Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

TRUMP TO INFINITY AND BEYOND HQ - The Great and Positive Place


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Drunken Cowboy said:

The problem is that so often they weren't taxed.

How so?  Can you tell me what part of the code that "so often" refers to that people subject to the estate tax were able to use to avoid tax?  Most people getting hit by the estate tax these days aren't one of the Rockefellers.  Additionally, unless they were tax cheats they also paid what the tax code called for, so by my definition that is double taxation.  That last part is obviously just my opinion on the definition, although it's a pretty prevalent view among CPA's.  So let's just talk facts of what we can document that these people did to not be taxed.

Edited by Shula-holic
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, GoBirds said:

I think it’s pretty clear what I think. 

It’s not to me. If your opinion were to be completely driven by tax minimizing goals, and your business is worth less than $11.7 million, I think you would be strongly against the proposal. But if your small business is worth substantially more than $11.7 million, you would more than likely favor it.  But the above is a bit of an oversimplification as there are a number of additional factors that could come into play.

edit:  Unless by “it’s pretty clear what I think,” you mean that you just want your business to pass to your heirs paying as little tax as possible as a general principle, but you don’t really know whether my proposal would be better or worse for you than the status quo. 

Edited by bigbottom
  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, Grace Under Pressure said:

Tax an unrealized gain? Based on what, a real estate assessment? Those assessments aren’t 100% accurate. Approach seems wrong on this. 

Yeah, I don’t like this part of it, though I guess it happens currently with respect to estates subject to the estate tax.  

Edited by bigbottom
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Shula-holic said:

My thought is all this is supposed to be addressed by the estate tax.  I'm not a huge fan of the estate tax anyway.  It's an outdated tax law that affects way more Americans than originally intended.  The current reality is nothing like what the original tax code for it was intended to address, at least in scale.  I know it's not a popular view here, but in my eyes it's double taxation.  I get all the arguments for and against that view, but those income/assets were taxed to the original taxpayer.

:goodposting:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Shula-holic said:

How so?  Can you tell me what part of the code that "so often" refers to that people subject to the estate tax were able to use to avoid tax?  Most people getting hit by the estate tax these days aren't one of the Rockefellers.  Additionally, unless they were tax cheats they also paid what the tax code called for, so by my definition that is double taxation.  That last part is obviously just my opinion on the definition, although it's a pretty prevalent view among CPA's.  So let's just talk facts of what we can document that these people did to not be taxed.

:goodposting:

You are nailing it. Sad that some don’t care how many times people are getting taxes then throw out false claims of taxes not being paid. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, GoBirds said:

:goodposting:

You are nailing it. Sad that some don’t care how many times people are getting taxes then throw out false claims of taxes not being paid. 

I'm open to hearing dissenting views on it but the reality is that Warren Buffet and those like him are the exception, not the rule to those people being impacted.  I see this in one of the poorer and lower cost of living states, it's going to be much more widespread of an issue in a state like a California where property values over the last generation have skyrocketed, even for a fairly common looking residential piece of real estate.

It just kind of irks me when blanket statements or accusations are thrown out there.  Our politicians have succeeded in perpetuating this view, almost a disdain for success or accumulation of wealth exists because of it.  Sure, there are things in the tax code that I may not think is fair.  There are things I may think is fair that others may not.  That's totally reasonable and those debates can be had on the facts and merits.  But it's simply a myth that most of these people haven't paid taxes.  I got two degrees in it, passed the CPA exam, worked in a public firm, then also for a private company.  Somewhere along the line in all that I missed this big secret that so many people seem to think exists out there.  

  • Like 1
  • Love 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Shula-holic said:

I'm open to hearing dissenting views on it but the reality is that Warren Buffet and those like him are the exception, not the rule to those people being impacted.  I see this in one of the poorer and lower cost of living states, it's going to be much more widespread of an issue in a state like a California where property values over the last generation have skyrocketed, even for a fairly common looking residential piece of real estate.

It just kind of irks me when blanket statements or accusations are thrown out there.  Our politicians have succeeded in perpetuating this view, almost a disdain for success or accumulation of wealth exists because of it.  Sure, there are things in the tax code that I may not think is fair.  There are things I may think is fair that others may not.  That's totally reasonable and those debates can be had on the facts and merits.  But it's simply a myth that most of these people haven't paid taxes.  I got two degrees in it, passed the CPA exam, worked in a public firm, then also for a private company.  Somewhere along the line in all that I missed this big secret that so many people seem to think exists out there.  

100%. It’s almost like those that were triggered by Trump and were upset they never got anything to stick with all the false claims like the no taxes etc hang on these MSNBC talking points of “loopholes”etc and push for these ideas with no regard for the damage they will do. I don’t see how else they actually believe it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, GoBirds said:

100%. It’s almost like those that were triggered by Trump and were upset they never got anything to stick with all the false claims like the no taxes etc hang on these MSNBC talking points of “loopholes”etc and push for these ideas with no regard for the damage they will do. I don’t see how else they actually believe it. 

