Johnny football

[WuDrWu]

@shocka khan: you say because of ability, you are less inclined to give them a free pass. Me too.

So is taking their family's money away a kind of preemptive strike so to speak?

[shocka khan]

@shocka khan: you say because of ability, you are less inclined to give them a free pass. Me too.

So is taking their family's money away a kind of preemptive strike so to speak?

I think redistribution of wealth most certainly weeds some of the knuckleheads out.

Estate taxes are one of the most effective firms of redistribution of wealth that there is, not according to me, but according to economists.

I have no issues with people avoiding estate taxes through trusts, annuities or other forms of tax avoidance.

Not only that, but distributing your estate (or at least the ownership aspects of it) make sense if you're middle class but too poor (or haven't planned effectively enough) to have purchased long-term care insurance.

My father has a nice long-term care policy he purchased when the rates were low. After the losses started rolling in and the pricing actuaries reprised the products, I found they were not a viable option for me. The rates are so high now that you are almost better off investing the money in a good mutual fund, as that approximates the benefit you would have had at, say, age 70.

I will have to give my assets to my family when I start getting feeble, because the government will take them away if I have to go to a rest home.

[shocka khan]

I phone snagging me again. Wish the editing features were better.

[im4wsu]

Estate taxes and the resulting estate planning is most effective in redistributing wealth to the attorneys and sellers of insurance policies. Every time there is another reform of estate laws, the attorneys get richer redrafting the documents and the insurance sales people end up writing new policies and discarding existing policies.

I wish tax laws were simple enough that nobody, wealthy or poor, needed attorneys to figure out the best course of action. As far as taxation goes, there should be only one course, it shouold be simple, and it should apply to everybody. That one course may certainly tax different things and have varying rates according to prescribed items (eg. non-food items, excise taxes on special items, etc.) or earnings levels, however.

[WuDrWu]

I think redistribution of wealth most certainly weeds some of the knuckleheads out.

Does it really? Does it really make them smarter and less likely to be a knucklehead or just more likely that you don't hear about their knuckleheadedness?

Also, can you estimate the % of (let's call them troubled) troubled people as compared to all people whose wealth you want to redistribute? I'm curious.

Estate taxes are one of the most effective firms of redistribution of wealth that there is, not according to me, but according to economists.

I'm not arguing this. Stealing from one group of people to give to another is in fact an effective form of redistribution. I don't know if you just wanted to say that or what. I'm not arguing it. I'm just pointing out that A) it's wrong and B) it accomplishes nothing but to satisfy your jealousy.

I have no issues with people avoiding estate taxes through trusts, annuities or other forms of tax avoidance.

Really? Because you seem to be advocating a lot more of the estate tax, fewer loopholes and less, as you like to call it, avoidance. Tax avoidance, as you and many other socialists often use it, is a lie. If I follow the law and pay X dollars in taxes, I'm not AVOIDING anything. I'm paying what the law says I owe, no matter how many loopholes I use. Stop trying to make it sound like people are not paying what they owe.

[shockmonster]

I will start out by saying that Capitalism is the best economic system there is. And there is nothing wrong with people making a lot of money. However, any historian, anthropologist, or psychologist will tell you that there has been a tension between the "haves" and the "have nots" for centuries and uprisings have often been the result. It doesn't matter if you are talking about indentured servitude and slaves vs. slave owners of the early centuries, or organized labor vs. business owners of the past century.

Businesses have always been and still are mainly about making money. However, owners who place a value on their workers that surpasses ONLY the bottom line will have a more stable company. There is definitely a balance to be reached to achieve this goal, but 50 years ago, we had more of these companies than we do today. The "excess of wealth" is just as much a "sin" on humanity as is the "demand of entitlement".

[shocka khan]

Does it really? Does it really make them smarter and less likely to be a knucklehead or just more likely that you don't hear about their knuckleheadedness?

Also, can you estimate the % of (let's call them troubled) troubled people as compared to all people whose wealth you want to redistribute? I'm curious.





I'm not arguing this. Stealing from one group of people to give to another is in fact an effective form of redistribution. I don't know if you just wanted to say that or what. I'm not arguing it. I'm just pointing out that A) it's wrong and B) it accomplishes nothing but to satisfy your jealousy.



Really? Because you seem to be advocating a lot more of the estate tax, fewer loopholes and less, as you like to call it, avoidance. Tax avoidance, as you and many other socialists often use it, is a lie. If I follow the law and pay X dollars in taxes, I'm not AVOIDING anything. I'm paying what the law says I owe, no matter how many loopholes I use. Stop trying to make it sound like people are not paying what they owe.

