unofan
Well-known member
I'm piecing together an argument as to why a minimalist estate tax is good,while a punitive one is bad.
The existing system with a 5 million dollar exemption (10 if married) is punitive? Really?
I'm piecing together an argument as to why a minimalist estate tax is good,while a punitive one is bad.
Do you really not understand the fallacy in that argument?
How sore you getting from beating that drum over and over again???![]()
The line was drawn by Democrats at 200-250. Somewhere in there.
Obama drew that exact line in 2008. 200k for single, 250k for married.
The existing system with a 5 million dollar exemption (10 if married) is punitive? Really?
I said that? Please don't put words on my keyboard.
400 for married, else why get married?
He specifically said 250k for marriage. Democrats don't want families. They want children to be wards of the state (Hill-Dawg has mentioned this through one of her "community" arguments), and try to sell it to us by feeling sorry for those that can't get any. Heck, look at Kepler's tax rate proposal of everyone being treated as single.
I said that? Please don't put words on my keyboard.
Correct. Democrats don't want families. That's why they were for Gay Marriage.
Is it biologically possible for two biological males to create a child? Is it biologically possible for two biological females to create a child? Take adoption out of the picture, because that's not actually them creating a child.
I rest my case.
Obama drew that exact line in 2008. 200k for single, 250k for married.
Is the existing one punitive to you?
That does not appear to treat spouses as equal earners with equal pay for equal work rights.
That does not appear to treat spouses as equal earners with equal pay for equal work rights.
I'd be fine with 150 for single and 250 for married. 250 is a good number in my mind.