Quote: If I really gave my honest opinion of Hilary I would probably be banished from this board. And since she is finally off my TV screen and I am not seeing her any more I don't really need to say that much. All I can do is pray she just stays retired and enjoys the rest of her life and does not run for President again. I can tell you a lot of women did not vote for her. The few things I will say that that made her an undesirable candidate was her big campaign to raise taxes on the rich people. The taxes on the rich are already high enough and she ran her mouth saying the rich would pay their fair share. The rich already pay too much. Then she wanted to raise the death tax to as high as 65% which is nothing but highway robbery. Trump wants to eliminate it and that is much better. That is an unfair tax that needs to go away. And I did not like listening to anything she had to say and I did not feel she could make a speech worth a dam. I feel if any other candidate would have run besides Hilary then Trump might not have won. I have said from the beginning I was not a fan of Trump as a Presidential candidate and I am not happy with stuff he is doing but I am extremely glad Hilary is not President and I will not back down on that.
I really would like to hear some of this sourced. Particularly that Trump and his rambling speeches were better than hers. Trump had no policy positions and what few concepts he had changed as needed. His basis was look how everybody is against me.
Also, the tax stuff in the US is more complicated than you are laying out.
1. In terms of the wealth disparity the wealthy do not pay what would be a "fair share". Is that right or whatever is another story. But given that about the wealthiest 10% have about 76% of the wealth in the US.
I am not saying that taxes are the best way of going about it. But I do not think it is fair to pretend that they are taxed at a given rate and ignore why they are. It seems if they have such wealth and it is not being distributed through the economy by other means (capitalism mechanisms) and the government needs tax revenue than it makes some sense.
It honestly depends on ones priorities with taxation, but there is logic to taxing those that are wealthy more. Historically, they were taxed at much higher rates and the economy did not crash either.
2. The Estate Tax, death tax, is a perfectly fine tax. The estimate for 2017 was that 1 in 487 pay the tax (0.2%). This is hardly a pressing matter given the number of people implicated. There are bigger issues of fairness in the tax code and other issues than worrying about if very wealthy people can pass property and material tax free.
IMO, the corporate tax code is more worthy of looking at. But even then we pretend that tax cuts alone are what matters. The base rate should be lowered to help out companies that do not have massive accounting firms. But more needs to be done to try and ensure it is paid. Fewer deductions etc.
I think in terms of tax policy we often here overstated the value of tax policy. Playing with the tax code in and of itself is not a solution. It can help but there are conflicting examples of the roles for such things. And too often we hear that cutting taxes is a fix all for the economy.
When in many cases it really is just shifting more money into the hands of the few. Unless it is done well and it has rarely been.