1. Not my place to decide which percentage. I just support estate taxes and believe that they do produce some good to society in general.
2. Taxation is not stealing. If you think it is, you could be anti-social and may belong in a jail somewhere. I'm not jealous, I just think the wealthy got a big break from Mr. George W. Bush and think the free ride should be ended. Budget deficits and income inequality stem from those tax cuts. I have said I would not mind paying more in taxes and I've said it a number of times (and probably here). So if you have any idea that I'm advocating theft, you really don't know who I am. What I would like to see is the dollars I pay in additional taxes used to reduce deficits and not to deport illegal aliens, buy weapons systems that waste oodles of money and the concept (once again traced back to George W. Bush) of fighting a trillion dollar war in Iraq off the books of the federal government so he wouldn't be accused of pissing money away.
3. You seem to have a problem with the word 'avoidance'. Just because you avoid something doesn't mean you're a bad person. Perhaps you have low self-esteem and that's why you see it that way. People practice avoidance every day. Problem avoidance at work, risk avoidance in strategy and planning at work, accident avoidance when you drive and so on. There's a big difference between avoidance and fraud. I use all the loopholes I can as well. By the way, and just so you know, my speciality was tax accounting in college, and we used that term a lot in the tax courses I took. Are you a tax accountant and/or did you get any training in that field?

I also feel that estate taxes should be rolled back to what they were when they were ginormously cut by Bush. I think there ought to be indexing, there ought to be provisions for those who are just over the limit and have family farms to be able to transfer their property to their family without tax consequences.

But if you're worth $100 million dollars and you don't try to use 'loopholes' (as you would like to say) to avoid some of the impact of estate taxes (hence my term avoidance), then I have to wonder how you made your money. Smart businessmen use those loopholes (and our government sets them up) to encourage investment in sectors of the economy they want to stimulate.

By the way, I'm not a socialist. You rwnj's (right wing nut jobs - back at ya' on that one) seem to like to throw that term around frivolessly. You've done it so much it seems to be losing some of its cache with Millennials. Just about all you rwnj's seem to haul that socialist club out and beat people to death with it. Meanwhile, you've overused the term so much that some of the younger folks really are anesthetized to its use so it doesn't bother them so much anymore. You guys are going to have to come up with a new term to describe someone who wants a fair tax system and a society that is not rigged toward large multi-national corporations and the people that own them.

[shocka khan]

Shockmonster, perhaps you go to church more often than I do and if you do, I would kindly appreciate it if you (or someone else) could provide the biblical reference to the verse that states "It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to go to heaven."

Doc, do believe that accumulating money while denying the needs of others who have less than you is something that will get you to heaven? Perhaps Jesus was the first socialist. I believe that there were some teachings in the bible regarding this, but it's been a few years.

Note before everyone starts piling on, I may have paraphrased the bible verse, but I am relatively sure that the meaning of it is correct.

[_kai_]

First time in this thread.... Is this really a Johnny Football thread?

[shocka khan]

Well it was, perhaps I derailed it, maybe someone could even accuse me of trolling the Doc.

That being said, Johnny and his family, if they lived next to you in Crestview, would be like the Beverly Hillbillies on Meth next door. I certainly would not want him as my neighbor.

A poor reflection on what money can do when you have dumb, irresponsible parents and family who hand out money like it came off a printing press.

Von Miller tweeted that Johnny needs to get some help. Johnny's dad seems to believe he won't last another year unless he gets some help.

It will be interesting to see how this all turns out, but I'm betting his football career is over.

[WuDrWu]

1. Not my place to decide which percentage. I just support estate taxes and believe that they do produce some good to society in general.
2. Taxation is not stealing. If you think it is, you could be anti-social and may belong in a jail somewhere. I'm not jealous, I just think the wealthy got a big break from Mr. George W. Bush and think the free ride should be ended. Budget deficits and income inequality stem from those tax cuts. I have said I would not mind paying more in taxes and I've said it a number of times (and probably here). So if you have any idea that I'm advocating theft, you really don't know who I am. What I would like to see is the dollars I pay in additional taxes used to reduce deficits and not to deport illegal aliens, buy weapons systems that waste oodles of money and the concept (once again traced back to George W. Bush) of fighting a trillion dollar war in Iraq off the books of the federal government so he wouldn't be accused of pissing money away.
3. You seem to have a problem with the word 'avoidance'. Just because you avoid something doesn't mean you're a bad person. Perhaps you have low self-esteem and that's why you see it that way. People practice avoidance every day. Problem avoidance at work, risk avoidance in strategy and planning at work, accident avoidance when you drive and so on. There's a big difference between avoidance and fraud. I use all the loopholes I can as well. By the way, and just so you know, my speciality was tax accounting in college, and we used that term a lot in the tax courses I took. Are you a tax accountant and/or did you get any training in that field?

