# Fuck Harry Reid! **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [February 12, 2010, 12:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-harry-reid/528694 "2010-02-12T12:53:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-harry-reid/528694/61 "2010-02-12T16:46:44Z")
> [@Slypork](#): > > When they die they want to make sure that their families continue to live in the way they were used to without the continued source of their salary. Why would they want their families to live on welfare, instead of earning their way in the world?:dubious: ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-harry-reid/528694/62 "2010-02-12T16:46:53Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > You should look up _progressive tax_ and make sure you understand it before you mouth off any more. Kay? Why don’t you attempt a contribution for change and attempt to answer the questions THAT YOU QUOTED? ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-harry-reid/528694/63 "2010-02-12T16:50:15Z")
> [@Squink](#): > > Sez the guy who thinks it’s cool to pre-emptively yell ‘FIRE’ in a crowded theatre, just because there _might_ be a fire. You folk didn’t do diligence on Iraq, you did _hysteria_. :eek: That was me?!!! :rolleyes: > [@Squink](#): > > And now you don’t want to pay for your war, and bitch about not getting _more_ money from the Feds. Conservatives like that are nothing but a plague on the body politic. You all need to start taking some responsibility, rather than pretend _once again_ that the past is the past, and every day in congress happens to be Republican Christmas. Ah, that explains the war on Christmas. Nice job with the back to back contributions, though. You have talent. ---
**Author:** ![John\_DiFool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_difool/32/19543_2.png) [@John\_DiFool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_DiFool)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-harry-reid/528694/64 "2010-02-12T16:52:13Z")
> [@Captain\_Amazing](#): > > Good way to fuck over Blanche Lincoln, too, who’s facing a major challenger in John Boozeman. Considering how Blanche Lincoln fucked over the health care bill, good riddance. ---
**Author:** ![Grumman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/43a26b/32.png) [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-harry-reid/528694/65 "2010-02-12T16:53:09Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > I hear this same stupid bullshit all the time. > > I find $100 on the ground and use it to pay for an amazing haircut. > The stylist is taxed on that income. > The stylist uses it to pay his landscaping company. > The landscaping company is taxed on that income. > The landscaping company uses it to pay their worker. > The worker is taxed on that income. > The worker uses it to rent a pony for his daughter’s birthday. > The Pony’s owner is taxed on that income. > The Pony owner stuffs the bill into a savings account. He dies. > His son get’s it. The son is taxed on that income. > > Income is taxed. _Welcome to Earth!_ > > Jesus merciful fuck, people, this isn’t rocket surgery. And yet you _still_ get this wrong! Revenue is not taxed, _profit_ is. This means that half your examples are wrong, because the income is being spent on business expenses, and thus is not taxed. The money is taxed once when it gets to the worker, once when it gets to the pony’s owner, and a third time when the son gets it. This means it has only been taxed 2-3 times (with and without estate tax), not the 4-5 times you claim. ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-harry-reid/528694/66 "2010-02-12T16:54:31Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > :eek: That was me?!!! :rolleyes: > > Ah, that explains the war on Christmas. Nice job with the back to back contributions, though. You have talent. At what point do you guys take responsibility for your poor stewardship of the economy, your ill-advised war, and your utter disregard for facts and logic? ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-harry-reid/528694/67 "2010-02-12T16:56:41Z")
> [@Grumman](#): > > And yet you _still_ get this wrong! > > Revenue is not taxed, _profit_ is. This means that half your examples are wrong, because the income is being spent on business expenses, and thus is not taxed. The money is taxed once when it gets to the worker, once when it gets to the pony’s owner, and a third time when the son gets it. This means it has only been taxed 2-3 times (with and without estate tax), not the 4-5 times you claim. Really, if you are this stupid just stop talking. You mean REVENUE, not income. Taxes _are_ paid on income. I told you guys that cutting education would come back to haunt you. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-harry-reid/528694/68 "2010-02-12T16:57:37Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Why would they want their families to live on welfare, instead of earning their way in the world?:dubious: This actually raises a good point. That is, to what degree does someone have a right to do what they want to with the fruits of their labor? There seems to be no (less) disagreement that what a person does with his money after he pays taxes (at whatever rate you choose) is his business. He can buy a vacation home, buy a sports car, a boat, put in a swimming pool, etc. But what if what is important to him is taking care of the family he leaves behind when he dies? As I said, I think people have less of a claim to an inheritance, morally speaking, than they do to money they’ve earned through their own sweat or smarts. But I do see that someone should be allowed to pass their monty on without a tax that takes 55% of it—any part of it. Why should the state benefit more from someone’s death than the family who suffered the loss? ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-harry-reid/528694/69 "2010-02-12T17:01:27Z")
