This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Connecticut On Its Latest Cash Grab: It’s Not Greed When We Do It
Submitted by Christopher Westley via The Mises Institute,
Those possessing the anti-capitalist mentality — so ascendant in our culture today — often critique market actors as being solely motivated by “greed.” Surely economic systems based on nobler motivations, they say, would better promote the long-run interests of the planet.
The Voluntary Marketplace Uses Greed as Motivation to Serve Others
This is an issue I deal with in detail in my Principles of Economics classes. The fascinating point about the market system isn’t that it is based on greed, but rather that it forces those motivated by greed to act in ways that promote the social interest. If you want to get rich, say by x amount, then you better improve the lives of consumers, through voluntary transactions, by some amount greater than x.
Such are the economic means of acquiring wealth, explained in more detail in 1922 by the German sociologist Franz Oppenheimer, writing at a time before his discipline transmogrified into an enterprise predicated on supporting greater state intervention.
However, problems arise when those motivated by greed find ways to acquire wealth through coercion. Oppenheimer called these the political means (as opposed to the voluntary means of the marketplace), and we witness them today when (1) firms benefit from their relationships to the state as opposed to the consumer, and (2) the state itself uses its legal monopoly on violence to acquire wealth.
A New Death Tax in Connecticut
These ideas ran through my head when I read about the new probate court “fees” approved by the Connecticut legislature this month, reinforcing its status as being among the worst states in which to die. Whereas the maximum fee for settling estates there was $12,500, it can now go as high as $100,000, and in some cases, well over $1 million. These “fees” are in addition to estate taxes that range between 7.2 to 12 percent on estates greater than $2 million.
The “fees” were justified on an expected budget shortfall of $32 million that the legislature wanted to fill, but I wondered: Where was the outcry from the greed-police? One can imagine the reaction if, due to poor fiscal management, Costco or Best Buy announced they were going to double or triple prices on their popular items to account for losses. Yet, governments do this all the time, and somehow, it is never considered greed when political means are used to acquire wealth.
Adding to the irony is the fact that resources are more likely to be squandered when forced out of private hands and into the public sector, where incentives to waste today promote bigger budgets tomorrow, and where crony capitalism is fed. Resources that might have been saved and directed to productive uses are instead directed to various interest groups and well-connected firms.
Capital Arises from Thriftiness, Not Greed
Those who would encourage greater transfers of wealth to the public sector forget that
[c]apital is not a free gift of God or of nature. It is the outcome of a provident restriction of consumption on the part of man. It is created and increased by saving and maintained by the abstention from dissaving. Neither have capital or capital goods in themselves the power to raise the productivity of natural resources and of human labor. Only if the fruits of saving are wisely employed or invested, do they increase the output per unit of the input of natural resources and of labor. If this is not the case, they are dissipated or wasted.
The accumulation of new capital, the maintenance of previously accumulated capital and the utilization of capital for raising the productivity of human effort are the fruits of purposive human action. They are the outcome of the conduct of thrifty people who save and abstain from dissaving, viz., the capitalists who earn interest; and of people who succeed in utilizing the capital available for the best possible satisfaction of the needs of the consumers, viz., the entrepreneurs who earn profit. [Mises, The Anti-Capitalist Mentality, pp. 84–85]
Capital is actually a gift of the thrifty, and it is not free. There’s no surprise that states with no death taxes whatsoever attract capital from places like Connecticut. Its pols are between a rock and a hard place, with the rock being the need to finance the current level of redistribution (and to never, ever reduce it), and the hard place being the increasing willingness of the pilfered to engage in tax avoidance. Its legislature must be the trust attorney’s best friend.
Sick minds deemed the supply of death perfectly inelastic and therefore worthy of tax. But it’s not just people who die in Connecticut. Wealth does too, illustrating what happens when greed is unconstrained by market forces. Some writers might consider Connecticut’s economy something of a model worth emulating, but the fact is that Connecticut — like every other tax jurisdiction — grows its public sector at the expense of its private, and that when capital predictably flows elsewhere, economic opportunity diminishes.
»
- 31799 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
We all understand you like dynastic wealth, Mises. Your backers were all born to it.
