What does a centrist think?

[Guaranteed]

What does a centrist think when they see a Democrat voting with the Republicans on a radical, agenda-driven issue?

On the other hand, what does a centrist think when a Democrat says things that are "out of the mainstream,"- too "liberal"- in response to a radical, agenda-driven issue?

[MrModerate]

1. I'm sort of centrist myself . . .

Left of center, anyway, as it was defined when I was forming my political model of the universe in the 60s and 70s. Also I talk to true centrists/moderates all the time.

So clarify your question, if you will, and maybe I can respond.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

2. Would you give an example

of a radical agenda-driven issue?

This sounds like a great discussion gearing up.

[Guaranteed]

3. Repealing the estate tax. nt

[Finder]

5. I am pretty much a centrist/moderate, and disagree...

that the estate tax issue should be a dividing factor.

[Guaranteed]

8. I'm pretty sure that the estate tax is an important issue.

The Republicans seem to think so, at least, and are even doing their best to find a "rich" victim of Katrina in order to justify repealing the estate tax.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

6. Gotcha

well, that doesn't seem that radical to me.

But I have been accused of being a centrist myself at times, altho not lately.

I respect anyone whom I see stepping out of their party box once in a while and voting their true conscience and not necessarily the party line. That really impresses me and I tend to take that person more seriously even when they ARE spouting the party line.

Make any sense to you?

[Guaranteed]

10. Well, I invite you to have a look at our federal defecit, given

the massive amount of money we're already spending on Iraq.

Almost half a trillion dollars.

And we're talking about giving tax breaks to the extremely rich.

I gotta say- as a MODERATE liberal- that that doesn't make a whole lot of sense, to me.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

14. God am I stupid

I misread. I thought you meant in the other direction: supporting the estate tax.

I agree that repealing the estate tax is radical and just pretty disgusting. If you can get 1.5 mil w/out tax, well that's enough damned money for everybody.

Sorry I am a bit dim today.

[Guaranteed]

16. Don't worry, everybody gets that from me.

Makes my punch a lot harder, though, doesn't it? :P

[TallahasseeGrannie]

17. Hell yes! n/t

[marbuc]

18. I have to disagree

1.5 million is really not that much when it covers the land and equipment needed to run even the most modest family farm AND the personal assets of the deceased. My family will face this situation when my grandmother passes on.

We are not weathly by most standards, we will have to sell the farm that has been in our family for over a century when my grandmother passes on (we are hoping this won't happen for long time, but let's face it, she's 91, and not in the greatest of health). because we will not be able to pay the estate tax. Even though the farm is probably worth a million or so, none of that is liquid, it is all tied to the land and infrastructure.

I cannot understand why this is an "either, or" debate, or repealing or not repealing. If we increase the level at which the estate tax is triggered, say to $5 million, this would exempt the family farms from the tax, and prevent independent farmers from having to make this painful decision.

[Finder]

19. Agree n/t

[TallahasseeGrannie]

20. Now I am throwing

out opinions on a topic about which I know nothing.

But it would make sense to me to exempt family-owned businesses that need the capital to just keep going.

Thanks for pointing this out. I was never particularly interested in this issue before but you've opened my eyes.

My inheritances have been meager but I was happy to get them.

[Guaranteed]

24. The previous poster's "farm" sounds like fucking garbage.

1.5 million dollar farm. Just can't pay the estate tax!

Oh. OK!! Derr.

[marbuc]

38. Derr, no, we do not have $500,000 plus lying around to pay the tax

Again, the value is tied to the land and equipment, but it is a strictly "break even" operation. We make enough to pay the taxes on the land and overhead. If profitability was the driving factor, we would have sold it long ago. Instead we hold onto it to preserve our family's heritage.

I am so glad you able to break it down to dollars and cents, this is something I'd rather not do. If I had my druthers, I would never see a dime, but instead allow our family farm to stay in the family for generations to come. If you, a self described progressive, cannot see this, then we are in bigger trouble than I thought.