I also feel that estate taxes should be rolled back to what they were when they were ginormously cut by Bush. I think there ought to be indexing, there ought to be provisions for those who are just over the limit and have family farms to be able to transfer their property to their family without tax consequences.

But if you're worth $100 million dollars and you don't try to use 'loopholes' (as you would like to say) to avoid some of the impact of estate taxes (hence my term avoidance), then I have to wonder how you made your money. Smart businessmen use those loopholes (and our government sets them up) to encourage investment in sectors of the economy they want to stimulate.

By the way, I'm not a socialist. You rwnj's (right wing nut jobs - back at ya' on that one) seem to like to throw that term around frivolessly. You've done it so much it seems to be losing some of its cache with Millennials. Just about all you rwnj's seem to haul that socialist club out and beat people to death with it. Meanwhile, you've overused the term so much that some of the younger folks really are anesthetized to its use so it doesn't bother them so much anymore. You guys are going to have to come up with a new term to describe someone who wants a fair tax system and a society that is not rigged toward large multi-national corporations and the people that own them.

1. I was hoping you'd at least be intellectually honest about what you were attacking. I believe a big part of the problem in general these days is pandering to the least common denominator. You use "rich and irresponsible people" like the Manziels to strengthen your argument for estate taxes. I was only asking for your opinion of the % of (whatever you want to define as) rich are also problems. Too bad.
You also said it "weeds some of the knuckleheads out". I asked how and if that really was the case, you countered with does "produce some good". Wow, that's STRONG.

2. Taking money for defense and building bridges is taxation. Taking money from you and giving it to me is stealing, I don't care what color lipstick you put on it.

3. You seem to have a comprehension problem. Me not doing my work is IN FACT avoiding something I should be doing. Following the law and paying the taxes that I owe according to the tax law is avoiding nothing. At best you're using the same thing you accuse me of later in your socialist rant. At BEST. I suggest some remedial English for you. I am neither an accountant or a tax specialist. Your posts over time seem to often mention your various skills and prowess. I think you may be the one with a self esteem problem, especially considering your jealousy towards the more affluent members of society.

You can "feel" whatever you want about the estate tax. That's your right. All I'm asking for is an honest reason why you feel that way. You've said nothing about where the money should go, just that some people aren't worthy of keeping at least some of the money they have and have ALREADY paid tax on.

Now, our Government over time has created a convoluted tax system where they have selected all kinds of winners and losers to pander to different special interest groups. My guess is both of us have problems with that. I certainly do. The tax code should be eviscerated and simplified and we should get out of the business of picking winners and losers.

You advocate taking money from one group of the citizens and giving it another group of citizens. You can call a fart perfume all you want, but in the end, it's still a smelly fart. You don't like being called a Socialist because it paints you into a corner you don't like, but that's your corner with your name on it my friend. You think you're smarter than that....like pretty much every Socialist. And I couldn't care less if it's losing it's cache with Millennials. Millennials are mostly idiots with hardly any real world experience. They believe their 12-20 years spent in education makes them smarter than the people who have that AND experience. You're one of the smaller group of experienced folks that still doesn't get it. Unfortunately, coupled with the younger know-it-alls, you wield a lot of power and have made a lot of disastrous decisions. Whether our country can repair the damage is the big question these days. I believe we can, but it's going to take a heck of a sacrifice from a group of people seemingly unwilling to sacrifice all that much.

By the way, if government didn't tax, define, regulate, litigate and force the life out of small businesses everywhere, perhaps the large corporations wouldn't control so much. Ever think about that, Mr. Socialist?

Lastly, "fair", as in "fair tax system" is relative. You define fair and a monkey can define fair. No difference. Personally, I can't see "fair" being where 1% pay 50% of the taxes and 40% pay none or receive a handout. Clearly, those inequities aren't good enough for even a Socialist like you. :good:

[shocka khan]

1. I was hoping you'd at least be intellectually honest about what you were attacking. I believe a big part of the problem in general these days is pandering to the least common denominator. You use "rich and irresponsible people" like the Manziels to strengthen your argument for estate taxes. I was only asking for your opinion of the % of (whatever you want to define as) rich are also problems. Too bad.
You also said it "weeds some of the knuckleheads out". I asked how and if that really was the case, you countered with does "produce some good". Wow, that's STRONG.

2. Taking money for defense and building bridges is taxation. Taking money from you and giving it to me is stealing, I don't care what color lipstick you put on it.

