OPINION & EDITORIAL
Robin Hood only lives in fairy tales, liberals’ fantasies
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Sam Clegg:
- Let me keep my own cash, SSFC (January 24, 2008)
- What's traditional about prejudice? (January 21, 2008)
- Don't bother filling diversity positions (December 5, 2007)
- AIDS class reveals societal problems (November 7, 2007)
- Lecturer's views no match for knee-jerk antagonists (October 24, 2007)
Related Stories:
- Doyle's oil tax will hurt consumers (February 19, 2007)
- Better late than never? (April 10, 2006)
- Doyle wrongly hikes taxes (May 3, 2007)
- Cieslewicz: keeping Madison progressive (March 3, 2005)
- Democrats losing liberalism to GOP (January 27, 2006)
by Sam Clegg
Thursday, February 7, 2008
Take heart, oh desperate masses of this great state. The budget shortfall will not go unresolved! There is a heroic effort being mounted by One Wisconsin Now — a progressive political advocacy group — to reinstate the estate tax, also known as the “death tax.”
The death tax is leveled on the estates of deceased individuals and taxes actual money, as well as assets such as small businesses, farms and private land holdings. The people who support this legislation are undoubtedly at the forefront of the struggle for the public good — champions of the poor, the elderly, children and cash-strapped students struggling to get an education.
Unfortunately, because I obviously hate poor people, the elderly, children and cash-strapped students, I must, on principle, oppose the reinstitution of the inheritance tax in Wisconsin. Such is the extent of that vicious and unrelenting hatred that, instead of favoring the death tax, I enthusiastically support cutting down on spending programs simply so that this noble attempt to rescue the helpless poor can remain untouched by legislators scrambling to make up the state’s $300 million deficit.
Despite the best intentions of the utopians, however, the numbers just don’t add up. A report submitted by Daniel Miller of the Joint Economic Committee demonstrates that on the federal level, a death tax has the effect of reducing the stock of capital in the economy by approximately $497 billion. The death tax raises little money in the short-term as well, the report states, because any revenue gained from the death tax is lost by a corresponding drop in income tax revenues.
Finally, the Economic Committee’s report explains that massive amounts of environmentally sensitive land — 2.6 million acres of forest in 2001 — have been harvested by those being taxed in order to come up with the money.
Scott Ross, the executive director of One Wisconsin Now and something of an amateur economist himself, disagrees. Mr. Ross recently stated in a press release that the repeal of the inheritance tax for the state’s wealthiest individuals was an “absurd” tax break for “the state’s next Paris Hilton.” Mr. Ross continued his assault against inherited wealth by declaring that his group wanted to “make sure that people are aware that this pot of money is just sitting out there.”
If by “sitting out there,” he means “being invested in the economy of Wisconsin,” then he would be right.
It so happens that his bogeyman, Paris Hilton, won’t inherit the vast bulk of the money from the Hilton fortune. Almost all of hotel chain founder Conrad Hilton’s estate went to the charitable foundation in his name, which is worth $2.5 billion and has distributed $450 million since receiving the bulk of Conrad’s estate after his death. If Paris Hilton is the necessary but unpalatable echo of men like Mr. Hilton, then pass me another plate of drunken degeneracy.
The problem is that if the death tax is reinstated, this money would not go from the pockets of donors to charitable organizations, and then to the people who need it most — the poor and hungry — but rather, it would go toward government programs of dubious benefit.
And, of course, as with every other argument against unnecessary taxes, the only reason to oppose penalizing wealthy individuals for kicking the bucket would be a direct representation of all that is greedy and unwholesome in this country. There couldn’t be any other reason for opposing the death tax.
It wouldn’t be because the prophets of progressivism merely want this money and Wisconsin’s wealthiest people have actually earned it. It wouldn’t be because there is an alternate vision of America, an America where it is the most sacred right of individuals to dispose of every last dime of their money as they see fit.
None of those justifications for opposing the tax could possibly be correct. The true culprit must be the miserly indifference of the rich toward the agony of the poor. So the state Legislature must do what is wrong, but easy. That venerable body must ignore the advice of the Daniel Millers of the world, who have proven that the death tax not only fails to accomplish its stated goal of reducing the deficit, but at the same time makes future deficits more likely, thereby bringing about the economic equivalent of a gas chamber.
As envisioned by Ayn Rand, a magnificently progressive vision of Wisconsin is within our grasp because One Wisconsin Now and its affiliates will frame this debate in ways that make it seem like the opposition to the death tax is morally comparable to simultaneously butchering everyone under the age of 10, over 70, or anyone with an annual income lower than $35,000. It is a Wisconsin that defies every principle of economics to impose its twisted idea of “the higher good.” It is a Wisconsin that takes from each according to his or her ability, and gives to each according to need.
Lenin would be proud.
Sam Clegg (sclegg@wisc.edu) is a freshman majoring in political science and economics.
Anonymous (February 7, 2008 @ 8:32am):
"As envisioned by Ayn Rand..."
You're a Randroid, Sam? SHOCKING! Now if only you layered Scientology on top of it, you'd have the idiocy trifecta.
Anonymous (February 7, 2008 @ 9:27am):
With no so-called death tax will there be any tax paid on the huge, previously never taxed, capital gains that represent the bulk of the dead people's wealth?
Or will that income never be taxed, unto the last generation?
Anonymous (February 7, 2008 @ 9:35am):
"The best way to help the poor is to not be one of them." attributed as "Robert Ringer's Axiom (and copied/stolen by such motivational speakers as Mark V. Hansen and Anthony Robbins).
However, a close match is to oppose government theft... "Stop Organized Crime, Abolish the IRS"
bob bliss (February 7, 2008 @ 10:42am):
Good job Sam Clegg! You are correct.