Drinking deeply from the idiot fountain I see.
The problem has never been dynastic wealth. It has always been the existence of the State that allows said wealth to be turned into political power at a massively subsidized and leveraged rate. The State takes money by force, then implements laws by force. Someone with enough coin can pay off a few politicians to influence that apparatus of coercion. More force and even more monopolizatin of power in the hands of the State, which means a few political families, cannot fix this issue. Of course said wealthy families and political families are usually one and the same anyway.
It is also foolish to believe that the truly wealthy and powerful are hurt by these laws. They know how to get around them. This mainly will just mainly hurt the new rich from becoming competitors with the established wealth and power. Your belief that these laws represent a stand against the wealthy and powerful is naive and misguided.
....counting down the days.... it won't be long now. Color me fucking gone. Fuck this place.
It costs a lot to continue to suppress the facts about the Sandy Hook false flag operation. "Actors" ask for additional payments, news reporters want pay for new "puff pieces" about the police work done that December 14, 2012 and, of course, there are the police there that day who were bought off with early and expensive pensions. For Connecticut, it is appropriate that taxes on real dead people pay for the costs of covering up this false flag operation after the feds shut off the money taps.
Soooo, nobody died? Is that your final answer?
sorry rowdy roddy, but if my child "dies" I do not believe it until I see his body. you refuse to show me his body....unless its death by asteroid, show me a FKN BODY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
not a SINGLE parent at SH saw the body of their "dead child." ZERO. how's that sit with you? does it sit as well as all of the zeroed out mortgage records in the newtown register? or the lamentation pages made the day before the "massacre"? or the fact that vance firstly told everyon e the kid went in there with two handguns and they also found a long gun in the trunk, and that's what they found? and it was a shotgun? and the AR15 never existed until the reporters asked about it? and the fact that supposedly mom's guns were all legit and registered with the sole exception of that AR15, that she uhhh yeah bought under shady circumstances from a "shady dealer" and it wasnt "properly documented"..... *cough can you say THROWDOWN....
You may believe that no parent saw their child's body, but I seriously doubt that it is true.
We left in 2013. Smartest thing ever. GTFO Duc888. Don't wait. Get!
"wealth greater than 2 million"...
If you are leaving your kid more than 2 million you are a fucking coward who failed to prepare your offspring for life.
no fucking sympathy for all those useless paper-pushing fucks in CONnectitcut.
Your assessment of parenting skills justifies theft? What universe do you live in?
you come into this world with nothing asshat, you leav the same way.
I love the way fucking cowards freely identify themselves.
My son will be fine you stupid fuck, he is already earning his own money.
what a fucking loser you must be, what do you have against EARNING YOUR OWN MONEY?
Besides, if you keep it in an American bank, it will be gone before you can get to it. My son knows this too and
already knows all about tax havens etc.
When Connecticut files taxes with the federal government they only send blank forms and a picture of a young banksters son playing lacrosse.
Then all debts are forgiven.
Exactly. Fuck em.
My only child is a teacher, making 40k/yr. So, yes I will be leaving her more than 2 million. BTW, I was left 2/3 of a million 27 years ago. In case you haven't heard, its takes money to make money.
No one had to give me any to get started. Fine, you are free to leave.
In case you missed it, money is free (ZIRP). The fuckers destroyed "money" a long time ago. Fuck em. You and I both know what is coming. Let the cowards run and hide. No where to run to because this time it really is global Weimar.
In case you missed it, money is free (ZIRP).
You and your children might have access to ZIRP. The rest of us still have to earn it the hard way.
Wow, so you think someone that is given $2,000,001 is worthless and knows nothing about "life"?
Speaking solely for myself, I'd set the limit on inheritance to $200M or some other arbitrary figure that would be high enough to exempt anyone who isn't passing along the kind of wealth that leads to Walton and Koch and Rockefeller types taking over our society and political system when all they did to earn such power was to have the right parents.
Hmmm, funny you didn't mention Soros and his ilk in that Rogues Gallery.
Soros is a complete asshat for other reasons. How much did he inherit? Do you know?