3. You seem to have a comprehension problem. Me not doing my work is IN FACT avoiding something I should be doing. Following the law and paying the taxes that I owe according to the tax law is avoiding nothing. At best you're using the same thing you accuse me of later in your socialist rant. At BEST. I suggest some remedial English for you. I am neither an accountant or a tax specialist. Your posts over time seem to often mention your various skills and prowess. I think you may be the one with a self esteem problem, especially considering your jealousy towards the more affluent members of society.

You can "feel" whatever you want about the estate tax. That's your right. All I'm asking for is an honest reason why you feel that way. You've said nothing about where the money should go, just that some people aren't worthy of keeping at least some of the money they have and have ALREADY paid tax on.

Now, our Government over time has created a convoluted tax system where they have selected all kinds of winners and losers to pander to different special interest groups. My guess is both of us have problems with that. I certainly do. The tax code should be eviscerated and simplified and we should get out of the business of picking winners and losers.

You advocate taking money from one group of the citizens and giving it another group of citizens. You can call a fart perfume all you want, but in the end, it's still a smelly fart. You don't like being called a Socialist because it paints you into a corner you don't like, but that's your corner with your name on it my friend. You think you're smarter than that....like pretty much every Socialist. And I couldn't care less if it's losing it's cache with Millennials. Millennials are mostly idiots with hardly any real world experience. They believe their 12-20 years spent in education makes them smarter than the people who have that AND experience. You're one of the smaller group of experienced folks that still doesn't get it. Unfortunately, coupled with the younger know-it-alls, you wield a lot of power and have made a lot of disastrous decisions. Whether our country can repair the damage is the big question these days. I believe we can, but it's going to take a heck of a sacrifice from a group of people seemingly unwilling to sacrifice all that much.

By the way, if government didn't tax, define, regulate, litigate and force the life out of small businesses everywhere, perhaps the large corporations wouldn't control so much. Ever think about that, Mr. Socialist?

Lastly, "fair", as in "fair tax system" is relative. You define fair and a monkey can define fair. No difference. Personally, I can't see "fair" being where 1% pay 50% of the taxes and 40% pay none or receive a handout. Clearly, those inequities aren't good enough for even a Socialist like you. :good:

What you call me doesn't really matter to me. I think this is the greatest country on the world and I don't mind paying a little more is we use it to reduce debt and make things better for our children.

Going to start calling you a rwnj every time I interact with you.

By the way, I'm going to came back to you in 4 years and ask you how that whole Brownback expirement worked out. I bet it's going to end up like Loiluisiana - the legacy left by Bobby Jindal - that got a democrat elected over a sitting republican Senator.

Maybe we can compare notes again.

[WuDrWu]

Well it was, perhaps I derailed it, maybe someone could even accuse me of trolling the Doc.

I missed the memo where the definition of "trolling" was changed to mean "being completely owned by".....thanks for the update, 'preciate it!


And I still don't know what his parents having money has to do with where he is now. He could have been dirt poor growing up and still be where he is now. And actually, that scenario plays out a LOT more often than Johnny's.

[WuDrWu]

I think this is the greatest country on the world and I don't mind paying a little more is we use it to reduce debt and make things better for our children.

I'm right there with you as long as the extra money pays down DEBT. I'll sacrifice for our children and grandchildren IF we're paying down debt, but until we can contain entitlement programs, that's a bit of pie in the sky, don't you think?

Going to start calling you a rwnj every time I interact with you.

How exactly do you pronounce that? Must be a Socialist thing.

I'm going to came back to you in 4 years and ask you how that whole Brownback expirement worked out. I bet it's going to end up like Loiluisiana - the legacy left by Bobby Jindal - that got a democrat elected over a sitting republican Senator.

Maybe we can compare notes again.

Boy, I must have really gotten to you....how many mistakes can one person make? Seriously, that's beyond drunken rambling. They must teach that in Tax School.

[shocka khan]

I'm right there with you as long as the extra money pays down DEBT. I'll sacrifice for our children and grandchildren IF we're paying down debt, but until we can contain entitlement programs, that's a bit of pie in the sky, don't you think?



How exactly do you pronounce that? Must be a Socialist thing.

Boy, I must have really gotten to you....how many mistakes can one person make? Seriously, that's beyond drunken rambling. They must teach that in Tax School.

You're a real riot. Judgmental condescending and right about where I thought you would personality-wise..

So do you call me a drunk😆😆😆. But yet have no proof of it. You're a pretty funny guy., but what I want to know what you're like when you're trying to be funny.

No, you're more fun to troll. But it's all good. Like my mom told me, 'sticks and stones will break my bones but words will never hurt me.'