Ultimate College Softball
Sign up Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
WanabeHorsey

Registered:
Posts: 3,737
Reply with quote  #1 
I wonder if these folks are part of the "trickle up" group frequently mentioned in the Misc. Forum.  The additional good news, is that the Fed isn't involved or it would be screwed up.  Oh wait, maybe the  Federal Government has secretly forced this and we don't know about it

40 billionaires pledge to give away half of wealth

Gates, Buffett lead campaign to persuade America's wealthiest to donate their fortunes



TheHammer

Registered:
Posts: 11,132
Reply with quote  #2 

Wake up people, the reason those billionaire wants to donate money, is that they want to pay less taxes, and look good

Softballfanatic

Registered:
Posts: 1,151
Reply with quote  #3 

I guess the previous post just goes to show that no matter what the rich do, they will always be viewed as the evil rich with an ulterior motive for everything they do resulting in a better situation for themselves. Give me a break! Absolutely ridiculous!


__________________
Jerry Wallace "For The Love Of The Game"
GrizzlyFan

Registered:
Posts: 2,055
Reply with quote  #4 

Hammer, people don't pay tax on wealth, they pay it on income.


__________________
If Obamacare is such a good thing, why did he have to lie about it to get it passed?
WanabeHorsey

Registered:
Posts: 3,737
Reply with quote  #5 
No good deed goes unpunished!

Hammer, my good friend, the only tax issue is that fortunately the money goes to the charities and not the government that would spend it as frivolously as it does with most of the money that goes through its grubby hands.

WanabeHorsey

Registered:
Posts: 3,737
Reply with quote  #6 
Oh oh, now the billionaires 's buddies from certain charities will be able to collect on chits
GoYard

Registered:
Posts: 1,289
Reply with quote  #7 
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrizzlyFan

Hammer, people don't pay tax on wealth, they pay it on income.


Assuming the estate tax is re-instated after 2010, they most certainly could pay taxes on accumulated wealth.  Charitable contributions - either while alive or post mortem - would reduce estate taxes.
WanabeHorsey

Registered:
Posts: 3,737
Reply with quote  #8 
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoYard
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrizzlyFan

Hammer, people don't pay tax on wealth, they pay it on income.


Assuming the estate tax is re-instated after 2010, they most certainly could pay taxes on accumulated wealth.  Charitable contributions - either while alive or post mortem - would reduce estate taxes.



The charitable contributions would reduce the size of the estate.  The estate would then be subject to whatever inheritance taxes are in force at the time.  Probably make many that post here ecstatic because the heirs will not be as rich....oops, if they were as generous as their parents they may not have as much to give to charity and the government would already have squandered the taxes.



DaddyO

Registered:
Posts: 1,016
Reply with quote  #9 

Quote:

The charitable contributions would reduce the size of the estate.  The estate would then be subject to whatever inheritance taxes are in force at the time.  Probably make many that post here ecstatic because the heirs will not be as rich....oops, if they were as generous as their parents they may not have as much to give to charity and the government would already have squandered the taxes.



If I were a cynic, I would see this as a brazen attempt to get around the death tax.  This would be viewed as nothing more than the fortunate among us trying to dodge their taxes.

As a result, I expect legislation in the soon-to-be lame-duck session to jack up the death tax rate to cover the expected difference so that Uncle Sugar doesn't have to do without.  After all, we all know that we simply cannot have private charities receiving such largesse when it has been proven that our Uncle is SO much better at it.

If I were a cynic.  

__________________
Scratch a reactionary leftist, find the fascist writhing underneath.
WanabeHorsey

Registered:
Posts: 3,737
Reply with quote  #10 
DaddyO, I know you know, but just to be clear, they are not getting around anything that would inure to their benefit or to their heirs, however more to the point of my thread, the evil cold hearted "Robber Barons" are giving money to charity.  How can this be?
woody

Registered:
Posts: 10,835
Reply with quote  #11 
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrizzlyFan

Hammer, people don't pay tax on wealth, they pay it on income.


People will certainly pay death taxes on estates of 1 million or more after January 1st.

