World Politics

Page 134 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Anonymous

Guest
patricknd said:
On the evening of March 15, 1965, President Lyndon Johnson addressed a joint session of Congress and a national television audience. His response to the violence in Alabama was to propose a law that would "strike down restrictions to voting in all elections--Federal, State, and local--which have been used to deny Negroes the right to vote." The most dramatic moment of LBJ's speech came when he invoked the anthem of the civil rights movement:

"But even if we pass this bill, the battle will not be over. What happened in
Selma is part of a far larger movement which reaches into every section and
State of America. It is the effort of American Negroes to secure for themselves
the full blessings of American life. Their cause must be our cause too. Because
it is not just Negroes, but really it is all of us, who must overcome the
crippling legacy of bigotry and injustice. And we shall overcome."

another lbj quote. i don't know if you've done much reading on johnson but he's a pretty fascinating character, and hard to figure.

the great society was a failure, but it's roots were in the new deal. i think johnson wanted to be remembered in the same vein as fdr, and he saw the welfare programs as his lasting legacy, something to give the poor a way out of poverty. daniel patrick moynihan warned at the time that it would create generational welfare, and as you pointed out that was pretty much what occurred. i think at the time people in his party thought he was a heretic for his views.

Yea, I have studied LBJ, and know the paradox of doing so. I also firmly believe that he came at welfare from a paternalism based on an inherent belief that African Americans were inferior. I will also note that he referred to MLK Jr. as "that ni*ger preacher."

My favorite little factoid about him was that as president, he would make people come into the bathroom with him to discuss issues while he shat. He liked the fact that he had the power to make someone do that, and also enjoyed the awkwardness they felt in being in there with him.
 
Jul 9, 2009
7,876
1,286
20,680
Thoughtforfood said:
Yea, I have studied LBJ, and know the paradox of doing so. I also firmly believe that he came at welfare from a paternalism based on an inherent belief that African Americans were inferior. I will also note that he referred to MLK Jr. as "that ni*ger preacher."

My favorite little factoid about him was that as president, he would make people come into the bathroom with him to discuss issues while he shat. He liked the fact that he had the power to make someone do that, and also enjoyed the awkwardness they felt in being in there with him.

I don't know about the bathroom crap :D but LBJ seemed to me to be like a lot of progressive southern white men of his age trying to do the right thing in spite of everything he had been taught growing up.
 
Jul 24, 2009
142
0
0
Thoughtforfood said:
It is much easier to assume a blanket condemnation of those that do not agree with you than to recognize the truths in the arguments of those same people.

I was referring to "most of the rhetoric". I don't know the specifics of LBJ's welfare programs, before my time and wrong country. I don't doubt that poor welfare legislation can lead to poor outcomes. But well thought out welfare legislation tends to do what it says on the tin, provide a social safety net, and with minimum welfare abuse.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
buckwheat said:
I don't know your personal situation with the estate tax but I do know that Buffet has not only not remained quiet on the matter, he has stated unequivocally that the tax is necessary.

As for the Heritage foundation. I think there are many ways to interpret raw data and use statistics to unfairly reinforce an interests predisposed way of thinking.

Buffet can be pro estate tax... his opinion and he's entitled. I have worked with families where drastic financial conditions were forced on the children of deceased parents in order to pay estate taxes. All I'm saying is it can be very unfair.

Buffet's estate is so large and so cash rich that it represents a unique situation where he can be cavalier regarding his wealth and how estate taxes may effect his children. High net-worth cash poor estates are another matter entirely.

As for the Heritage article, again, either the facts are correct or they are incorrect. You may be correct in your broader point but if we as a nation can't present and discuss the facts with each other without being able to acknowledge when the other side makes a good point then we are in real trouble.
 
Jul 9, 2009
7,876
1,286
20,680
Scott SoCal said:
Buffet can be pro estate tax... his opinion and he's entitled. I have worked with families where drastic financial conditions were forced on the children of deceased parents in order to pay estate taxes. All I'm saying is it can be very unfair.