The good point is “To what degree do offspring have the right to live on money that was earned by someone else, and how does that make them different from welfare queens/kings?” Not “What property rights does someone have after they’re dead?” It’s no surprise that you either really don’t get it, or pretend not to. Can we now take it as read that you really don’t observe a distinction between earned and unearned income? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-harry-reid/528694/70 "2010-02-12T17:04:57Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > This actually raises a good point. That is, to what degree does someone have a right to do what they want to with the fruits of their labor? There seems to be no (less) disagreement that what a person does with his money after he pays taxes (at whatever rate you choose) is his business. He can buy a vacation home, buy a sports car, a boat, put in a swimming pool, etc. But what if what is important to him is taking care of the family he leaves behind when he dies? As I said, I think people have less of a claim to an inheritance, morally speaking, than they do to money they’ve earned through their own sweat or smarts. But I do see that someone should be allowed to pass their monty on without a tax that takes 55% of it—any part of it. Why should the state benefit more from someone’s death than the family who suffered the loss? Because the state allows people to amass that money in the first place. Without the state, there is no wealth. Also, what **Elvis** said. The Estate Tax does not tax the “fruits” of anyone’s “labor.” It taxes unearned windfalls. ---
**Author:** ![Grumman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/43a26b/32.png) [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-harry-reid/528694/71 "2010-02-12T17:17:29Z")
> [@DanBlather](#): > > Really, if you are this stupid just stop talking. You mean REVENUE, not income. Taxes _are_ paid on income. I told you guys that cutting education would come back to haunt you. Income can refer to assessable income _or_ taxable income. That’s the whole reason why I went out of my way to use the words “revenue” and “profit”, so that even a complete moron could follow along at home. **Lobohan** only looked at half of each transaction - he counted the taxes payable on income, but not the tax deductions accrued for expenses. That’s why he got the wrong result. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-harry-reid/528694/72 "2010-02-12T17:18:47Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > No, it’s unearned income.It’s not a tax on the stiff, it’s a tax on the parasite inheriting it. No. The tax is on the estate, not the beneficiaries of the estate. The estate pays its own taxes or, if it doesn’t, it is forfeit. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-harry-reid/528694/73 "2010-02-12T17:20:52Z")
Let me say I don’t particularly care very much whether the estate tax on estates over $1 million is 0%, 55%, or 100%. What I do care about though is that this was a bill that had bipartisan support, could have passed easily, and the Democrats a legislative accomplishment that both the President and the Democrats in Congress need right now. This could have been a great news story. The newspapers and CNN could be reporting that the Senate has broken free from its legislative paralysis and passed a jobs bill. Robert Gibbs could stand up there and say,“This bill is an example of the bipartisanship that the President has been calling for, and he’s glad to sign a bill that will help provide jobs to millions of Americans out of work.” Instead, they’re reporting that yet another bill has been stalled, this time by Majority Leader Reid’s unwillingness to compromise, and the story is yet again about how the Democrats control Congress but can’t get anything done. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-harry-reid/528694/74 "2010-02-12T17:21:34Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > No. The tax is on the estate, not the beneficiaries of the estate. The estate pays its own taxes or, if it doesn’t, it is forfeit. I stand corrected. ---