__________________
Ignorance is forgivable, and correctable with proper study. Stupidity is a way of life.


Softballfanatic

Registered:
Posts: 1,151
Reply with quote  #12 

Uh oh! Any idea to which party these EVIL Americans are registered to? If they are trying to skirt paying their fair share and are obviously rich, they must be republicans all! Another conservative plot to lower taxes on the super rich!  


__________________
Jerry Wallace "For The Love Of The Game"
TheHammer

Registered:
Posts: 11,132
Reply with quote  #13 
guys since those billionaires have decided to give at least half of their wealth to charity, they have convinced me to do the same.
wonder which charity would be happy with $100.
woody

Registered:
Posts: 10,835
Reply with quote  #14 
Agreed the economy is a bit sluggish. Brother could ya spare me some cutter?
__________________
Ignorance is forgivable, and correctable with proper study. Stupidity is a way of life.


GoYard

Registered:
Posts: 1,289
Reply with quote  #15 
A well-reasoned article, IMO

Raise my taxes, Mr. President

oldscout

Registered:
Posts: 3,492
Reply with quote  #16 
the best taxes are ones that max revenue with the least interference with the economy.
I believe that continued spending & taxes during a recession & UE over 7% is a road to disaster.
To bring in tax revenue you need to spur growth, because only when people have jobs can you get taxes from them. To grow jobs you have to lower taxes. You are always hearing comments about consumer confidence &  businesses confidence, the cause of every economic crisis always comes down to consumer confidence.
When people lose confidence they tighten up their purse strings & quit spending & this will cause an economy to fold like an accordion. When taxes are high and jobs scarce, people worry  & spend less & save more.When business slows down, they lay off people & the snowball begins to gain momentum.
A low tax rate with low UE ,IMO,is better for revenue than higher taxes during high UE. I admit there is a floor rate at which revenue will fail to improve, but we are not there, still IMO in any recession, the most effective way to improve employment< & thus revenues from taxes, is to reduce them.
This Adm's. keeps on raising taxes, fees, increasing regulations & lowering the confidence of the people & business, I guess maybe when you don't like private enterprise that's what you do.

I hope they see the light soon, otherwise I suggest you all start stockpiling what you have & receive....the real stuff,that's what I'm doing.









__________________
Terry Schneider
" Fear not tomorrow, God is already there ".
bluedog

Registered:
Posts: 11,067
Reply with quote  #17 
Scout, Government will only get bigger....Then, they will invite religion as a partner....It's beginning to happen now....Religions are uniting and setting aside their differences paving the way for the partnership....Secular mankind will be under their control....This is where the mark of the beast will come from.....

There will be a few who won't be fooled by all this, those who know what the Bible tells us.......And, they will be mightily persecuted....

The Bible illiterate will, knowingly and unknowlingy, accept the mark of the beast, some out of choice and some out of ignorance...Those who do, and most will, will be doomed to an eternal death....Ignorance of scripture will not be an excuse....
masare

Registered:
Posts: 2,643
Reply with quote  #18 

bluedog, if you read the constitution you will see that religion was woven in the fabric of words.  Religion was a big part of the founding fathers thinking.  I don't think it has ever taken a back seat.  It's there to be used or misused.

JoiseyGuy

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #19 
masare - As I'm sure you already know, our Founding Fathers cast a jaundiced eye at the relationship between religion and government, having learned from the English experience of the problems created by the duality of power of the Crown and the Roman Catholic Church, sharing power while resenting it. Remember the murder of Sir Thomas a Becket? Remember Henry VIII's divorce from Catherine of very RC Aragon, Spain in defiance of the Pope, and then Elizabeth's creation of a state church subservient to the Crown? Remember the times of "The Troubles" in Ireland after England created through force a Northern Ireland that is Protestant amid an Ireland that was very Roman Catholic. Even today there are problems between "Papists" and "Prods", some religious and some economic in nature.


Even worse governmentally is the type of theocracy that exists in Iran where religious culture and state government vie for power in divided courts. Ultimately that leads to the type of thinking relevant to the 1692 witchcraft trials in our early colonies (Salem, Mass). As we speak there is an international concern about a woman charged with adultery and subject to stoning to death vis a vie religious doctrine. To most of the rest of the world, that is barbaric, but religious doctrine is what it is.

