Fixing social security

[Alpine01]

You earned that right. Plus, don't forget I said $10million exemption. 99.9% of Americans would never hit that number so their calculus doesn't change. And maybe there could be some arrangement for operating family businesses/ranches/farms so it doesn't screw that up. I always find it interesting that the 99.9% that pay the bulk of the taxes, and do the bulk of the work in this country yell so loud for the tax treatment in favor of the 0.1% who has already gotten every tax break possible along the way so they can pass on fortunes to kids and grandkids that never lifted a finger.

Whether it applies to 0.1%, 1% or 100% doesn't make it right. If the Govt. can do it to the 0.1% today, they can do it to the 10% tomorrow. That whole fair and equitable treatment thing always seems to get in the way. And no, I am not part of the 0.1% or the 1%, or the 10%.

 

[VikingsGuy]

Whether it applies to 0.1%, 1% or 100% doesn't make it right. If the Govt. can do it to the 0.1% today, they can do it to the 10% tomorrow. That whole fair and equitable treatment thing always seems to get in the way. And no, I am not part of the 0.1% or the 1%, or the 10%.

Fair and equitable? Fair and equitable as in if you create wealth via unrealized gains you pay zero in taxes while someone who works for a salary pays taxes on every penny - that kind of fair and equitable? Or that if you are paid via "carry" you pay zero taxes but in salary, full taxes - that kind of fair and equitable? Paying farm subsidies to a dozen or so sugar kings while letting a local electrician lose his home during a tough year - that kind of fair and equitable? Fair and equitable that if you work for wages you are fully taxes and if you work to generate capital gains you get half the tax rate?

I love free markets. I love a small and efficient govt. I love individual liberty and what this country was striving for. But it has become a captive crony capital state where fair and equitable has nothing to do with it. It is time for the 99% to actually demand fair and equitable - in reality, not in a 5th grade government/social science text book or a Facebook meme.

 

[Alpine01]

I like how people use this hypothetical scenario and don't acknowledge the size of the taxable exemption or the question on how a young family who wants to farm could ever start?

The entire tax code was made by American aristocracy for its own benefit. And many serfs defend it. Sort of explains how we got in the situation we are in.

Young families can't start farming unless they have a family that already is in the business or they become employed farmers for a large corporation. But allowing the Govt to swoop in and take property away from existing families by taxing the bejeebers out of them so they have to sell it off in pieces isn't any more right.

Given current tax codes are "progressive", and more and more taxes are needed to cover greater and greater entitlement spending in parallel with now servicing a huge national debt, I guess you are admitting that the left-leaning policies dating back to FDR are the root cause. In that sense, I am in total agreement with you.

 

[SAJ-99]

Young families can't start farming unless they have a family that already is in the business or they become employed farmers for a large corporation. But allowing the Govt to swoop in and take property away from existing families by taxing the bejeebers out of them so they have to sell it off in pieces isn't any more right.

Given current tax codes are "progressive", and more and more taxes are needed to cover greater and greater entitlement spending in parallel with now servicing a huge national debt, I guess you are admitting that the left-leaning policies dating back to FDR are the root cause. In that sense, I am in total agreement with you.

The government doesn't "swoop" in and take anything. The worst that could happen is the beneficiary has to sell a few acres to pay the 20% cap gains tax on the excess above the excluded cap. And this is only if they didn't have good lawyers and accountants to shield from the tax to begin with. It's a hard sell for you to convince me to feel sorry for that "poor" family farmer who inherits a $15m farm and can't cover the tax bill.

 

[Gus Chiggins]

The entire tax code was made by American aristocracy for its own benefit. And many serfs defend it. Sort of explains how we got in the situation we are in.

The tax code keeps expanding, as does the unelected bureaucracy.

 

[Gus Chiggins]

The government doesn't "swoop" in and take anything. The worst that could happen is the beneficiary has to sell a few acres to pay the 20% cap gains tax on the excess above the excluded cap. And this is only if they didn't have good lawyers and accountants to shield from the tax to begin with. It's a hard sell for you to convince me to feel sorry for that "poor" family farmer who inherits a $15m farm and can't cover the tax bill.

If its easy or possible to split off a few acres

 

[JCS]

@VikingsGuy or anyone else that wants to crunch some numbers.

1. up the tax rate to .25, .50, or .75% . What will happening in 10 years, etc.
2. delay withdrawls for 1, 2, 3 years etc.
3.Have high wage earners pay into SS up to $150,000, $200000, etc.

