Thanks for the replay DAnne just as I thought. I hate when government gets involved in business. Years ago a competitor of mine received a grant that I didn't get it made the playing field so imbalanced it almost put me under. When the government takes our tax money it should be spent on the people not business.

Quote Kend:Sorry but I hear Thom say "corperate welfare" alot, as a Canadian I am not sure what he means. What kind of handouts are corperations getting. Does he mean tax breaks?

Kend ~ No, he isn't just talking about tax breaks and loopholes. "Corporate welfare" also refers to subsidies. You see Kend, English in this country can be very misleading. When the government hands out money for no reason to poor people it is called welfare and "entitlements". When it does the same thing for rich corporations it is called "subsidies" and "loopholes", and "tax breaks." That is why Thom, and others, refer to these "subsidies" as "corporate welfare" because they are simply trying to tell it like it really is.

Here are two articles that will help to familiarize yourself with the concept of corporate "subsidies"/"welfare".

http://thefederalist.com/2013/09/30/calculating-the-real-cost-of-corporate-welfare/

http://reclaimdemocracy.org/corporate-welfare-tax-breaks-subsidies/

It is estimated that while medical services and food stamps are being cut from people living below the poverty line the government anually hands out over $154 Billion in "corporate welfare." As the article cited above in The Federalist states:

Quote The Federalist:If you add these altogether, you see that federal, state and local governments force American families to give, on average, $2436 per year to companies that certainly don’t need the handouts (or shouldn’t be in business if they do). That $2436 could go a long, long way for most families, whether it was spent on food and clothing, vacation, a college fund, or whatever mom, dad and the kids most need. Indeed, considering that the average American family spends around $6500 per year on food, eliminating these corporate subsidies and returning the savings to taxpayers could pay for about 4.5 months-worth of groceries.

Reclaim Democracy uses Whirlpool as one example in how big business is shafting the taxpayer in this country.

Quote Reclaim Democracy:WASHINGTON — Lobbying for special tax treatment produced a spectacular return for Whirlpool Corp., courtesy of Congress and those who pay the bills, the American taxpayers.

By investing just $1.8 million over two years in payments for Washington lobbyists, Whirlpool secured the renewal of lucrative energy tax credits for making high-efficiency appliances that it estimates will be worth a combined $120 million for 2012 and 2013. Such breaks have helped the company keep its total tax expenses below zero in recent years.

The return on that lobbying investment: about 6,700 percent.

The article goes on to explain just how this travesty is allowed to happen:

Quote Reclaim Democracy:The Senate approved tax benefits for Whirlpool and a host of other corporations early on New Year’s Day, a couple of hours after the ball dropped over Times Square and champagne corks began popping. A smorgasbord of 43 business and energy tax breaks, collectively worth $67 billion this year, was packed into the emergency tax legislation that avoided the so-called “fiscal cliff.’’

In the days that followed, the tax handouts for business were barely mentioned as President Obama and members of Congress hailed the broader effects of the dramatic legislation, which prevented income tax increases on the middle class and raised top marginal tax rates for the wealthy.

chuckle8 ~ You are turning everything I said around. A modest inheritance tax on estates over $1-$5 million is something I might approve of. Of course I feel the 1% are very excluded from any such restrictions. However, a 100% tax on anyone is preposterous. Could you imagine the effect such a ridiculous tax would have on the family of four if the only breadwinner suddenly died? They would automatically be homeless, penniless, hopeless and doomed.

As far as Thomas Jefferson is concerned I wouldn't be the first to disagree with the man. Wasn't it Jefferson who called for limited government and then, when in office, expanded government farther than any other President in history? I don't blindly follow anyone when they have a stupid idea. Who in their right mind would save a dime during their lifetime knowing that it would all be forfeited to the government at death? Everyone would sell everything they own--most likely to their own children for next to nothing. A 100% death tax is a ridiculous idea that opens the door for more loopholes for the rich; while, creating greater hardships for the poor. How can the lower class ever move up if they are stripped of their savings at death? Your damn right I'm at odds with Jefferson on this one too.

One's family is the main reason people contribute to society in the first place. If that is where they want their money to go they have the human right do see to their wishes. We, as a society, have the simple responsibility of respecting their wishes. Now if you want to discuss a 35%-50% inheritance tax on the 1% then I'm listening. Anything else is pure fascism on steroids. Just where do you fit in the so called "American Dream" where everything you acquire in your lifetime belongs to the Federal Government when you die? Doesn't that make you a lifetime slave of the Federal Government? Is that really what you want to be?