Buffet's estate is so large and so cash rich that it represents a unique situation where he can be cavalier regarding his wealth and how estate taxes may effect his children. High net-worth cash poor estates are another matter entirely.

As for the Heritage article, again, either the facts are correct or they are incorrect. You may be correct in your broader point but if we as a nation can't present and discuss the facts with each other without being able to acknowledge when the other side makes a good point then we are in real trouble.

Oh crap they can't keep all 5 houses.
 
Mar 17, 2009
2,295
0
0
Thoughtforfood said:
Yea, I have studied LBJ, and know the paradox of doing so. I also firmly believe that he came at welfare from a paternalism based on an inherent belief that African Americans were inferior. I will also note that he referred to MLK Jr. as "that ni*ger preacher."

My favorite little factoid about him was that as president, he would make people come into the bathroom with him to discuss issues while he shat. He liked the fact that he had the power to make someone do that, and also enjoyed the awkwardness they felt in being in there with him.

he also liked to give exclusive interviews or talk about legislation while skinnydipping in the whitehouse pool, and would make the person he was with do the same. most were uncomfortable enought to be pretty pliable in that situation, and would do a lot just to get out.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Hugh Januss said:
Oh crap they can't keep all 5 houses.

How about 2 sons not being able to hang on to the business that Dad started because estate taxes were due 9 months after the fathers death and there was nowhere near enough cash to pay them?

Eh, eff the kids. They don't deserve an effing thing (as opposed to the govt).
 
Thoughtforfood said:
All I would suggest is that you visit some neighborhoods where there used to stand monuments to the idea that a Great Society was possible, and ask the people who used to live in government housing how it affected their communities. Honestly, I didn't really begin to change my mind until I heard if from them. LBJ and the ideas he promoted were wrong, and as racist as any they claimed to be fighting against. Again, taking the vaunted attitude that "I am smart and know what is best for you" is paternalism, and inherently supposes the characteristic of superiority. Personally, I do believe people should be responsible for their own lives once reaching adulthood, taking into account the need to provide for the mentally and physically challenged and disabled, that responsibility is taken from adults by a state derived economy. Again, I am also fine with safety nets, and the fluid manner in which they need to be implemented based on a given time period. I just don't think everyone needs to be tied up in the net so that they are left with the inability to swim in the open water.

As for religion. It is as easy to compartmentalize the religious as it is people of a different color. I would suggest that your take on it is affected by those with the loudest voices, and does not take into account the earnest beliefs and actions of the majority. Some of the most bigoted people I have ever known were people who hated Christians. The interesting thing is that many times the hate stems from a perceived lack of tolerance in Christians themselves. Intolerance and hatred based on the fact that another is intolerant and hateful merely makes you brothers, not opposites. I am also well aware of the intolerance preached in many churches, and the ideas that are contrary to the teachings of Christ that are passed off as being fundamentally derived. The sermon on the mount was a radical teaching then as it is now, and many of the people who see themselves as the spearhead of Christ would scream to crucify him for his teachings were he to say those things today. Today's Fundamentalists are yesterdays Pharisees. Let me stop there though for fear of being branded an evangelical. I certainly am in no position to question your faith or lack thereof, and you didn't ask me what my belief regarding Christ is.

Back in the middle 90's I bought my first home in Philadelphia, in the upcoming art museum section as it were (which my megalomania led me to purchase), which was then being reclaimed by an upwardly mobile young generation of professionals, from the hovel that it had become since the 70's. On my street, just a few doors down in the sequence of brick, industrial age row-homes, were three section 8 residences. The Afro-American families there had been transplanted from the western urban quarters, ghettos of course, by State facilitation, and fit in among the white university graduate new-commers about as much as, to borrow a Chinese proverb, donkey's lips with a horse's mouth. The result was, irrespective of natural equality, a blatent cultural mismatch.