I actually suggested an alternate proposal that would eliminate the estate tax, and rather than provide your thoughts on it, you post laughing emojis. Can we have a legitimate discussion or is it all just talking points and insults? This does seem to be a topic you care about after all. 

Edited by bigbottom
  • Like 2
  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, Shula-holic said:

My thought is all this is supposed to be addressed by the estate tax.  I'm not a huge fan of the estate tax anyway.  It's an outdated tax law that affects way more Americans than originally intended.  The current reality is nothing like what the original tax code for it was intended to address, at least in scale.  I know it's not a popular view here, but in my eyes it's double taxation.  I get all the arguments for and against that view, but those income/assets were taxed to the original taxpayer.

Re the bolded, that is not necessarily the case when you take step up basis into account.

Edited by bigbottom
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, bigbottom said:

I actually suggested an alternate proposal that would eliminate the estate tax, and rather than provide your thoughts on it, you post laughing emojis. Can we have a legitimate discussion or is it all just talking points and insults? This does seem to be a topic you care about after all. 

You are one of the few in the safe space majority that can be respectful of those that don’t fall in line with the group think in here, sorry if my shortness carries over from the behavior of some of the others. I’m not sure what alternative you offered but thanks for being better than the others, it does deserve recognition. 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, bigbottom said:

Re the bolded, that is not necessarily the case when you take step up basis into account.

For the estate tax though, the basis is not the way the property is valued for that calculation.  If you're paying estate tax, of course you should get the new stepped up basis.  I would caveat that by asking you to keep in mind in an estate tax situation, all assets are being taxed, not just real property.  So that increase to FMV over basis is the only part of the estate tax I wouldn't consider double taxation.  For that specific slice that the estate tax does cover, I agree with you. 

While it is true that if your estate falls below the estate tax threshold you would get the stepped up basis on property without paying that additional tax, that would be a totally different argument.  I don't think that's what you are going for here but I wanted to address that part as well.  If we want to have a tax discussion on whether lower value estates shouldn't get that stepped up basis we can have that discussion, but I think to say that plan would be as popular as getting VD to the average American would be pretty accurate.  

Edited by Shula-holic
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, GoBirds said:

You are one of the few in the safe space majority that can be respectful of those that don’t fall in line with the group think in here, sorry if my shortness carries over from the behavior of some of the others. I’m not sure what alternative you offered but thanks for being better than the others, it does deserve recognition. 

Thanks, and I appreciate the sentiment.  We’re all good.

As for the proposal, there has been a lot of talk about eliminating the estate tax.  But I don’t see how you can propose to eliminate the estate tax while still keeping step up basis.  I’m just not clear what the logical argument would be for preserving it other than simply wanting to maintain a provision that allows for the circumvention of capital gains upon the death of the taxpayer.  So the alternative proposal would be to eliminate both the estate tax and step-up basis.  This would no doubt result in benefits to large estates with assets and family businesses that are worth substantially more than the estate tax exemption level, while also removing what Randall aptly described as a death tax windfall up thread for a whole lot of Americans. From a policy standpoint, I think this approach makes sense if you are opposed to taxing inheritances.  And @Shula-holic is exactly correct that such an approach would be as popular as VD to the average American, but what is the argument for keeping step-up basis while eliminating the estate tax?

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, bigbottom said:

Thanks, and I appreciate the sentiment.  We’re all good.

As for the proposal, there has been a lot of talk about eliminating the estate tax.  But I don’t see how you can propose to eliminate the estate tax while still keeping step up basis.  I’m just not clear what the logical argument would be for preserving it other than simply wanting to maintain a provision that allows for the circumvention of capital gains upon the death of the taxpayer.  So the alternative proposal would be to eliminate both the estate tax and step-up basis.  This would no doubt result in benefits to large estates with assets and family businesses that are worth substantially more than the estate tax exemption level, while also removing what Randall aptly described as a death tax windfall up thread for a whole lot of Americans. From a policy standpoint, I think this approach makes sense if you are opposed to taxing inheritances.  And @Shula-holic is exactly correct that such an approach would be as popular as VD to the average American, but what is the argument for keeping step-up basis while eliminating the estate tax?

 

Gotcha, here’s where I was on a different page as I wasn’t aware estate tax was being eliminated. My concern is inflation is taking off, the current estate tax limits are scheduled to reduce, then eliminating the step up basis on top of that. If estate tax is eliminated that’s a game changer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back to the subject of this thread: he’s spent the last week promoting the BIg Lie even further. He continues to have the support of the vast majority of Republicans. Mitt Romney was loudly booed in Utah for daring to question The Leader. 