It might take way more than I suggested, less or maybe a little of all three.

 

[brymoore]

Young families can't start farming unless they have a family that already is in the business or they become employed farmers for a large corporation. But allowing the Govt to swoop in and take property away from existing families by taxing the bejeebers out of them so they have to sell it off in pieces isn't any more right.

Given current tax codes are "progressive", and more and more taxes are needed to cover greater and greater entitlement spending in parallel with now servicing a huge national debt, I guess you are admitting that the left-leaning policies dating back to FDR are the root cause. In that sense, I am in total agreement with you.

They can rent land and start farming from there. Build equity in the farming business and eventually buy land if they wish.

 

[Alpine01]

Fair and equitable? Fair and equitable as in if you create wealth via unrealized gains you pay zero in taxes while someone who works for a salary pays taxes on every penny - that kind of fair and equitable? Or that if you are paid via "carry" you pay zero taxes but in salary, full taxes - that kind of fair and equitable? Paying farm subsidies to a dozen or so sugar kings while letting a local electrician lose his home during a tough year - that kind of fair and equitable? Fair and equitable that if you work for wages you are fully taxes and if you work to generate capital gains you get half the tax rate?

I love free markets. I love a small and efficient govt. I love individual liberty and what this country was striving for. But it has become a captive crony capital state where fair and equitable has nothing to do with it. It is time for the 99% to actually demand fair and equitable - in reality, not in a 5th grade government/social science text book or a Facebook meme.

And when you sell that asset, whether it is stock, a piece of land, whatever and realize that gain, then there are capital gains taxes collected. But taxing "wealth" based on an assumed gain calculated from today's stock market value or an assessed value on some defined date every year is not fair. That value will fluxuate on a daily basis.

The dollars you invest is what allows a new business to get started, or a small business to grow to a medium business. In return for providing that investment you get a share of the profits (or losses) they achieve. You are taking a risk as well. If there is no value in that risk, why would you invest? No investment, no growth. Does that mean your wealth increases, yep, but so does that small/medium/large business that ploughs some of that profit back into growing the company. Why is that a bad thing? If anything, it allows new/small competitors to emerge and challenge the "big guys" for a market that has too little competition. The USG should do more to protect those startups and enforce existing anti-competitive laws.

I am all for stopping all farm subsidies if that was as simple as it sounds. But the general public doesn't want to pay $15/lb for sugar (made up number but hopefully you get the drift) because that what it costs to grow and deliver that sugar in the US and not go bankrupt in the process. And other countries that do subsidize their farmers can flood the US with $3/lb sugar and the struggling US sugar beet farming community will totally disappear because they can't compete with foreign subsidized products. So do you sacrifice the US farmer or levy massive import taxes to level the playing field or subsidize the farmer so he can compete in the US and abroad? Look at the US textile industry if you want to see what happens when the US Govt. doesn't protect home-grown industries.

I love free markets as well - but that model doesn't often extend beyond our own shores. And by all means support your local small businesses. I do. I may pay a bit more but that is a choice I am willing to make. And if you buy/ship from Amazon, then you are the one lining Bezo's pockets. If you buy a Tesla, you are the one lining Musk's pockets. If you buy cheap sugar from the grocery store that is supplied by a "sugar king" then you are the one lining their pockets, along with the 99%. Guess what - you own your money and can reward/punish any company you choose. But don't think you can make that choice for me, I like my individual liberty just as much as you do.

 

[406dn]

Young families can't start farming unless they have a family that already is in the business or they become employed farmers for a large corporation. But allowing the Govt to swoop in and take property away from existing families by taxing the bejeebers out of them so they have to sell it off in pieces isn't any more right.

Given current tax codes are "progressive", and more and more taxes are needed to cover greater and greater entitlement spending in parallel with now servicing a huge national debt, I guess you are admitting that the left-leaning policies dating back to FDR are the root cause. In that sense, I am in total agreement with you.

Any history that details how we got to the current level of debt, that does not mention the tax cuts of various GOP presidents, is incomplete.

Each time the deficit and debt rose as a result of the cuts. When GWB pushed thru his cuts, we were actually balancing the budget. We might have been able to retire some debt, if we just left the tax rates untouched.

We got to where we are, by policies that all of us bear responsibility for. It is very easy for politicians to cut taxes without a similar cut in spending, just as it is easy to expand spending, without raising taxes accordingly. We are the people that voted in these politicians.

