Restrict Charitable deductions

Reader comment on: A 65% Death Tax?

Submitted by benjamin (United States), Jun 24, 2010 16:01

Sounds like a good idea to me, a cool billion should be enough for the great-great-great Grandchildren. Perhaps capping the charitable tax deduction would be a good idea. I also think it unfair to equate the greed of billionaires with the "greed" of politicians. When a politician raises taxes, the money gets redistributed to other Americans in the form of services, not into a politician's personal bank account.


Note: Comments are moderated by the editor and are subject to editing.

The Future of Capitalism replies:

Or it gets redistributed to the politician's friends in the form or earmarks, which are then redistributed to the congressman in the form of campaign contributions, which the congressman spends to get re-elected to his job, which pays him a salary and pension that go into his personal bank account until he can quit and become a Washington lobbyists at a higher salary, working for people who want a piece of the redistribution. Sounds cynical, I know. But it's a good portion of the reality. Not the whole reality, I don't want to overstate it. But a good portion of the reality.

Submit a comment on this article

Other reader comments on this item

Title By Date
Estate Tax [107 words]M TrachtenbergJun 24, 2010 17:28
⇒ Restrict Charitable deductions
[w/response] [68 words]
benjaminJun 24, 2010 16:01
I am all for cynicism [80 words]benjaminJun 24, 2010 20:16
Actually the tax on inherited IRAs and 401ks comes close right now. [89 words]LyleJun 24, 2010 15:56
"greed" applied to the billionaires, but not to politicians [217 words]BrettJun 24, 2010 15:51
Athletes and entertainers earn way too much [66 words]benjaminJun 24, 2010 20:11

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to Restrict Charitable deductions by benjamin

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Comments are moderated by the editor and are subject to editing.