2) bankruptcy, divorce and lawsuits are not confined to the medical profession. Look in your phone book under "A-Z"
3) since you won't disclose your identity, perhaps you'll disclose your credentials...who are you other than "spelling bee champ"? (you obviously got turned down by med. school)
4) you've got way too much free time on your hands!

Pinkie said...

C's get degrees.