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Back to the subject of this thread: he’s spent the last week promoting the BIg Lie even further. He continues to have the support of the vast majority of Republicans. Mitt Romney was loudly booed in Utah for daring to question The Leader. 

Liz Cheney came out with a sharp rebuke of the big lie today. "The 2020 presidential election was not stolen." Good for her. The party of Trump will now attack her, and that's too bad. Instead they should listen and come to terms with reality, but they won't. It's the most dangerous attack on our democracy in this generation. Not accepting obvious election results. C'mon. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Laughing 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Grace Under Pressure said:

Liz Cheney came out with a sharp rebuke of the big lie today. "The 2020 presidential election was not stolen." Good for her. The party of Trump will now attack her, and that's too bad. Instead they should listen and come to terms with reality, but they won't. It's the most dangerous attack on our democracy in this generation. Not accepting obvious election results. C'mon. 

Nice to see someone with a spine. 

  • Thanks 2
  • Laughing 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Grace Under Pressure said:

Liz Cheney came out with a sharp rebuke of the big lie today. "The 2020 presidential election was not stolen." Good for her. The party of Trump will now attack her, and that's too bad. Instead they should listen and come to terms with reality, but they won't. It's the most dangerous attack on our democracy in this generation. Not accepting obvious election results. C'mon. 

I'm old enough to remember when the left despised the Cheneys and called them all kinds of names in the book.  Including "liar".

Now you believe Liz Cheney?  Lemme guess: You now think George W. Bush was a good President too, right?

Edited by BladeRunner
  • Thanks 1
  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, BladeRunner said:

I'm old enough to remember when the left despised the Cheneys and called them all kinds of names in the book.  Including "liar".

Now you believe Liz Cheney?  Lemme guess: You now think George W. Bush was a good President too, right?

They believe whoever tells them what they want to hear. 

  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, BladeRunner said:

I'm old enough to remember when the left despised the Cheneys and called them all kinds of names in the book.  Including "liar".

Now you believe Liz Cheney?  Lemme guess: You now think George W. Bush was a good President too, right?

I despised Dick Cheney, but don't recall even knowing who Liz Cheney was.  I probably disagree with her on a lot of issues, but she at least appears to be a voice of reason in the Republican Party, which is why she got censured by her party.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Dickies said:

I despised Dick Cheney, but don't recall even knowing who Liz Cheney was.  I probably disagree with her on a lot of issues, but she at least appears to be a voice of reason in the Republican Party, which is why she got censured by her party.

blind obedience.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/2/2021 at 3:04 PM, Shula-holic said:

My thought is all this is supposed to be addressed by the estate tax.  I'm not a huge fan of the estate tax anyway.  It's an outdated tax law that affects way more Americans than originally intended.  The current reality is nothing like what the original tax code for it was intended to address, at least in scale.  I know it's not a popular view here, but in my eyes it's double taxation.  I get all the arguments for and against that view, but those income/assets were taxed to the original taxpayer.

I said the same thing about 5 years ago & I got---------Oh wo is you you have to pay tax.

the tax has already been paid on earned money.  it never ends and it never will.  you got some, I want it.  I don't want to work for it but I deserve it.  it's getting worse right before our eyes with those in elected positions telling the crowd it's not your fault, I'm going to make it right.

All for votes.  the "what is good for the Country" went out the window a long time ago.  all for votes, & thus power.  it is a pandemic worse than the one we just went through.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BladeRunner said:

I'm old enough to remember when the left despised the Cheneys and called them all kinds of names in the book.  Including "liar".

Now you believe Liz Cheney?  Lemme guess: You now think George W. Bush was a good President too, right?

Who do you side with on this question of the big lie? Liz Cheney or Donald.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, The General said:

Who do you side with on this question of the big lie? Liz Cheney or Donald.

Not sure.  Still on the fence.  I have a hard time believing Joe Biden got more votes than Obama, but maybe he did.

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dickies said:

And yes, George W Bush was one of the all time worst presidents.  I still think his heart was in the right place.

He wasn’t the best but he also wasn’t Obama level bad. He did seem to have his heart in the right place, agreed. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, GoBirds said:

He wasn’t the best but he also wasn’t Obama level bad. He did seem to have his heart in the right place, agreed. 

He was worse than Obama...and I voted for W twice and not once for Obama.  Its hard to even take many seriously who can’t see that.

Also laughable anyone tried to compare people’s feelings about Dick Cheney to Liz.  Just flat our ridiculous 

Edited by sho nuff
  • Laughing 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

He was worse than Obama...and I voted for W twice and not once for Obama.  Its ahed to even take many seriously who can’t see that.

