FOX Reports on Democrats Reinstating the Death Tax

FOX News today reported on a hidden provision in the Democrats' budget that reinstates the death tax that was supoosed to be repealed in 2010.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Taxes
• Republicans
• Boehner
• Budget

[7221991]

lets say youve just passed away, to qualify for the "death tax" your estate would have to be worth 3.5 million if you have only one child who did not marry, and 7 million if married. if you had two married children your estate would have to be worth $14 million to apply, but lets face it, you were bright to begin with and as most do who are of these means, found a loophole.i find it interesting that right off the bat they tell you 45% of your estate is going away, which, in no way is misleading

[nzau2010]

Corporatism 4 evah!!!!!

[types10000]

@WeedGreenPowerRanger

your claiming logical fallacies have been made when you obviously dont know what they are.

you've claimed i've created a false dichotomy between economic viability and fairness.

not only is this incorrect, but it's also non-conducive to the conversation; all that matters is that you can show a given claim IS to do with fairness; you have as of yet been unable to do this.

[types10000]

@WeedGreenPowerRanger

"Thats what I keep trying to tell you. Any argument I've made you can make the false dichotomy of declaring them to be about keeping the system viable"

- incorrect, every comment you've made that doesnt boil down to the 'rich should pay more because they can afford it' has been to do with viability.

if you dispute this then kindly show how your claim is to do with fairness.

also a false dichotomy isnt an issue as the ONLY thing that matters is faireness

[WeedGreenPowerRanger]

@types10000

"then i suggest you actually say something relevant, instead of continuously spouting logical fallacies and attempting to project your failure onto others."

I'd point out thy hypocrisy of this, but I don't think you're capable of understanding it.

[types10000]

@WeedGreenPowerRanger

"No, my attempts to try to reason with you the concept that if your system is not viable then there's no opportunity for fairness"

- the discussion is about fairness, unless every viable economic system is by necessity a fair system then bringing up viability is completely meaningless.

and you dont have to look to far back in history to realize this isnt the case; viability does not necessitate faireness.

[WeedGreenPowerRanger]

@types10000

"- if there's something i havnt addressed then name it, because as i've pointed out all your claims regarding viability are completely irrelevant."

Thats what I keep trying to tell you. Any argument I've made you can make the false dichotomy of declaring them to be about keeping the system viable and declaring that because you advocate a burning house, that somehow it can't be considered fair. The points you refuse to address are the ones you hold ad bay with a dichotomy fallacy.

[WeedGreenPowerRanger]

"economic viability is a completely separate subject; you can have a fair system that isnt viable or a system that is viable and unfair

your attempts to conflate them have once again failed."

No, my attempts to try to reason with you the concept that if your system is not viable then there's no opportunity for fairness or unfairness have failed. You keep declaring that I'm conflating the two, when you're failing to provide any justification that keeping the system viable isn't also Fair.

[types10000]

@WeedGreenPowerRanger

"I'm seriously done repeating myself" - then i suggest you actually say something relevant, instead of continuously spouting logical fallacies and attempting to project your failure onto others.

"You think you've addressed everything iv'e said" - if there's something i havnt addressed then name it, because as i've pointed out all your claims regarding viability are completely irrelevant.

[types10000]

@WeedGreenPowerRanger

"No, the viability of the economy is not a red herring"

- the entire conversation is about 'fairness' so yes, every single claim you made regarding viability is a red herring.

"as my argument is that the tax system is fair because it keeps the economy viable" - economic viability is a completely separate subject; you can have a fair system that isnt viable or a system that is viable and unfair,

your attempts to conflate them have once again failed.