The Debate

We had an interesting sub-debate on Saturday morning at our Salon.

Consider the estate tax, or “death tax” if you are a republican.

Is it right?

We had four interesting perspectives presented.

Anthony: “We shouldn’t have an estate tax, because we should encourage families to support their offspring. Taxing the transfer of wealth from parents to children inhibits that. The taxes have already been paid by the parents, the children shouldn’t have to pay the taxes as well.”

Bill: “We should have an estate tax, because inheritance creates an idle leisure class that contribute nothing to society, including money for infrastructure and other services (because they receive their income tax free). A large portion of inheritances should be taxed.”

Ryan: “We should have an estate tax, because it is a transfer of wealth from one entity to another, the same as me recieving a paycheck from a company. It should be taxed as standard income, which is fair. The fact that the inheritor is a relative of the deceased is of no consequence, assuming the child has reached the age of 18 and is therefore a full and separate individual in the eyes of society and the law.”

Glenn: “Children should inherit their parent’s love.”

Lively!

One of the fundamental questions is whether you see a parent and child as a social and economic unit, even after a child reaches the age of adulthood. If two people differ on that fundamental opinion, they will never reach consensus in the debate. The other fundamental question is whether you see government in the role of social engineering (for lack of a better term). Both Bill and Anthony seem to agree that the government has a role in encouraging certain behaviours (either supporting families or discouraging a leisure class), whereas I don’t and Glenn is undeclared.

Interesting stuff.