It all comes down, I suppose, to a matter of perspective. If, as did our Founders, one presumes that private property belongs to the individual, then one recognizes that government must have a compelling reason for interference with the fundamental right to the that property. On the other hand, if one presumes that the right to oneÂ’s property is subordinate to some pre-existing claim to that property by government, then any resistance to its confiscation by government is somehow immoral or unpatriotic. That was the argument by Joe Biden during this past fallÂ’s presidential campaign, and it is the argument today by the New York Times in todayÂ’s editorial about the estate tax.

Last week, as the unemployment rate hit a 25-year high and nearly one in 10 Americans was receiving food stamps, 10 Democrats in the Senate joined all 41 Republican senators to cut estate taxes for the wealthiest families. The provision would funnel an additional $91 billion over 10 years to the heirs of megafortunes, money that would otherwise have been paid in federal taxes or donated to charity.

With economic pain and suffering on the rise, how do the senators justify a big tax cut for multimillionaires? By asserting that an estate tax cut is just what struggling Americans need.

The response of the NYT editorialists to every argument made by proponents of cutting (and frankly, I believe the proper policy should be eliminating) the estate tax is those arguments are “swill”. But the real argument to be made on this one is that the estate tax should be cut or eliminated because the estates of the dead – no matter how rich they are – should not be looted by government bureaucrats. It is, dare I say it, the private property of the deceased and his/her heirs.

Look at the argument – the legislation “would funnel an additional $91 billion over 10 years to the heirs of megafortunes, money that would otherwise have been paid in federal taxes or donated to charity.” I call “Bullshit!” It would not funnel a penny of tax dollars to anyone – indeed, it would put an end to the government acting like the crew looting the possessions of the dead Ebenezer Scrooge in Dickens’ “A Christmas Carol”. But the editorial, couched in the rankest terms of class warfare, argues that allowing the families of the dead to keep their family property is somehow a raiding of the national coffers and a picking of the pockets of the poor. Again, I cry “Bullshit!”

The cash and properties in those estates have been taxed – indeed, they have probably been taxed more than once. The estate tax is simply the government taking one more bite at the apple on the grounds that “they have too much money”. Such a policy is, dare I say it, a fundamental attack on the very principles upon which our nation was founded. And even though I am one who has no prospects of becoming rich, nor of inheriting from some mega-rich relative (trust me, I’ve searched my family tree looking for a rich uncle or three), I do recognize the fundamental injustice of special taxes on people based upon their economic status (what of “equal protection of the law”, liberals?). Reducing or eliminating this ghoulish confiscation of assets is a therefore not only a good policy, it is the most moral policy.

Posted by: Greg at 12:25 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 576 words, total size 4 kb.