Aliceinwonderland ~ Don't worry, I have no problem with being outnumbered when I'm right. Even the fact that Kend agrees with me doesn't bother me. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day. This whole idea of "idle wealth" and the resentment that everyone seems to have with it reeks of pure jealousy and envious resentment. What is wrong with someone being able to retire and enjoy life after a parent passes? Doesn't it occur to anyone that this may indeed have been the reason that the parent worked and saved their entire life--so that their children don't have to? I don't have any problem with anyone living solely from dividend checks as long as A) They pay their fair share of taxes on Capital Gains, and B) They don't use any excessive wealth to influence politics. Quite frankly the only reason #B exists as a real problem is because We the People are allowing it to happen by allowing big money to be used in our political system. Vigorous Campaign Finance Reform is the pill to cure that ill. For every Koch brother there are a thousand other wealthy people who just want to enjoy their lives and not be bothered. The vast majority of people living from "idle income" are not our problem. If there is something wrong with aspiring to become independently wealthy and enjoy life then kindly explain to me what used to be "The American Dream?"

The problem we have in this nation is lack of proper taxation of living people. The terms "Inheritance Tax" or "Death Tax" makes no difference to me. One implies that you are taxing a corpse, the other implies you are taxing heirs. The plain fact of the matter is that you are taxing a corpse. The money doesn't fall into anyone else's hands until the taxes are paid; therefore, you are taxing a corpse. Make no mistake about it. Like the old Beatles song went...

Quote The Beatles:Now my advice for those who die

Declare the pennies on your eyes
Cos I'm the taxman, yeah, I'm the taxman

And you're working for no one but me
Taxman!

Aliceinwonderland: I can't speak for Johnnie, but when my father passed away in 1992 I paid about $7000 in tax on my inheritance. It was because I inherited land, not money..... it was 90 acres of mainly woodland, not an estate or something. Payment of this tax was to create whats called a cost basis, to help offset gains on a future sale. The laws may have changed since then?

More importantly, I currently pay about a 50% tax rate on my income, as many working class folks do, if you include all taxes, such as property tax, sales tax, etc. Nothing makes me more angry than when the rich piss and moan about the rest of us not paying enough Fed income tax. I want to see people like Mitt pay 50%.....he'd still have plenty left over to stress about. Also I actually work for my income..... I don't rip off pensions.

The only answer I see to this outrageous pillage of our labor force is democratizing the workplace. We need more businesses that are owned by the workers, not by absentee do-nothing kleptocrats like the Waltons (to cite the most extreme example). I recently read an article about this in The Nation, which happens to be my favorite magazine. That article was full of examples of such enterprises. In our area of southwestern Oregon, Bi Mart is worker-owned. This has to be the wave of the future, or we are doomed to lives of servitude, serfdom and slavery. - Aliceinwonderland

Amen Johnnie, "chuckle", PD and "Mister 10K"! And Loren, I love your bratwurst wisecrack! My dear Marc, we've got'cha outnumbered this round.

Johnnie, I am puzzled as to how you wound up paying taxes on your dad's estate if it was a meagar one. I don't recall us paying taxes on anything we've inherited.

Like I say, I'm fine with tax-free inheritance to a point. But if someone inherits millions- enough to become independently wealthy and join the ranks of the idle rich- they can pay up and shut up. From my perspective, it's all about simple fairness. As Gary Reber and "dollymajig" both pointed out, it's about giving something back to a society that has been (overly) generous to you! - AIW

DAM -- So you want the 1% to keep their money so they can keep buying politicians: politicians who make sure that the FDA does not pass any restrictive FDA laws; those politicians that make sure are defense spending never decreases. Just remember this if we had a 100% death tax their would be no Koch brothers.

Oh boy, this one really ticks me off. After my father died, I paid the taxes on my inheritence and my father's liquidated estate, a meger inheritence, but an inheritence all the same. Just knowing that these rich pigs get away with not paying their fair share of taxes, like everyone else, really bugs me to no end. They are nothing but the worst kind of traitors and it's way past time we as Americans did something about them.

DAnneMark: Of course, the oil companies may have a stake in keeping any more efficient engine off the market.

By the way, that youtube video...funny!

To begin with, any economic system that allows billionaires to "happen" is a flawed one. Whenever I hear the words super rich my thoughts immediately shift to the problem of unregulated capitalism. Seeing how there appears to be no political will to regulate the fascist hogs, then the only solution that I see is a return to the pre- Reagan tax rates. However this can only happen when a congress willing to honor the will of the vast majority is voted in.

Of course when the idiocy of a white Santa argument is more important than the fact that your red state representative has voted yes more than once to the Paul freaking Ryan budget plan, then I guess the hope that this voter will pull their head out of their ass in time for the midterms is slim to none. Merry Holidays.

No, but seriously folks...
Actually, I very strongly agree with Aliceinwonderland #11! Many of those filthy rich spoiled brats, themselves, inherited their wealth. And they have all gotten a "free ride" ever since the Reagan days....robbing the poor to pay the rich...reverse Robin Hood! It's time we got really ticked off and stop these obscenely wealthy few from continuing their economic war against us. And it is a war...people are dying from it! Since the Democratic Party is really no better than the Republican Party...we've got to do something radically different. Otherwise, we'll all die early deaths trying to make ends meet...trying to survive. Things WILL get worse..much worse! It's a matter of dying on your feet or dying on your knees!

PD, You're such a wise ass.