I actually have much less of a problem with a complete asshat making a lot of money and running around doing what he wants with it, than some son or daughter of an asshat who inherited it. At least the guy who made it must have had some skill other than being a lucky sperm and egg.
At least the guy who made it must have had some skill other than being a lucky sperm and egg.
Yes, typically the skill of inveigling government officials into granting them quasi- (or even outright) monopolies. In other words, most of the rich now are political operators.
If you limit the amount they can pass on to their children, how do you think they'll spend that wealth? On good causes? Or buying even more political influence?
At least if they leave it to their spendthrift children it'll wind up being dissipated on consumer goods rather than, say, to buy another Maidan "uprising".
Your prescriptions for the problems of our republics are the usual lefty combination of shallow thinking and envy. Instead of writing laws that will prevent the unscrupulous using government to make themselves fortunes, you want to write laws that tax them more when they do.
Just keep hacking at the branches of evil, and leave the roots untouched.
.
Speaking solely for myself, I'd set the limit on inheritance to $200M or some other arbitrary figure that would be high enough to exempt anyone who isn't passing along the kind of wealth that leads to Walton and Koch and Rockefeller types taking over our society and political system when all they did to earn such power was to have the right parents.
Why the hell do you need to set a hard limit on the amount of inheritance, when anything more than ~$5.4m will have already been subject to estate tax @ ~50%+ depending on the jurisdiction? Further, that estate value is post income tax, etc., that the decedent paid during his or her life. In other words, the present law is to shave half of the income, then half of the bequest, but that's not enough?
As stated by BigJim above, through this policy, you're not actually attacking political clout, you're just attacking the right of someone to decide what to do with his or her own money (after it has been taxed once). I'll leave you to venture how this might affect one's desire to produce.
PS, you're missing one of the most fundamental aspects of tax law (or the law in general); the more complicated the law becomes, the harder it is to enforce.
Yes, if the "law" says they will steal from anything over 2,000,000 and you actually leave 2,000,001, yes, you really are a fucking idiot.
You might want to fire your accountant to.
Exactly. There is no reason to be leaving an estate large enough to trigger their rules. There are many ways of distributing one's wealth to heirs during one's lifetime that will avoid the problem altogether. Just do those things, instead of wasting energy fighting their attempts to confiscate...which you KNOW they are going to do.
Like Hannah Dagoe who, on her way to Tyburn to be hanged, threw her clothing to the crowd. Good clothing was valuable, and it was tradition that the hangman got to keep the prisoner's clothes after dispatching them. So she decided not to let hers be confiscated, she wasn't going to need them for long anyway.
She took total control of her "estate" in a way that completely kept her "assets" out of the hands of those who would steal them. And that is what people must do, because our PTB wouldn't hesitate to strip your dead body just like Hannah's hangman...Have a last laugh on them like she did.
You two dipshits... There are a million reasons why you would rather report a small amount of excess value in an estate and file your 706, rather than conveniently value it under and not file (you think those estates coming under the mark don't get audited?). Aside from the fact that if you have $1 over the exemption amount, then you're only taxed on the excess...
Further, sometimes you can't avoid an estate large enough to trigger estate taxes or, alternatively, the way the decedent's assets are situated make it practically impossible.
Just saw 100 u hauls leaving town.....
just moving my gold bars to a safer place.
They have to pay a hidden "exit tax" when they leave. If they sell their home and don't buy another in Connecticut the State will change them a bit under 2% of the sales price.
Highest gas tax, worst roads.
We tricked some folks in pitching Obama's economic recovery.
Move out of Connecticut, Illinois, California, etc.
All tax-happy states. Let the tax sharks eat feed on themselves.
They are not sharks, they are money sucking parasites. Or should I say in your case, money sucking lampreys who feed on the sharks.
Nearly everybody cheers the oncoming of socalism because they will get something from those who have more. Then they fear those who have less because they will have to give it to them.
One of the few things Ayn Rand got right.
+1 for the lampreys. lake champlain went to shit shortly before they arrived. was weird catching a fish that had gotten away and had this perfect circle bite mark and sucker punchhole in the middle of it.
now you have to run junk every one of my posts on general principle, lter? pathetic.