 

[SAJ-99]

If its easy or possible to split off a few acres

That might be a problem, but should be fixable. The more common problem is the kids don't want the farm, so they sell it to a corporation. They could take out a loan to pay the taxes, lease it someone, collect the income, pay taxes on that and use the rest to pay off the loan. The problem at its core is that land values are not supported by the income they could generate. Apparently, it's because of FDR (sarcasm).

You know who didn't have any problem sheltering assets in an inheritance? Waltons, Adelsons, Kochs, Rockerfellers, Mars, Holdings, etc.

This thread went from people showing what they don't know about SS to what they don't know about the tax code.

 

[VikingsGuy]

@VikingsGuy or anyone else that wants to crunch some numbers.

1. up the tax rate to .25, .50, or .75% . What will happening in 10 years, etc.
2. delay withdrawls for 1, 2, 3 years etc.
3.Have high wage earners pay into SS up to $150,000, $200000, etc.

It might take way more than I suggested, less or maybe a little of all three.

My understanding is just setting automatic annual pre-retirement calculation adjustments to actual price inflation instead of wage inflation fixes it for another 75 years. But simple doesn’t generate fear, votes, recriminations, news cycles and campaign contributions - so we will have to gore some oxen, add complexity, increase costs, increase administrative overhead, increase taxes, reduce payments and add years in order to satisfy the partisan leviathan.

 

[Alpine01]

They can rent land and start farming from there. Build equity in the farming business and eventually buy land if they wish.

Yep - put in the sweat equity. Buy that small farm and grow it. Buy some neighboring land and farm that to produce more. Rinse and repeat. Pass it to their children so that they can have a career and grow the business. I am 100% for that model. Hell, I would even invest in a small farmer to help make that happen so hopefully they can be successful over several generations.

And then folks show up after a generation or two and demand they sell off bits and pieces because the value of that land has increased over a few decades and these farmers are now "evil rich". They don't bother to look at the sweat equity that was put in from day one. They weren't part of the tough times when there was a drought or the rains washed away the seeds and there was no crop to sell to pay back the loans that had to be taken out. They only see some rich person that has more than they do and demand their "fair share".

 

[Alpine01]

That might be a problem, but should be fixable. The more common problem is the kids don't want the farm, so they sell it to a corporation. They could take out a loan to pay the taxes, lease it someone, collect the income, pay taxes on that and use the rest to pay off the loan. The problem at its core is that land values are not supported by the income they could generate. Apparently, it's because of FDR (sarcasm).

You know who didn't have any problem sheltering assets in an inheritance? Waltons, Adelsons, Kochs, Rockerfellers, Mars, Holdings, etc.

This thread went from people showing what they don't know about SS to what they don't know about the tax code.

Well I work a full time job and draw a salary from a large company and I own a small business. I have also owned commercial property and realized income from that. My wife ran her own small business for a while. So I do know a little bit about the tax code that applies to those situations. But no, I don't know the entire tax code. And judging from my interactions with the IRS in the areas I have dealt with, neither does the Govt.

And certainly if you have evidence that any of the families you mentioned sheltered assets illegally, you should alert the IRS right away. But if all they did was play the game that the USG defined and played by the rules that the USG set, then I think you are directing your ire in the wrong direction. And if you aren't taking advantage of those same rules to shelter your assets, then who's fault is that?

 

[Nick87]

They can rent land and start farming from there. Build equity in the farming business and eventually buy land if they wish.

Not impossible but without some money behind you your gonna have a real hard go of making it work. Your competing with someone who had a lot of that farm paid for a few generations ago. I'm not saying it's impossible but trying to start farming from scratch compared to most other businesses would probably be one of the hardest.

 

[Forkyfinder]

Not impossible but without some money behind you your gonna have a real hard go of making it work. Your competing with someone who had a lot of that farm paid for a few generations ago. I'm not saying it's impossible but trying to start farming from scratch compared to most other businesses would probably be one of the hardest.

Still missing why folks are entitled passing that on - but want to tax other business inheritance.

 

[Nick87]

Still missing why folks are entitled passing that on - but want to tax other business inheritance.

Can't help ya there.

 

[Benfromalbuquerque]

Damn straight, young poor farmers could just rent land.

 

[Forkyfinder]

Can't help ya there.

Somehow whoever gets a handout has a story.

 

[Nick87]

Somehow whoever gets a handout has a story.

Everybody's got a story.