Comments on: Warren Buffett on Giving it Away

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 29 Jun 2006 12:00:00 +0000

I plead for a retraction by Mr. Thomas Hawk himself. The concept of A 100% estate tax for the “wealthy” is ludicrous…(BTW we are all INCREDIBLY wealthy if viewed by a world standard). So why don’t we make the 100% estate tax @ $50,000? Hawk’s idea is right up there with… Al Gore invented the internet! Dumb and Dumberer. I think you would have been better off leaving your hair-brained politics at the door, instead of your blog. Maybe write a commentary for a newspaper-you would fit right, I mean, fit “left” in! Ah! Socialism-Ode to yo Playa!

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 28 Jun 2006 23:49:00 +0000

Another big problem with this is we’re not actually talking cash reserves. If someone starts a business that is worth $50 million and they have $5 million in cash what happens when they die under this idea? Their family has to sell the business in order to pay the taxes on it! That is absolutely crazy!

By: Scott

Scott — Wed, 28 Jun 2006 20:18:00 +0000

"I think that the estate tax on estates over $50 million ought to be 100%. Why over $50 million? Because I believe that $25 million (what would be left assuming the first $50 million being at 50%) is more than enough money to leave your children and heirs to live out their life in relative comfort."

I'm no accountant, but wouldn't a 100% tax on $51 million be $51 million?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 28 Jun 2006 10:23:00 +0000

I think Jill Greenberg should give %100 percent of her profits to organizations that fight child abuse…

… but that’s just my opinion.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 28 Jun 2006 10:23:00 +0000

I think Jill Greenberg should give %100 percent of her profits to organizations that fight child abuse…

… but that’s just my opinion.

By: David

David — Wed, 28 Jun 2006 09:05:00 +0000

Your estate tax tax idea is an uninformed one – our economy would collapse as any small business with a valuation over $50m would be unable to survive beyond one generation. It’s honestly not as hard as you would think for the IRS to come up with a $50m valuation on a successful, ongoing business – and remember, it’s the IRS’s opinion of value that they’re going to tax you on, not yours. Small businesses represent 50% of all private-sector jobs in the US – they’re completely needed.

I think you see a $50m estate and think “guy with $50m in the bank.” That’s not true. The $50m usually is almost entirely non-liquid. So if his heir has to pay $25m in tax, they have to liquidate the company, the family house, everything to pay that tax bill.

I’m not a multi-millionaire, I just have experience in dealing with these issues. So please, think through the ramifications of an opinion like this. It’s just not a viable one. Thanks,

-David

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 21:11:00 +0000

Bill Gates said he’d give away his wealth on his time table. Who are you to say when or even if he was to do something with his money? I am so amazed that think they are open-minded liberals are, in fact, incredibly closed minded. It’s such a shame that efforts like this are met with such animosity.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 14:47:00 +0000

Bill Gates never gave a cent away until people started calling him the Devil and creating online Bill Gates wealth clocks, etc. He’s not giving money away because he actually wants to, but because others have told him to and it’s good PR.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 27 Jun 2006 04:37:00 +0000

IMPOSING an estate tax is not “encouraging” someone to give to charity. Its forcing them to pay ANOTHER tax! Educating someone of the value of what their generosity could do for a cause is “encouraging”. An Estate is not the gov’ts $$$. Why should they have control over it? Is this China? Mexico? Cuba? No, this is the U.S.A. where capitalism is alive and well, where people can make thousands, millions, and even billions of dollars, and have the ability, generosity, and CHOICE to donate their time, talents, and MONEY to a great cause/charity if they so CHOOSE-good grief, please don’t speak of such un-American, ill-thought ideas. There are too many people in Public office already, that have lost their bearing on what it means to be good stewards of the money they ALREADY have of ours! Give. me. a. break.
My hats off to ANYONE that is willing to volunteer their time to a good cause, their talent in whatever capacity to a good cause, and yes, even those that give money. It doesn’t always have to be monetary…almost everyone can volunteer their time-maybe the gov’t could impose a volunteer tax for everyone-now that would make some changes in our country! Maybe parents would be forced to volunteer some time and spend that volunteer time with their children, read to them, nourishing them, teaching them morals and values, showing them the important things in life. And maybe volunteer with under-priveleged children on occassion? Gee, if everybody actually did this…Do you think we would actually need a Bill Gates “education” foundation? Why punish (tax) a select few for working hard and being successful, when we could all chip in for the cause?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 26 Jun 2006 23:58:00 +0000

Imposing a 100% estate tax on everything in an estate over $50,000,000 would not be the government taking any person’s money from them. Since the money is in an estate, the person is dead. You can’t take it with you.

Furthermore, I doubt that many people capable and desirous of acquiring more than $50,000,000 would be deterred from doing so because of an estate tax. There are plenty of billionaires around despite the current estate tax. But if a 100% tax on amounts over $50,000,000 would deter CEOs, CFOs, etc., from amassing huge fortunes by paying themselves salaries more than 400 times higher than what they pay their employees, corporations might begin paying their employees a living wage. That would be a good thing.