Needles to say there was a constant "conflict of interests" between the two camps, though the white contingency, being educated, was at least able to veil any apparant racism with a contrivedly becoming "philosphical approach" that is able to condemn with "compasion" and, following the logic of politically correct, without steriotypical insults. In any case, such "corrective measures" were effected by a hypocritical class of white affluent oportunistic politicians merely to placate the troubled souls of the "post-racist," civil rights era and the collective guilt of white America (without, ntaurally, having to see such newcomers showing up in their own neighborhoods). And were, futhermore, based upon the rather crude notion of absolute equality (yes in nature this is true, but not culturally), which totally discounted, or even considered, the consequences upon the forma mentis of cultural background, education, modus vivendi, etc. Yet this has nothing to do with the social State, as it is concieved of in a normal society, and is rather wrapped up exclusively in the particular problems that America has had to face owing to its racist past.

In other words a social State that provides universal healthcare, enables the retired to have a decent pension and allows the young to participate in higher education through public contibutions (i.e. taxes), irrespective of economic status, has nothing to do with the corrective measures of a political class that is so blinded by a desire to appear humane and governed by political correctness, that it responds with a policy that defies every rational comprehension of human interaction. The "net" of which you speak is put in place to catch the falling, not to sustain those who can already stand up on their own feet. If the political class wanted to truly help the poor and marginalized, then it should have seen to having well-off America having its taxes spent on making more livable the various urban ghettos of the US cities which its racism had in part caused and providing their inhabitants access to good education to slowly alter the trend of a generational "lost community", rather than transplanting a select few exemplararies to the affluent universe and expect that simply through environmental contact and osmosis they would magically become integrated and "reformed." On this point, we seem to be more in agreement.

Yet, once again, what does this have to do with social programs in a "normal society?"

In regards to the religious issues you mention, I can only say that the allarming state of the fundamentalist Christian right in the US has a much greater impact on the affairs of state then any other form of religious bigotry. If only because it is a bona fide movement within the right-wing political class as a whole. Muslim bigots, that is, hardly have a say in the managing affairs of Washington. And the same goes for Hindu, Buhdist, Animist, and Neo-pagan faiths as well, in short, all the minority sects as well as any non-evangelical form of Christianity. Though, one could argue, for a strong Zionist (to make a distinction between the Hebrew religion and the Jewish State) influence too, as is evident by the "special relations" and preferential treatment Israel recieves from the US government and by the movement's decidedly strong presence in the US financial world. Be that as it may, you are right though about the "loudest voices" always being heard. Unfortunately, they are also the most annoying.
 

ravens

BANNED
Nov 22, 2009
780
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
How about 2 sons not being able to hang on to the business that Dad started because estate taxes were due 9 months after the fathers death and there was nowhere near enough cash to pay them?

Eh, eff the kids. They don't deserve an effing thing (as opposed to the govt).

Why do conservatives insist on inserting yourselves between the government and its money? Surely you don't believe you know better than they do or deign to think money is actually property that belongs to the individual. Buncha knuckledraggers .... Money is the government's property and so aren't you. At least that's what the teleprompter says....
 

ravens

BANNED
Nov 22, 2009
780
0
0
The Cargo Cult

The Cargo Cult Prez

Cargo Cults:

Wikipedia entry
A cargo cult is a type of religious practice that may appear in traditional tribal societies in the wake of interaction with technologically advanced cultures. The cults are focused on obtaining the material wealth (the "cargo") of the advanced culture through magic and religious rituals and practices, believing that the wealth was intended for them by their deities and ancestors. Cargo cults developed primarily in remote parts of New Guinea and other Melanesian and Micronesian societies in the southwest Pacific Ocean, beginning with the first significant arrivals of Westerners in the 19th century. Similar behaviors have, however, also appeared elsewhere in the world.

Cargo cult activity in the Pacific region increased significantly during and immediately after World War II, when large amounts of manpower and materials were brought in by the Japanese and American combatants, and this was observed by the residents of these regions. When the war ended, the military bases were closed and the flow of goods and materials ceased. In an attempt to attract further deliveries of goods, followers of the cults engaged in ritualistic practices such as building crude imitation landing strips, aircraft and radio equipment, and mimicking the behaviour that they had observed of the military personnel operating them.