To the Founding Fathers, children of the Enlightenment, "God" meant many different things, including "Nature". Their basic premise for our democracy is to be found in "The State of Nature" where inalienable rights exist, as theorized by John Locke. Today, some people wish to superimpose their particular meaning of "God" on government. That was never meant to be in our nation. Freedom of religion does not mean the forcing of a singular method of worship, a single method of BELIEF, or even a singular interpretation of "God" on "we the people".

PS - As for the Bible, King James, in 1611 had an English INTERPRETATION of the Hebrew and Greek and declared it the English Bible. I assume that the King James version, seen as the word of "God", is the source of wisdom for bluedog. To each his own in a land proud of freedom of choice.

__________________
"Freethinkers are those who are willing to use their minds without prejudice and without fearing to understand things that clash with their own customs, privileges, or beliefs. This state of mind is not common, but it is essential for right thinking. Where it is absent discussion is apt to become worse than useless." Leo Tolstoy

"Do not try to teach pigs to sing. It will frustrate you and infuriate the pigs who will unite in anger against you, and you will never achieve singing your song". Dr. Petersen
JoiseyGuy

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #20 
bluedog - Concerning just one passage in the Bible: "Upon this rock I shall build my church".

Protestants say that it means that their God has stated that upon this earth He has created a church for worshipping Him. Roman Catholics use this to establish the Papal Legacy (even infallibility at one time), as the same word that means "rock" in Hebrew means "Peter", the first Pope. Jews say that it means Mount Zion, and the Zionist movement was based on that "BELIEF". Remember the words to the Exodus song, "This land is mine. God gave this land to me"?

Three or more religions - one small passage. How do we know which one is the absolute "word of God" that will save us from eternal hellfire or whose God is the best God? Just curious. You seem to have found your answers. I have never gotten past the questions.

__________________
"Freethinkers are those who are willing to use their minds without prejudice and without fearing to understand things that clash with their own customs, privileges, or beliefs. This state of mind is not common, but it is essential for right thinking. Where it is absent discussion is apt to become worse than useless." Leo Tolstoy

"Do not try to teach pigs to sing. It will frustrate you and infuriate the pigs who will unite in anger against you, and you will never achieve singing your song". Dr. Petersen
bluedog

Registered:
Posts: 11,067
Reply with quote  #21 

Joisey, I do not support, or believe in, the ideology of Religions....I think of Religions as I do, say, the Democratic or Republican parties.....Far too much secularism in Religions and Political parties, both....

The Book of Revelation in the Bible is a great study of the false teachings of Religions.... 

Quote:
bluedog - Concerning just one passage in the Bible: "Upon this rock I shall build my church".


If you know Scripture, there's no question as to who the Rock is......God's Church could only be built upon He who is referred to as a Rock many times in the Bible, Jesus....No man and no religion could ever lay claim to God's Church.....


Joisey, something most people don't know about Scripture....When God refers to Israelis, He could be referring to one of two groups of people, Israelis of the flesh or of the spirit....Israelis of the flesh are Jewish people.....Israelis of the spirit are followers of Jesus, no matter their race.....An example would be Abraham.....He was a Hebrew and there were no Jews in his day, but, he is referred to as an Israeli......All followers are his Israeli children, spiritual Israelis.......These are God's chosen people....

The whole Bible must be studied to understand the different parts....One part out of context may be confusing and religions take advantage of this to suit their material wants......The warnings about this are in the Books of Daniel and Revelation......




rocklifter

Registered:
Posts: 2,920
Reply with quote  #22 
I dunno. If I were a Billionaire I would definitely give to St. Jude's in Memphis, Scottish Rite/Children's Healthcare of Atlanta, or something of that sort.
Random donations would seem a bit wrong no matter how much money one has....



__________________
I voted for Trump. 
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,419
Reply with quote  #23 

Just got this article from a Republican friend of mine.  He occasionally surprises me.  It is a bit dated, (couple of days prior to passing extension of unemployment benefits), but I'll give you a hint.  Author doesn't believe in "trickle down". 

Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.