KaskadskyjKozak

A handful? You have apparently omitted the catholic church. no, I haven't.

uh,yeah, except there are thousands and thousands of pastors and only a handful of these cases a year.

You're ignoring my point. Maybe if I cite a liberal icon, you'll get it: Let me tell you how it will be; There's one for you, nineteen for me. 'Cause I’m the taxman, Yeah, I’m the taxman. Should five per cent appear too small, Be thankful I don't take it all. 'Cause I’m the taxman, Yeah, I’m the taxman. (if you drive a car, car;) - I’ll tax the street; (if you try to sit, sit;) - I’ll tax your seat; (if you get too cold, cold;) - I’ll tax the heat; (if you take a walk, walk;) - I'll tax your feet.

unless of course they inherited the capital somebody worked for that capital, and was taxed for it, whether it was passed down once, twice, or many times

I'm repeating several posts previous, but let me repeat that you are just plain WRONG on the double or triple taxation issue. If you are against such "double or triple taxaction, let's talk about simply eliminating the "step up" in basis. The vast majority if not nearly all of what is taxed under estate taxation laws has never been taxed. We are not talking about some poor working schmoe whose estate is now being taxed on his paycheck savings. In order to pay any estate tax at all, you must have an estate valued at over $2 million or $4 million for a married couple. Unless they are paid a lot more than you and me, this is not a tax on someone's wage income that has been put in the piggy bank, but it is a tax on their earnings from stock investment or real estate or other assets that have never been taxed. Seriously: the "double taxation" argument just doesn't hold up unless you assume that these people who earn 100's of thousands a year are idiots and don't invest well. Let's have a real discussion here and see how many succesful investors are interested in avoiding "double or triple taxation." (Note: by "successful investor" I mean anybody who has had substantial sums to invest - wealth - and competent counsel or inate skills in asset management.) cut the bullshit lawyer speak. That estate was built up through the efforts of someone who was taxed on his/her income and through real estate taxes. That person paid his dues *already*. When he/she dies and the estate goes to a family member - or whomever he gives the property in his will, the government is taxing again. It's bullshit. Of course all pinko commie statist assholes don't see it that way. Big government tries to justify spreading out taxation across the board for everything they can, purposely hiding beyond a false premise of "fairness" and playing class warfare.

I get taxed every year in a progressive tax system based on my income. My property is taxed every year for real estate taxes. After years of paying my taxes, I die. The government has no damn business taxing my estate, when I leave it to my family, no matter how big it is. you, comrade!

and now you've made him both hot and bothered...

Although the State gleans more from rich estates, and the rich may be required to divest a portion of the estate's portfolio to pay the tax, the loss of a few 10k - 100k, or the need to take on a mortgage to retain the family home/ranch/farm has a significantly greater impact upon the lower to middle-income, relatively. Haven't you learned not to bother Hot Carl with facts?

It's fundamentally wrong to double-, triple-, and quadruple tax. To all you statists that disagree:

Land lost would be offset by land gained - that is, land in a climate previously too cold to grow crops.

Do condoms count as boots? If you're gonna die, toss the condom man

If you're gonna die, die with your boots on.

Don't bring facts into the discussion, Jay. It's just not fair! Time for the Demo-Liberals to resume their mantra "tax cuts for the rich" to restore their sense of serenity and self-delusion.

Who is number 1?

you are what you eat

I'MNOTANUMBERI'MAFREEMAN

we tried that already in Florida

there was a slight Dem majority in the Senate when we got into Iraqifuckistan

8675309

go lick some more stamps, hippy

The weak minded are easily amused.

you'll never get it. it's not about how "great" the Republicrats are or aren't. the cuntry's run by 2 Oligarchies and those who cheer at the prospect of a slight shift in power as if it were some earthshattering revolution are utterly clueless f**ks who make GWB look like a genius.

And yet the liberals repeatedly deny there is a media bias.

There will be no wholesale tossing out of a "trainload" of Republicans you stupid ass. At best there would be just enough loss of "close races" to barely shift the balance of power. You'll still have to contend with close to 50% of congress populated by the people you hate so much - and you'll still have to deal with Bush. Choke on that.