On Jul 31, 11:31*pm, "Ed Huntress" wrote:
"Larry Jaques" wrote in message

...





On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 17:53:33 -0500, Ignoramus28671
wrote the following:

On 2010-07-31, pyotr filipivich wrote:
Ignoramus18915 on Fri, 30 Jul
2010 13:31:24 -0500 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking *the following:
That you don't like inherited wealth doesn't matter. *You can give
it all away - and not take the tax deduction.

I would not give anything away until my children are well provided
for.

Bah, you are one of the capitalist running dogs, those who inherit
wealth are the worst of the lot.

I'm sorry citizen, but you are being greedy, by not sharing the
wealth.

Well, I do not ojbect to being taxed. If I die with over 10 mil in
current money (extremely unlikely!) I would leave some to charity.

Those of us on the bottom give small amounts to charities _now_ from
our much smaller incomes, ya big, rich softie.

You live in a Rush Limbaugh fantasy land.

I highly recommend not listening to Rush Limbaugh at all, and trying
to re-establish your grip on reality. I do mean well when I say it, do
not take it as an insult.

I'm sorry, but it does seem to me that you are the one who seems
to feel that I should have a claim to your money, because I am poor
and you are not. And that your children don't need it, being the
offspring of a rich corporatist.

I see nothing really wrong with sharing a part of money with the
society.

That's much, much easier to say when you have 3, or even ten, times
the amount of money you need to survive on. Ask the poor kid, living
in an apartment, who just inherited his parents' house (and half acre)
why he has to sell it to pay the estate taxes.

That kid doesn't have to pay estate taxes, and won't under any proposed tax
plan.



Socialism is a whole lot easier when you can afford it.

It's less likely to happen when you actually understand what you're talking
about.

--
Ed Huntress

Ed, you're spoiling their fantasies. Again.