Also laughable anyone tried to compare people’s feelings about Dick Cheney  Liz.  Just flat our ridiculous 

What?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, BladeRunner said:

So the guy who defends and votes for the party who invented Safe Spaces is talking about spines?  Oof.  :doh:

No, I'm talking about someone who stands for their convictions. There are a lot of Republicans who feel exactly like she does but they are too chicken #### (spineless) to speak up. 

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, sho nuff said:

He was worse than Obama...and I voted for W twice and not once for Obama.  Its hard to even take many seriously who can’t see that.

Also laughable anyone tried to compare people’s feelings about Dick Cheney to Liz.  Just flat our ridiculous 

Thanks for the good laugh, not even close. :lmao:

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, GoBirds said:

Thanks for the good laugh, not even close. :lmao:

In what measureable way was Obama worse?

Bush got us into a quagmire in the ME that we still are trying to get out of...the economy tanked into Obama’s years that took years to recover from.

He (W) was a terrible President.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

In what measureable way was Obama worse?

Bush got us into a quagmire in the ME that we still are trying to get out of...the economy tanked into Obama’s years that took years to recover from.

He (W) was a terrible President.

Sorry, just not true. Obama is responsible for the slowest recovery from recession in the last century and was the great divider that brought you Trump. That alone should make this obvious to you and your side. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, GoBirds said:

Sorry, just not true. Obama is responsible for the slowest recovery from recession in the last century and was the great divider that brought you Trump. That alone should make this obvious to you and your side. 

The only thing Obama did to divide the country was being black.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, GoBirds said:

Sorry, just not true. Obama is responsible for the slowest recovery from recession in the last century and was the great divider that brought you Trump. That alone should make this obvious to you and your side. 

Why a recession though?  Hint, W.

And a slow recovery is somehow worse than...no recovery or being the guy in charge when the cause of the recession happens?  How in the world is that worse?   Seriously?

The great divider was a joke of a name brought to you by the right that were never going to like him.

That anyone could defend and support Trump yet say that about Obama is laughable.

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
23 minutes ago, Drunken Cowboy said:

The only thing Obama did to divide the country was being black.

That's what a racist would give as a reason because he wants to be seen as the White SaviorTM of black people.

Were you chosen by black people to represent them because you thought they couldn't defend themselves?  Or did you just do that all on your own?

Edited by BladeRunner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, BladeRunner said:

I'm old enough to remember when the left despised the Cheneys and called them all kinds of names in the book.  Including "liar".

Now you believe Liz Cheney?  Lemme guess: You now think George W. Bush was a good President too, right?

This comment swings both ways.  I'm old enough to remember when the Bushes, the Cheneys, the McCains and the Romneys were considered the pillars of the Republican Party and were viewed as staunch defenders of many of the core beliefs of Republicanism.  It's a bit odd that essentially the last  20 years of Executive Branch Republican power brokers are now anathema to huge swaths of that Partys rank and file and have been replaced by a former Democratic celebrity.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sho nuff said:

Why a recession though?  Hint, W.

And a slow recovery is somehow worse than...no recovery or being the guy in charge when the cause of the recession happens?  How in the world is that worse?   Seriously?

The great divider was a joke of a name brought to you by the right that were never going to like him.

That anyone could defend and support Trump yet say that about Obama is laughable.

Only in a liberal safe space like this, in the real world it’s pretty obvious. I don’t think it’s productive to continue responding to your falsehoods so let’s move on. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Drunken Cowboy said:

The only thing Obama did to divide the country was being black.

That’s a pretty racist view you have. Personally that was my favorite part and biggest success of his presidency, great to see our country elect the first AA POTUS. Besides that it’s hard to look back and see any positives on actual results produced. 

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, GoBirds said:

Only in a liberal safe space like this, in the real world it’s pretty obvious. I don’t think it’s productive to continue responding to your falsehoods so let’s move on. 

Nothing I stated was false...but to claim it takes a safe space to think Trump was more divisive also shows why its hard to take some seriously.  Because its laughable to complain about Obama as a divider...yet not only support Trump, but applaud him as he was far more divisive of a POTUS.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Thunderlips said:

This comment swings both ways.  I'm old enough to remember when the Bushes, the Cheneys, the McCains and the Romneys were considered the pillars of the Republican Party and were viewed as staunch defenders of many of the core beliefs of Republicanism.  It's a bit odd that essentially the last  20 years of Executive Branch Republican power brokers are now anathema to huge swaths of that Partys rank and file and have been replaced by a former Democratic celebrity.

Except we're not the ones quoting the Cheneys to prove some dubious point - you are.

If we were using the Cheneys as a source to prove my point then I would agree that it goes both ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, BladeRunner said:

Except we're not the ones quoting the Cheneys to prove some dubious point - you are.

If we were using the Cheneys as a source to prove my point then I would agree that it goes both ways.

Why are you combining the Cheneys as if they are the same people?  What Liz says now has zero to do with how bad Dick Cheney was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
  • Create New...