From Woodstock’s Richard Rostron:
Are politicians tempted to intercept Baby Boomer wealth as it passes hands?
What are the odds that they aren’t?
(This article is based on an interview with an experienced financial adviser who spent time on the floor of the Stock Exchange in Chicago. He wishes to remain anonymous)
Imagine dangling $68-trillion in front of politicians while assuming that, other than a limited amount from around the edges, it’s generally out of their reach.
Can you picture politicians simply accepting this as the way things are or would you expect them to look for a stick they can use to knock chunks of cash out of the bundle swinging temptingly in front of their eyes?
This is not an arbitrary scenario.
It’s an analogy for the $68-trillion Baby Boomers currently control and are planning to distribute to their heirs.
The politicians, no doubt, realize they can’t get it all.
But, equally obviously, they are drooling over the prospect of how much they can get.
Substantial portions of this ‘nest egg’ are currently residing in IRAs (about $11 trillion), which are taxable when inherited.
The beneficiaries of funds from IRAs have 10 years to ‘dissolve or distribute’ these inheritances.
But the remainder of the accumulated wealth may or may not be taxable.
If the inheritance is through insurance, there are no taxes.
After IRAs, we’re still talking about serious cash ($57 trillion), even in these days of trillion-dollar spending bills.
We don’t need rocket scientists to figure out that the government will want a piece of that pie, and the bigger the better.
Our current national debt is around $30 trillion
If feds tax that $57 trillion by 33 percent, they’ll rake in about $19 trillion.
That would take a nice bite out of the national debt.
And imagine if the politicians can find a way to take a bigger bite.
Keep in mind that politicians in The Swamp tend to think bigger
The update of the words of Sen. Everett Dirksen follows accordingly:
“A (trillion) here, a (trillion) there, and pretty soon you’re talking real money.”
The point is that people in government tend to think big, especially when it comes to taxing and spending other peoples’ money.
Considering, what are the odds that some exceptionally clever people in government didn’t see this coming long way back?
Could this help to explain why Democrats (as well as some Republicans) don’t seem terribly concerned about the skyrocketing national debt?
They could have their eyes on the ultimate ‘wealth redistribution.’
If what Dems did to Illinois home values is an indicator, they won’t be able to cash in before it all hilariously collapses, like some Beanie Baby market.
There is no safety as long as a single Socialist DEMOCRAT remains living on this Earth.
*
The more we do to you,
the less you seem to believe it.
Joseph Mengele
*
Democrats are straight up communists.
Free yourself from knowing anyone one of them anti American POS MFers
Friend or family cut them lose.
Stark, you are 100% on target.
I will never watch, listen on the radio to, or attend another MLB game. FU MLB.
Look what happened in Cypress?
https://nomadcapitalist.com/2013/03/18/your-bank-account-is-no-longer-sacrosanct/
Democrat Senator Cherokee Liz Warren had long ago proposed a yearly “surtax” on net worth of “wealthy” individuals. She updated that recently with her statement:
“It’s time to fundamentally transform our tax code so that we tax the wealth of the ultra-rich, not just their income,” said Senator Warren. “By asking our top 75,000 households to pay their fair share, my proposal will help address runaway wealth concentration and at the same time accelerate badly needed investments in rebuilding our middle class.”
The Ultra-Millionaire Tax taxes the wealth of the richest Americans. It applies only to households with a net worth of $50 million or more-roughly the wealthiest 75,000 households, or the top 0.1%. Households would pay an annual 2% tax on every dollar of net worth above $50 million and a 3% tax on every dollar of net worth above $1 billion. Because wealth is so concentrated, Saez and Zucman project that this small tax on roughly 75,000 households will bring in $2.75 trillion in revenue over a ten-year period.
So, if there were a bill in the House and the Senate and it somehow passed, HOW SOON in years to come would it affect the less rich. Such as a family in Barrington Hills, Woodstock or Crystal Lake with a house and property worth about One million and savings including IRAs of about $800,000 and a yearly income of $200K. Two million dollars total. At “only” 1 percent surtax, that is $20,000 to the Govmnt for REDISTRIBUTION.
This would be fair IF only Democrats and those who vote for Democrats would be assessed the surtax. But what changes would be needed so that the IRS knew who are the Democrats and every single person that votes for even one Democrat anytime, anywhere in the U.S.
So, Cherokee Liz has the mentality of 5-year old toddler who is fascinated by stories and fairy tales of Robinhood.
Regarding the wealth Tax, this is just another spread the wealth tax.
It will stop people from accumulating assets and investments as well as rewards for hard work.
However, I do have a question, will the people who pay the wealth tax receive a credit for taxes paid if your wealth decreases the following year?????
Since you are including investments and items that change in value, what if stocks tank, home value decreases.
Also, will you get a credit on the capital gains if you sell the assets?
I agree they’ll be tempted to tax it, but not for the purpose of reducing the national debt.