**Author:** ![Gangster\_Octopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a8b319/32.png) [@Gangster\_Octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gangster_Octopus)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-harry-reid/528694/75 "2010-02-12T17:26:49Z")
> [@Captain\_Amazing](#): > > Let me say I don’t particularly care very much whether the estate tax on estates over $1 million is 0%, 55%, or 100%. What I do care about though is that this was a bill that had bipartisan support, could have passed easily, and the Democrats a legislative accomplishment that both the President and the Democrats in Congress need right now. > > This could have been a great news story. The newspapers and CNN could be reporting that the Senate has broken free from its legislative paralysis and passed a jobs bill. Robert Gibbs could stand up there and say,“This bill is an example of the bipartisanship that the President has been calling for, and he’s glad to sign a bill that will help provide jobs to millions of Americans out of work.” Instead, they’re reporting that yet another bill has been stalled, this time by Majority Leader Reid’s unwillingness to compromise, and the story is yet again about how the Democrats control Congress but can’t get anything done. Send that to _The Onion_, it’s goood stuff. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-harry-reid/528694/76 "2010-02-12T17:30:32Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Because the state allows people to amass that money in the first place. Without the state, there is no wealth. > > Also, what **Elvis** said. The Estate Tax does not tax the “fruits” of anyone’s “labor.” It taxes unearned windfalls. Since you’ve acknowledged that the second part of this is incorrect (kudos), I’ll just refer to the first. I agree with you to some extent. That is why I am not opposed to taxes in general, nor the estate tax in particular. The question goes to who has the greater claim to the estate? I think the heirs deserve the money simply because the person who made it, and paid all his taxes in the process, wished it to go to them. In practicality, our disagreement is one of degree. In assessing the moral components we seem to have more of a gulf. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-harry-reid/528694/77 "2010-02-12T17:33:49Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > The good point is “To what degree do offspring have the right to live on money that was earned by someone else, and how does that make them different from welfare queens/kings?” > > Not “What property rights does someone have after they’re dead?” > > It’s no surprise that you either really don’t get it, or pretend not to. Can we now take it as read that you really don’t observe a distinction between earned and unearned income? Can you not read? I’ve stated that I am not opposed to the estate tax—several times. I’ve even stated—at least twice—that I don’t think that a claim to an inheritance is as strong to a claim the fruits of someone’s own labor. Read my last response to **Dio**. ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-harry-reid/528694/78 "2010-02-12T17:36:56Z")
> [@Grumman](#): > > Income can refer to assessable income _or_ taxable income. That’s the whole reason why I went out of my way to use the words “revenue” and “profit”, so that even a complete moron could follow along at home. > > **Lobohan** only looked at half of each transaction - he counted the taxes payable on income, but not the tax deductions accrued for expenses. That’s why he got the wrong result. He said no such thing. He said taxes are paid on the income, no where did he say that it was paid on the entire $100. But beyond that, even if we deduct the expenses from revenue, the point is still 100% accurate. Let’s say each transaction resulted in a 10% profit. After 10 transactions there is still tax being paid on more than the initial $100. To make it worse, this is what you said initially: > [@](#): > > Revenue is not taxed, profit is. But he never used the word revenue. You made it up. He said income. I am not sure why you conservatives need to lie every time you open your mouth. If the true facts don’t support your position, rethink it. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-harry-reid/528694/79 "2010-02-12T17:36:59Z")
> [@Captain\_Amazing](#): > > This could have been a great news story. The newspapers and CNN could be reporting that the Senate has broken free from its legislative paralysis and passed a jobs bill. Robert Gibbs could stand up there and say,“This bill is an example of the bipartisanship that the President has been calling for, and he’s glad to sign a bill that will help provide jobs to millions of Americans out of work.” Instead, they’re reporting that yet another bill has been stalled, this time by Majority Leader Reid’s unwillingness to compromise, and the story is yet again about how the Democrats control Congress but can’t get anything done. Do you understand the concept of a “poison pill” when it comes to business? That’s what the Republicans did to the bill. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2010, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-harry-reid/528694/80 "2010-02-12T17:37:10Z")
**magellan01** : Then you shouldn’t have a problem with a 100% tax on estates, should you? Unless you’re claiming that offspring really do have some right of parasitism. And it seems you are. If you’re not addressing the rest of my posts, I’ll have to assume you have no answer that can stand up in public. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-harry-reid/528694.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fuck-harry-reid/528694.md?page=5)