Cant wait for these Liberal cunts to start eating each other...great theater. This is exactly what you assholes wanted, now stew in it.
Dick Fuld sure was thrifty when he set up McAllister Ranch in Bakersfield Calinfornia, eh, Mr. Paulson, & Bernanke? And Bernie Maddoff was perhaps the most thrifty of all given that he lived on billions for years without even conducting trades to keep his 'thriftyness' in really good working order, Mr. Westley.
NOTE: The Mafia is the thriftiest of all IMHO. And they offshore their profits too, Mr. Westley.
Cocaine dealers are 'thrifty' like Warren Buffett too, eh.
"Your monies is ours!"
Battle cry of the .gov and banking/corporate/insurer cabal.
Worst run state in the Union and itis run by the unions for the unions.
The labor unions and the public employee "bargaining units" (unions with another name) run the state. They also have massive unfunded pensions. They have a surprise coming.
And as soon as one of those Union guys gets his retirement/disapbility he moves to florida.
Most of the old folks in Connecticut are pinkos, who have spent their whole lives advocating for this sort of confiscation. They're not about to change their stripes now. Anyone who has not already left CT (or MA, NJ or RI for that matter) is a die-hard socialist, so don't waste sympathy on them.
as if everyone with their head screwed on relatively straight has the means to just up and move his family elsewhere where there are no roots. call 'em out on their lack of balls, or their path of seppuku supporting friends and family and staying in the shithole....but that dont mean they are socialists, that dont mean the union members arent wary of their unions and representation. people know who gets their bread buttered and who dont. the rest just do drugs.
Well, that little piece of legislation will certainly give a boost to Florida home prices.
For every action there's a reaction. No doubt the estate planners can't wait to get their commercials on the air in Connecticut. "Afraid of the Connecticut death fee system? See us and we'll ensure you pay them nothing...."
Nice try, Connecticut.
About 15 years ago I worked for a small financial planning company that specialized in avoiding probate with trusts. This new fee will double their business.
If your estate goes to probate, you're doing it wrong.
More than a few people prefer to get a court order regarding the transfer of their assets... not appropriate in all cases, but it definitely has a place.
The desire to provide for one's children is a major motivating force for many good people.
Envy is the most dangerous vice for those who are successful.
Keeping wealth through generations is a real challange for wealthy families. I plan to learna few things before i croak. I also plan to leave the family more than I got coming into this world. If you don't like that, well avoiding your type is one of the things I plan to learn.
I don't know why some people believe they should control their 'stuff' from beyond the grave.
Use it during your time here, and if you want your children to have it, gift it or spend it on them while you are still alive. THAT way you control where it goes.
Most of these fools don't realize they are likely leaving their heirs a major fucking headache. Not to mention the nasty battles that often erupt between heirs when there is any serious money involved.
Then there are the lawyer's fees for straightening all that shit out...is that who you want to have your money? A bunch of fucking lawyers?
Do what you want with it while you are alive. But don't expect your heirs, or the State, to respect your wishes after you die. Expect a free-for-all, with the State, and attorneys, walking off with the lion's share. And a bitter family feud that might last a lifetime. And there are always those who use that inheritance to control their heirs during life...
Such stupidity, this worship of money. You have no claim on anything you leave behind after you die. You only get to borrow it during your little stint here, that's it. Like 3-D glasses, you gotta drop 'em in the bin on your way out of the theater.
So... $2 million at todays 1% gets you a lousy $20,000/YEAR. These colonbreath socialists should have made it $100 million and above... ditto for the federal estate tax. If you really want to target a-holes like Blankfein, Dimon and Buffet... it could be $500 million plus, NO EXEMPTIONS. OF course, adding a re-instatement of Glass-Stegall is mandatory. BTW... if you are that loaded... why not buy a PRIMARY residence in NV and lease-back in the Commie state you live in now?
They don't want to target Blankfein, Dimon and Buffet
The green in New Haven has three churches, side by side, to represent the strength of their combined faith.
