Strange Times
- Thread starter BigWillieCock
- Start date
How about a farm? Have to split it into because of taxes. Can’t pass the whole farm down to a child? That’s not fair to the children. Not sure what you are trying to fix. Is it jealousy?
Came to present an idea and that clearly didn't go too well. I wish you well.
Are you surprised that a conservative forum is adamantly opposed to a magical system that doesn't exist (ahem, the government) taking people's money and redistributing it to people that somehow should be rewarded for doing nothing?
Your class warfare under the guise of 'greater good' argument has been tried numerous times before. It doesn't work. You know this, right? Or, has the missing ingredient just been crypto currency? LOL x2.
Same. I think I might start a thread about the I-formation. I think it's very versatile. You can run just about everything from it including the triple option.
I'm aware of history. What I'm proposing looks nothing like it. It's not radical. If you checked that article, Warren Buffet has similar ideas/concerns about this subject. He just isn't looking at the Blockchain as a possible solution.
Again, I'm sorry if you're somehow hurt? As I remember, you jumped into this thread to criticize. I'm sure you can find another to continue with that objective.
I jumped in to criticize? I asked if you were someone's butler. That's called being light hearted, not critical. After that I only asked questions. That's also not being critical. I am not the one who started calling people names.
Yes - I assumed the butler comment was a shot.
Again, I've apologized for using the "R" word and it was directed at the comment itself (You sound like.."), not the individual.
And let's be honest - There's plenty on this forum even today which far exceed what we are talking about. This is why many people have stopped apologizing.
Yep. Inheritance Cap. Not sure if you caught it in an earlier post, but i wrote my Master's thesis on the subject at SC and it was well received. Our University is not overly liberal and it did not ruffle feathers at the time. Everything is just hyperpolitical now. The idea would only impact but a very small amount of individuals.
Capitalism is great. Hypercapitalism and Monopolies are not. For example, those who inherent $100mil and use a quant bot to short equities from their couch and call it a job - that's of interest. This might sound abstract, but it's far more common than most realize. Enter Gamestop.
Thanks and I appreciate your goal of having a discussion but I’m still not clear why an individual having money is wrong. Monopolies can be controlled legally, such as antitrust, which I took at USC.
When you start messing with people's financial legacies, legally amassed, you are stealing from them posthumously. Taking care of their families was a major part of the reason they worked as they did.
It seems that you misinterpreted my comment as a zinger.
It was meant as a fact.
Sure, but you keep changing the amount. Is it 10million, 20 million, 100 million? Who decides?
I'm simply talking about high wealth individuals. Enjoy everything you can in your lifetime and make as much as humanly possible. My suggestion was to cap inheritance at a certain amount to discourage those dictating policy through wealth alone and other runaway network effects. In addition, personally believe handing down large sums of money to your children can be terrible for them.
Whatever it's determined to be. We are printing money daily so that will be fluid and based on an equation.
Amen. Or drastically limiting it's role. That's the promise of crypto and if you caught any of the hearings today - they are very concerned to say the least.
I expect central banks around the world will try to “embrace” crypto and then try to monopolize it.
What if I own a family heirloom or piece of property that is worth 50 million dollars, does the government just get to seize that?
Most likely. But it will be very difficult with Ethereum and anything built on it.
Dictatorships like China and Iran have been confiscating Bitcoin from their citizens to hold.
However. regardless of who is holding, at least you have scarcity baked in.
The dollar is just about wrecked, and apparently a new 3.5 trillion package is on the table for vote. Hard to believe this is happening here.
Blockchain again. All real estate, stocks, etc. will have the ability for fractional ownership
For example, you'll soon be able to buy a $100 worth of Berkshire Hathaway stock which is currently valued around $470,000 per share.
Yep. I'm not sure exactly how that would play out, but I'm certain it can.
Like the NIL, a lot of moving parts to sort through.
Well youre proposing the seizure by the government of land and assets. I'm not sure if you'd consider yourself communist, but it sure sounds like it.
No person that has that much money would allow any of it to go to the government. They would give it away, create trusts, give to family, etc. before they would die having more than your inheritance cap. The suggested cap will not generate any tax income and would be a useless burden to a very few in society.
Put this redneck down for the option that I earned and paid taxes on everything that I have now and accumulate in the future, it's mine (and my children's). Keep your damn hands out of my cookie jar. 
Yes, for anyone doubting your proposal they need to understand you are advocating theft. Also, you are arguing that some "such as yourself" need to be in charge of everyone's life.
Pretty simple concept no matter how many cryptos or block chains you try to hide behind.
He may well be, but he has answered your inherentance issue for himself. Last I heard he was cutting the kids out of his will but for a small amount.
Practicing freedom for himself.
Why should anyone else's freedom be limited?
Are the people who supports seizure of land and assets by the government for things like highways, pipelines and walls also communists?
I don't like seizure of anything for any purpose. If you want something of mine bad enough and I am not actively trying to sell it, you have to pay a premium, you're going to pay my price.
I find it ironic that those who point fingers at "the 1%" for being greedy are practicing a larger form of greed. They realize they won't ever reach that level of wealth, so the greedy solution is to advocate seizing it from those that have it.
And to add insult to injury, they want us to believe that they have such glorious, altruistic motives. It's greed, theft and deceit all rolled up into a nasty worldview.
And to add insult to injury, they want us to believe that they have such glorious, altruistic motives. It's greed, theft and deceit all rolled up into a nasty worldview.
So all they have to do is just make inheritance seizure a thing and you’d be okay with it because it exists.
I read the earlier post as well and here what you are saying Academically it’s an interesting point, and if all other attempts at shrinking the wealth gap had failed, I can see this as the next potential solution.
Here is my issue with the idea today. Large chunks of capital and assets moving from one generation to the next is only a small part of the problem. The biggest issue is our current taxation structure.
When you have “American” company with subsidiaries domiciled in other low tax nations, while simultaneously getting tax breaks and credits in the US, that dwarfs any other debate.
Just the same as your proposal would just drive more and more personal assets into offshore trusts.
The middle class has borne the tax burden from day one. Nothing has changed since 1909. Those with cash, influence, lawyers and accountants beat the system. It’s the biggest shakedown in US history. It ironically was born from public outcry of...wait for it...an under taxed upper class. Sound familiar?
So I’m with you on the fact there is a wealth gap. But it seems pretty clear to me that when you can keep more of what you make, your wealth will grow exponentially faster.
Well stated. I appreciate you reading all of the posts for context and the feedback as well.
We're now witnessing the impact of runaway wealth/power and the challenges it presents. A similar phenomenon was happening with the College Football Playoff System.
Wall Street has always been gamed, but this is a new paradigm shift and both the FED and SEC have chosen to jump on the bandwagon versus trying to protect society as a whole.
No one wants tech giants and big pharma dictating policy, censoring or telling people how to think and that's what is happening. You can't lean on history for lessons anymore because the individuals we counted on to keep it even somewhat between the lanes are no longer there.
