Thursday, December 20, 2012

Democrat Weiner epitomizes attitude toward Estate Tax

Representative Weiner (who eventually became famous for his exposed libertinism following his many Clintonesque denials) is seen here responding to questions about the morality of the estate tax, with all the childishness and petulance he can muster.  You have to admire the smug, bored, snotty look on his face he keeps for the whole exchange. 

If I do manage to make a significant nest egg for my surviving family, apparently I would have to transfer it to them somehow before I died--but even then, perhaps a gift would be taxed as income (though not quite as roughly taxed), because after my death it is the government's largesse that allows some of it to be given to my loved ones who are, in Weiner's estimation, not entitled to stuff they haven't earned. 

Wiener, er, Weiner dismisses this in typical class warfare fashion as money unfairly gained.  Its unfair that so much money lands in the lap of your children because they didn't earn it, even though you possibly worked very hard to provide it for them, not to provide it for the government.  My wishes don't matter.  If my ghost were to appear post-mortem to denounce the government vultures preying on my bank account, Wiener's response to me, apparently, would be "You're dead.  What you want doesn't matter any more. You have no rights any more that the federal government needs to honor." 

Do my privacy rights disappear after I die?  Should my death open a door for the federal government to invade the privacy rights of my family?  I'm dead after all and all my privacy rights died with me, right?  Or maybe my welfare is wrapped up in theirs?   Why is the State obligated to comply with my last will and testament?  I am not a person any more.  My rights, including my right to contract, died with me.  The state has no obligation to honor my wishes.  I'm just a dead body to pilfer, a corpse with pockets to raid, a right-less fetus with stem cells ripe for harvesting, a mere opportunity.   

But it's obviously important to Wiener to keep the question from being framed within the rights of the deceased.  And just as important to the Democratic Party.  Inheritance is not just income like any other kind of income, it's actually a lesser sort of income.  It's dirty money.  You are getting money your parents earned for you, not money you earned for yourself, you capitalist swine.  You are living off the dead instead of making money to support the government dependency programs.     

Straight from Karl Marx to all socialist doctrines (including those of fascism and progressivism and modern "liberalism"), the hatred of private capital (as long as it doesn't belong to some big Hollywood celebrity) manifests specifically as the hatred of accumulating capital for one's family. 

As with many progressive policies, it's the upper middle class that is hit much more squarely on the jaw than the well-established uber-rich (who tend to advocate for progressive policies that keep the up-and-coming middle class from supplanting them).  The uber-rich have the inside track on the trusts and tontines and other legal angles that allow their families to avoid the estate tax vultures.  It is the middle class that remains vulnerable.  I think it was Alfred Jay Nock that said that the very poor and the very rich are alike in this one sense: they have the least "skin in the game" when it comes to Jeffersonian liberty and free markets.  And the most to gain from fascism and crony socialism.  

Note: Some may argue that I'm conflating estate tax and inheritance tax.  If you read about the difference, you might understand why I think these are just legal gymnastics that allows government to double-dip and twice feast on the dead.  Government collectors feast before the goods are distributed, and then collectors feast again after the goods are distributed.  

No comments:

Post a Comment