Anonymous (February 7, 2008 @ 11:02am):
Tax their coffins, tax their shrouds,
Tax their souls beyond the clouds;
Tax 'small' business, tax the shop;
Tax their incomes, tax their stocks;
Tax the living, tax the dead;
Tax the unborn before they're fed;
Tax the water, tax the air,
Tax the sunlight if you dare;
Tax them all, tax them well,
Take it all, don't leave a smell;
Tax the good roads, tax the stones,
Tax the farmers, tax their loans,
Kill their credit, raise their rates,
Tax the cities, tax the States;
Save the profiteer his gold,
Tax the rich, tax the old;
Tax them just all you can,
This is, friends, the Doyle plan.
Anonymous (February 7, 2008 @ 11:21am):
I wonder how the conversations go in the Badger Herald office when they decide to give Sam Clegg a column...
"We need someone to say something really, really stupid. Not just everyday stupid, but jaw droppingly inane."
"I've got just the man for the job. Sam Clegg hasn't let us down in that department yet."
Keep up the good work Sam!
Anonymous (February 7, 2008 @ 11:35am):
I think it's stupid that liberals want to tax everything, yet they don't say a word about the way our taxes are wasted. That's always the scenario when they are the ones running the show. Try to make life easier for someone and they bitch.
I'd also like to know why liberals are so obsessed with taxing the crap out of the rich when they know from experience that the little guy is the one that ends up paying it all in the end.
Robert Doeckel (February 7, 2008 @ 12:39pm):
Oh and this vaunted "economist" Daniel Miller...nothing more than an ex-GOP staffer, RNC researcher. hardly great unbiased economic data.
Anonymous (February 7, 2008 @ 1:00pm):
I hope you're not taking any grants from the tax-paying Leninists of Wisconsin. I think your tax-subsidized education is feeling betrayed by this article.
Marquette or Northwestern will take your $40,000 tuition with a smile.
Anonymous (February 7, 2008 @ 1:11pm):
How the hell do you "penalize" someone who is dead? They no longer exist, so they cannot possibly be said to have interests!
Robert Doeckel (February 7, 2008 @ 4:22pm):
and for those of you interested in doing your part in stopping this ridiculous handout to the wealthy, go to http://www.onewisconsinnow.org/page/petition/inheritance to sign the One Wisconsin Now petition to the Wisconsin State Legislature.
Kyle Szarzynski (February 7, 2008 @ 4:22pm):
I must say, when you cite pseudo-philosopher Ayn Rand approvingly, you tend to lose legitimacy.
Anonymous (February 7, 2008 @ 5:42pm):
A really great post by 11:21 am, i like how the person took Sam's argument, broke it down for us, gave reasons why the idea posed a problem for the state/country's best interest, and then most importantly, came up with a better solution to the present problem.
No sir, you keep up the good work! I'm glad to see that my parent's hard earned tax dollars are going to fund YOUR education, which appears to be lacking in the logic department
Anonymous (February 7, 2008 @ 6:03pm):
"I wonder how the conversations go in the Badger Herald office when they decide to give Sam Clegg a column...
"We need someone to say something really, really stupid. Not just everyday stupid, but jaw droppingly inane."
"I've got just the man for the job. Sam Clegg hasn't let us down in that department yet."
Keep up the good work Sam!"
You never said *why* his opinion is stupid. That, as anyone with an IQ above a plant knows, is an ad hominem and not a real argument.
Keep up the good work indeed, anon.
Anonymous (February 7, 2008 @ 8:31pm):
and why are you sticking up for the 1% of Wisconsin's wealthiest estates while the rest of us have to pick up the tab? The estate tax has been collected in Wisconsin since 1899 - how are we going to replace that revenue stream? oh yeah, the other 99% of us have to pick up the tab.
and i won't hear the argument about reducing government spending. the man who repealed the estate tax nationally (GWB) also increased federal spending more than any other president in my lifetime. so where does that extra money come from to pay for his deficits?
Anonymous (February 7, 2008 @ 8:54pm):
Typical liberals, you put a intelligent point in front of them, give them the numbers and point out the facts. But rather then make a rational intelligent remark that refutes the statement, they resort to hate fueled name calling and ignore all the information.
"Your a Randiod" or " I must say, when you cite pseudo-philosopher Ayn Rand approvingly, you tend to lose legitimacy."
You know, because no one takes logic, facts, and peaceful trade seriously. Silly liberals and your childlike tantrums. Now go back to your self righteous indignation and forget that anyone hurt your head with rational thoughts or figures.
Anonymous (February 8, 2008 @ 8:18am):
I feel pity for those of you who feel you must take and take rather than earn your own keep. I didn't work hard my entire life so that those of you who sit on your butts and whine can take my son's rightful inheritance. I want him to have it, not you undeserving slugs whose parents obviously taught you nothing about personal responsibility.
Anonymous (February 8, 2008 @ 9:50am):
kyle,
I must say, I must say...what a saucy criticism! Forgive me for citing someone who has published 5 major fiction novels and 7 philosophical/political texts! Pardon my atrocious lack of philosophical decorum. Pardon the fact that we, as two writers at a relatively small but excellent paper have nothing but our own claims to moral legitimacy and the occasional statistic to support what we say. Pardon the fact that I am not so presumptious as to assume that the students here will continuously take me at my indignant word independent of any reference to individuals of a higher stature than either of us.
Sincerely,
Sam Clegg
Add a comment
We welcome your thoughts, but please keep your feedback thoughtful, on-topic and respectful. Offensive language, personal attacks, or irrelevant comments may be deleted.
Login...
Not registered? Sign up now.
It's quick, free, and the email address you provide will not be sold or solicited.