Sunday was the working man's day off. After mass, when they came across the green, they were all brothers.
If I go to Connecticut, I will go as a drafted troop. I will not perform.
Fuck you, DC
Free Connecticut!
All I can say is that I'm glad I don't have $2 million.
Wait. What?
FUCK YOU CONNECTICUT
one of the best places I've been to there has (had?) a huge sign that said CONNECTICUT HATES YOU
Volf Blister, Israeli military inductee and neck beard goatboy. Enemy
I know a widow who was fairly weathy and after her husband died she started writing cheques for $5,000 to every relative she had, cousins, nieces, nephews ect.. They had no kids of their own. She did this 3 times until most of her money was gone. It was done to avoid inheritance taxes.
I buried some asshole who took advantage of a widow. Due to my record I got a combat dispensation.
Where do you live, boy?
The one thing I find horribly wrong with the system is the dead still making money...
http://www.forbes.com/dead-celebrities/
Public domain after death? Thoughts?
Because my friend supports and admires Netenyahu, Netenyahu has this opportunity to state his case.
State your case.
Mr. Netenyahu, I am holding all the cards. As the leader of your nation, you are required to respond.
Answer me.
I got head in a sweaty circular elevator in the saint louis arch, i whored her out and she lives in connecticutt now on some half dyke quest. Hey bitch, howdy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRrAln0dtgY
how's the herp doing?
I avoid buying anything from totalitarian liberal socialist states like CONnecticut, New York, California, etc. I don't want to live there and I don't want my money to live there, either.
Let them eat freed negros
This is your last chance: State your case, Bibi Netenyahu.
My sons will not die for you.
Americans seem to think that they can spend more on their bloated military (and its wars) than the rest of the world combined, and not pay for it (states suffer in turn because of Federal cuts). This is magical thinking.
Politiicians pass such measures in a somewhat covert way. While we can clearly see what they're doing, they promote it as transferring wealth from the wealthy to the less well to do, but the truth is the wealthy just move to other states, and the wealth that remains are accepting of this tax by not taking action. But the real government revenue comes from the masses that can't easily afford to move without enduring some level of hardship.
Those possessing the anti-capitalist mentality — so ascendant in our culture today — often critique market actors as being solely motivated by “greed.” Surely economic systems based on nobler motivations, they say, would better promote the long-run interests of the planet.
Fail. Go to the back of the class. There is no difference in the "mentality" of the capitalist and the anti-capitalist. Rather, the feelings and innate desire to promote self interest give rise to both economic systems. Further, the only difference between the classical types of economies is how a particular person or group controls the narrative of its power. Whether it's the "party" or the "tycoon" is of little difference to everyone else.
Self interest is a motivator for every conscious human act. There is no nobler motivation because there is no other motivation.
PS, capitalism does not exist outside the incubator. Self interest demands that rational actors will avoid the normalization of profit. Thus, the competition that separates capitalism from the rest of the pack has some serious limitations. The different types of classical economies are best differentiated by how centralized planning and control are utilized to make purchase decisions for all the goods and services throughout the economy, not how income is ultimately distributed (as there is no difference between economic types for the latter, which is practically all that matters).
A father should marry his son, then all the money flows tax free to the surviving spouse
Any person in the USA can pass his entire estate tax free to anyone he chooses by marriage. It hasn't been scrutinized by the courts yet but the fuckheads of the SCOTUS said it lies in the 14th amendment.
I wish we had a tax system that barely touched earned income, treated unearned income without any preferences over earned income and then hit estates harder with some reasonable amount of inheritance being, again, touched lightly. For example: 5% income tax on all earned and unearned income (with all deductions phased out) and a 60% inheritance tax on everything above $10 Million on estates. The first $10 Million would be passed on tax free. I prefer each generation to be able to create its own wealth and the button gets reset when the estate values get too high. This system would would make it easier to support yourself so long as you were willing to work for a living but there would no longer be people born knowing that they and their heirs will never have to work.
The state symbol of Connecticut is an oak tree. The rebels hid their constitution in that tree.
There is NO GREATER GREED than
the greed of socialist collectivist parasites and thieves
for other people's earnings.