Over the last sixty-five years, most cargo cults have disappeared. However, the John Frum cult, one of the most widely reported and longest-lived, is still active on the island of Tanna, Vanuatu. This cult started before the war, and only became a cargo cult afterwards. A number of editions of the Papua New Guinea Post-Courier from late 1969 report an apparent latter-day cargo cult, but with more traditional practices involved.
Contents
[hide]

* 1 Causes, beliefs and practices
* 2 Early history
* 3 Pacific cults of World War II
* 4 Other uses of the term
* 5 See also
* 6 References
* 7 Sources and further reading
* 8 External links

[edit] Causes, beliefs and practices

Contacts between members of different cultures can often produce misunderstandings. These misunderstandings are not limited to an isolated society's first contact with the other cultures—a result, for example, of exploration, colonization, missionary efforts or warfare. Often people will have doubts about the fully human nature of those being encountered: outsiders will also have difficulties understanding those from the isolated society. Attempts may be made by both sides to fit the contact into the existing beliefs of the culture, with members of the other culture being assimilated to various non-human roles: spirits, demons, animals.[citation needed] With time, each culture learns that the others are mortal and that their respective material cultures differ in important ways. Disagreements often arise over how parts of this material culture (whether and manufactured goods (the "cargo") or handicrafts) are shared. In cargo cults, natives develop rituals that express their disagreements with outsiders who refuse to share cargo on acceptable terms.

Cargo cults tend to appear among people who covet the foreigners' equipment but are unable to obtain it easily through trade or established traditions. Members, leaders, and prophets of the cults maintain that the manufactured goods of the non-native culture have been created by spiritual means, such as through their deities and ancestors, and are intended for the local indigenous people, but that the foreigners have unfairly gained control of these objects through malice or mistake.[citation needed] Thus, a characteristic feature of cargo cults is the belief that spiritual agents will, at some future time, give much valuable cargo and desirable manufactured products to the cult members.[citation needed]

Given their relative isolation, the cult participants generally have little knowledge of modern manufacturing and are liable to be skeptical about modern explanations. Instead, symbols associated with Christianity and modern Western society tend to be incorporated into their rituals as magical artifacts. Reliance upon cultural traditions may suggest that proper rituals are not being followed, especially in a culture that has been altered by colonists and missionaries, but that devising new rituals may result in the fulfillment of their expectations.

Cargo cults thus focus on efforts to overcome what they perceive as the undue influence of the others attracting the goods, by conducting rituals imitating behavior they have observed among the holders of the desired wealth and presuming that their deities and ancestors will, at last, recognize their own people and send the cargo to them instead. Notable examples of cargo cult activity include the setting up of mock airstrips, airports, offices, and dining rooms, as well as the fetishization and attempted construction of Western goods, such as radios made of coconuts and straw. Believers may stage "drills" and "marches" with sticks for rifles and use military-style insignia and national insignia painted on their bodies to make them look like soldiers, thereby treating the activities of Western military personnel as rituals to be performed for the purpose of attracting the cargo.

In some instances, such as on the island of Tanna in Vanuatu, cult members worship certain Americans, who brought the desired cargo to their island during World War II as part of the supplies used in the war effort, as the spiritual entity who will provide the cargo to them in the future.[1] The Prince Philip Movement, also on the island of Tanna, worships Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, husband of Queen Elizabeth II.
[edit] Early history

The history of cargo cults seems to have begun before historical records in the countries of Melanesia, where an indigenous tradition of exchange of goods and objects of wealth was tied to a belief that the ancestors and deities had an influence over these things and would return at some time laden with these objects for the members of the tribes. The focus of cargo cults advanced from materials that arrived with foreigners by canoe, to sailing vessels, freighters, and airplanes.

Discussions of cargo cults usually begin with a series of movements that occurred in the late nineteenth century and early twentieth century. The earliest recorded cargo cult was the Tuka Movement that began in Fiji in 1885. Cargo cults occurred periodically in many parts of the island of New Guinea, including the Taro Cult in northern Papua New Guinea and the Vailala Madness that arose in 1919 and was documented by F. E. Williams, one of the first anthropologists to conduct fieldwork in Papua New Guinea. Less dramatic cargo cults have appeared in western New Guinea as well, including the Asmat and Dani areas.

Parkinson (Thirty Years in the South Seas.) notes a number of scams occurring around the Tolai areas of New Britain circa 1880, that were cult-like. Tolais used shell money and it was true currency, not merely decorative. Unscrupulous individuals had been observed to set up get-rich-quick schemes to fleece shell money from the masses. The most notable scheme was the Tabu (money) Tree, exactly like a modern-day casino, but with an entry fee. These types of schemes, no doubt widespread, show that scamming was well developed in Melanesian societies before outside contact. The cargo cults found after World War II could well have been nothing more than such deceptions, practised by a few cunning individuals.
[edit] Pacific cults of World War II

The most widely known period of cargo cult activity occurred amongst Pacific islanders in the years during and after World War II. First, the Japanese arrived with a great deal of unknown equipment, and later, Allied forces also used the islands in the same way. The vast amounts of war materiel that was airdropped (or airlifted to airstrips) onto these islands during the Pacific campaign between the Allies and the Empire of Japan necessarily meant drastic changes to the lifestyle of the islanders, many of whom had never seen Westerners or Easterners before. Manufactured clothing, medicine, canned food, tents, weapons, and other useful goods arrived in vast quantities to equip soldiers. Some of it was shared with the islanders who were their guides and hosts. A small number of primitive peoples were observing, often right in front of their dwellings, the largest war ever fought in history, between the most technologically advanced countries.

Missionaries and colonial authorities normally present before World War II were evacuated from combat areas, and the local villagers were deprived of any knowledgeable explanations of these widespread and large scale war activities. Very little fraternization, or at least exchange of knowledge, occurred between US troops and the remote Melanesians. Initially, relations with the Japanese Army were good, but this soon deteriorated into hostility in most regions.

With the end of the war, the airbases were abandoned, and cargo was no longer dropped. In response, cults developed within remote Melanesian populations that promised to bestow the followers with deliveries of food, arms, jeeps, etc., from their own ancestors, or other sources, as had happened to the outsider armies.


...edited to character limit..see wikipedia for the rest...it's pretty good
 
Jul 9, 2009
7,876
1,286
20,680
Scott SoCal said:
How about 2 sons not being able to hang on to the business that Dad started because estate taxes were due 9 months after the fathers death and there was nowhere near enough cash to pay them?

Eh, eff the kids. They don't deserve an effing thing (as opposed to the govt).

Oh please, I bought the business that I had managed for the past 15 years with nothing, I mortgaged my house, I borrowed from family, I got it done. If you inherit a profitable business and all you owe is the taxes and you can't figure out a way to swing it.....well you should probably be working for someone else.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Hugh Januss said:
Oh please, I bought the business that I had managed for the past 15 years with nothing, I mortgaged my house, I borrowed from family, I got it done. If you inherit a profitable business and all you owe is the taxes and you can't figure out a way to swing it.....well you should probably be working for someone else.

The IRS valued the parents estate at a little over $6,000,000. With exemptions, Dad's estate (taxable portion) was a little over $4,000,000. The estate tax rate for the $4M was 45% (a little less that $2,000,000 was due to the IRS in 9 months). While the business was profitable the local banks didn't use the same calculations of business valuation as the IRS. The best deal the kids could get from the banks (as a loan) was a little less than $1M.

Long story short, the kids sold the business as basically a fire sale because the taxes were due. The kids recieved a cash deal for about 65% of the value of the business that the IRS had established. The IRS taxes the estate at a value of $6M, the kids sold the entire estate for a little less than $4M and paid the IRS a little less than $2M in estate taxes. Now one may say "well the two kids still get to split two million dollars so whats the problem?" The problem is the father worked for 30 years to build something. He paid his taxes, played by the rules, was proud to have his kids work along side of him and had the audacity to die.

Could Dad have done a better job at his estate plan? Yes. But if this meets your definition of "fairness" then I don't know what else to say.
 
Jul 14, 2009
2,498
0
0
Estate tax,income tax,sales tax.gas tax,toll roads,property tax,car registration based on the cost of your vehicle and no end in sight. The only thing taxed higher than an estate(all things you bought with post tax dollars) is Lotto. Guy won @200 and walked with 85 million.
 

ravens

BANNED
Nov 22, 2009
780
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
....had the audacity to die.

Could Dad have done a better job at his estate plan? Yes. But if this meets your definition of "fairness" then I don't know what else to say.

The audacity of death.

So those kids robbed the government of how much (ie, what did they actually get out of the $6m) Cil the writch!
 
Jul 9, 2009
7,876
1,286
20,680
Scott SoCal said:
The IRS valued the parents estate at a little over $6,000,000. With exemptions, Dad's estate (taxable portion) was a little over $4,000,000. The estate tax rate for the $4M was 45% (a little less that $2,000,000 was due to the IRS in 9 months). While the business was profitable the local banks didn't use the same calculations of business valuation as the IRS. The best deal the kids could get from the banks (as a loan) was a little less than $1M.

Long story short, the kids sold the business as basically a fire sale because the taxes were due. The kids recieved a cash deal for about 65% of the value of the business that the IRS had established. The IRS taxes the estate at a value of $6M, the kids sold the entire estate for a little less than $4M and paid the IRS a little less than $2M in estate taxes. Now one may say "well the two kids still get to split two million dollars so whats the problem?" The problem is the father worked for 30 years to build something. He paid his taxes, played by the rules, was proud to have his kids work along side of him and had the audacity to die.

Could Dad have done a better job at his estate plan? Yes. But if this meets your definition of "fairness" then I don't know what else to say.

So blame the "unfair" tax structure because dad didn't have affairs in order before he died.
It does sound like the kids got a bad deal, but that's why there are tax lawyers.
 

ravens

BANNED
Nov 22, 2009
780
0
0
Hugh Januss said:
So blame the "unfair" tax structure because dad didn't have affairs in order before he died.
It does sound like the kids got a bad deal, but that's why there are tax lawyers.

Precisely. Besides that they were probably conservative, so if they weren't driven from their homes and allowed to keep the clothes on their backs they ought to be grateful for the government's largesse. On top o' dat, we need to spend trillions because a few million people who want health insurance but don't want to pay for it are going to get it.

It doesn't matter what they did or did not work for or the choices they made prior to this. We have a political agenda and these sad sacks are going to be our props to turn this country and that used tissue referred to as 'the constitution' on its head.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,854
2
0
Scott SoCal said:
The IRS valued the parents estate at a little over $6,000,000. With exemptions, Dad's estate (taxable portion) was a little over $4,000,000. The estate tax rate for the $4M was 45% (a little less that $2,000,000 was due to the IRS in 9 months). While the business was profitable the local banks didn't use the same calculations of business valuation as the IRS. The best deal the kids could get from the banks (as a loan) was a little less than $1M.

Long story short, the kids sold the business as basically a fire sale because the taxes were due. The kids recieved a cash deal for about 65% of the value of the business that the IRS had established. The IRS taxes the estate at a value of $6M, the kids sold the entire estate for a little less than $4M and paid the IRS a little less than $2M in estate taxes. Now one may say "well the two kids still get to split two million dollars so whats the problem?" The problem is the father worked for 30 years to build something. He paid his taxes, played by the rules, was proud to have his kids work along side of him and had the audacity to die.

Could Dad have done a better job at his estate plan? Yes. But if this meets your definition of "fairness" then I don't know what else to say.

Someone gave the kids poor advice. the IRS routinely grants interest free extensions in such cases. Especially these days where it is harder liquidate assets. It is also unusual for the bank to value the asset so much higher then the IRS. Value modifications are very common as well.

Interesting if this happened this year there would be no taxes at all.
 

ravens

BANNED
Nov 22, 2009
780
0
0
Race Radio said:
Someone gave the kids poor advice. the IRS routinely grants interest free extensions in such cases. Especially these days where it is harder liquidate assets. It is also unusual for the bank to value the asset so much higher then the IRS. Value modifications are very common as well.

Interesting if this happened this year there would be no taxes at all.

Calling Dr Kevorkian, Calling Dr Kevorkian..... stat to the rest home.

Is there a publicly traded arsenic company that I can invest in? 2010 is gonna be a banner year in the funeral business. A veritable bumper crop of wealthy parents.
 
Mar 18, 2009
1,844
1
0
I have an honest question for those who have universal health care...how does the system handle citizens who smoke, are alcoholics, or engage in other unhealthy activities? Are they treated like everyone else?

Thank you.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Race Radio said:
Someone gave the kids poor advice. the IRS routinely grants interest free extensions in such cases. Especially these days where it is harder liquidate assets. It is also unusual for the bank to value the asset so much higher then the IRS. Value modifications are very common as well.

Interesting if this happened this year there would be no taxes at all.

The banks value of the business was nearly $1,000,000 less than the IRS. This is what eventually forced the kids to sell.

A life insurance trust would have helped the kids keep the business but I don't know why the Dad didn't do that. Could be bad advice.

The IRS was no help. 'Rules are rules' was their position.

No estate taxes this year but there is capital gains and that's gonna hurt too. Also, in 2011 the exemption drops back to $1,000,000.
 
Jul 14, 2009
2,498
0
0
TRDean said:
I have an honest question for those who have universal health care...how does the system handle citizens who smoke, are alcoholics, or engage in other unhealthy activities? Are they treated like everyone else?

Thank you.

You mean activities like riding a 17 pound bike next to 2 ton cars while wearing colored nylon clothes and a hunk of styrofoam on your head ? The doctors don't say anything. Just like in the US when you come in 100 pounds over weight,as long as you have insurance the course of treatment is based on when your insurance runs out not when you get healthy. My doctor in Belgium used to examine my injured leg in his driveway,give me tubes of ointment with my cookies and takeaway Extran water bottle...free
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,854
2
0
Scott SoCal said:
The banks value of the business was nearly $1,000,000 less than the IRS. This is what eventually forced the kids to sell.

A life insurance trust would have helped the kids keep the business but I don't know why the Dad didn't do that. Could be bad advice.

The IRS was no help. 'Rules are rules' was their position.

No estate taxes this year but there is capital gains and that's gonna hurt too. Also, in 2011 the exemption drops back to $1,000,000.

I expect that the exemption will be rolled into another bill this year and will be in the $2 million range with Annual increases.

Yes, I miss wrote on the bank/IRS imbalance however as I said IRS extensions are not difficult to get so there is no reason that they would be forced to sell in 9 months. This would give them time to sell the asset as well as hire a lawyer to negotiate a more favorable valuation for the asset.

Of course this would be if there were going to keep the asset, you wrote that they sold it. As they sold it then this is the valuation that the IRS would use, not the appraisal.

Sorry, but the story does not make sense
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Race Radio said:
I expect that the exemption will be rolled into another bill this year and will be in the $2 million range with Annual increases.

Yes, I miss wrote on the bank/IRS imbalance however as I said IRS extensions are not difficult to get so there is no reason that they would be forced to sell in 9 months. This would give them time to sell the asset as well as hire a lawyer to negotiate a more favorable valuation for the asset.

Of course this would be if there were going to keep the asset, you wrote that they sold it. As they sold it then this is the valuation that the IRS would use, not the appraisal.

Sorry, but the story does not make sense


I don't know what the details were of the trust situation with the kids. I talked to the trust attorney after the sale of the business and she wouldn't say much except that the IRS was difficult to deal with, or something to that effect.

I think part of the problem was the kids were extremely frustrated at the difference of business valuations. They didn't have much nice to say about the IRS or two regional banks they did business with. The bottom line with this was the kids accepted about $4,000,000 for an estate that was valued much higher. I readily admit I don't know every detail of this case as I was not involved with the legal part (among other things). But the kids are convinced the IRS essentially forced this to happen.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.