[Guaranteed]

39. They take, nearly, at least, HALF your money in taxes!

Why, that sounds almost unbelievable!

Again, you might just have to sell the farm and settle for a measley couple hundred thousand.

And she didn't use a trust or anything, for such a huge farm?

[marbuc]

42. The estate tax rate

starts at 47%.

[Guaranteed]

45. Assuming you're correct,

47% of a million dollars is 470 thousand dollars.

So, what are you going to do with the remaing half of a million dollars?

Again, assuming you're right.

I'm crying, though.

And your grandmother didn't have a lawyer or accountant finding a way to shelter this farm....

[marbuc]

46. Provided we are forced to sell it?

You don't seem to understand, we don't farm money trees, if faced with the estate tax, we would have to SELL THE FARM TO PAY THE TAX. This is how it works. Yes, if we were FORCED TO SELL THE FARM we would have money left which would be divided up, or put to alternate use, but this IS NOT THE DESIRED OUTCOME. I would prefer to get nothing and keep the farm in the family. It's not a money thing, its about preserving our heritage.

I don't expect you to care, but I do expect you to understand why this is important.

[DLnyc]

23. Absolutely right!

If I recall correctly, the Dems tried all sorts of compromises with higher exclusions, clauses to protect farms and so on, but the Repubs insisted on a COMPLETE repeal. The issue of smaller estates and farms makes a nice tool for Repubs to divide the opposition. But it is BS. The Dems were happy to deal with those issues, but the Repubs insisted on repealing the tax for EVERYONE, even those worth hundreds of millions.

The idea of the estate tax, I think, was that you can make as much as you want during your life, but there should not be a hereditary class of extremely wealthy people who never have to work at all and whose chldren, grandchildren and so on keep getting richer and richer without ever being asked to contribute anything to society. Actually, the tax doesn't prevent handing over fortunes to children, it just decreases the amount.

[Guaranteed]

25. The estate tax has a monetary limit.

It's up near a million dollars.

If people can't "handle" the nominal tax, well, shit!!

YOU'RE JUST GOING TO HAVE TO SELL THE FARM, WHEN YOU INHERIT THAT MILLION-DOLLAR-PLUS PIECE OF PROPERTY.

Shut the HELL up. You get NO fucking sympathy from me.

[Finder]

29. what if there are 5 or 6 children...

who worked the "farm" for under 20g a year for a couple of decades? That is the reality and telling others to "shut the HELL up, you get NO fucking sympathy from me." is not exactly the tolerant, progressive, wanting to understand the issue stance I would expect from a so-called progressive.

[wuushew]

31. Would not the progressive viewpoint be to promote one's OWN merit

free from conditional hereditary entitlement? Is that not why we insist on universal education, non-discrimination in society and level playing fields?

I fail to see why the hardship and struggle of agrarian life somehow exempts it from discussions of estate taxes. Since farming is after all a business why should the government promote small scale farming over any other field or occupation?

People need to eat, beyond that that I don't want the government promoting so called idyllic lifestyles. Many more people were once employed in farming, the advance of mechanization forced the surplus labor into other sectors. If family farms cannot survive the passage between generations why should I feel compelled to modify the nature of the system?

[Guaranteed]

33. It does seem to be a bit on the bullshit side to feel that one is

entitled to hundreds of thousands of dollars....no matter how much work has done to supposedly "earn" it, being underpaid the whole time, apparently.

[Guaranteed]

32. Let's see, 5 or 6 children- for one, only working for 20G a year?

What the hell kind of grandmother is that?

And, in any case, is the 200G's they're going to get in any case just not enough for them- assuming, of course, she deemed all of them worthy in her will?

[Finder]

40. You misunderstand...

the lump sum you mention is only if the farm is sold. The problem is the business cannot continue but needs to be liquidated to pay the taxes.

[Guaranteed]

41. I'm sure something will get worked out.

The problems of multi-millionaires.

Makes me weep.

[DLnyc]

36. Oh. I never heard of a 'limit'

As someone else said, I think that it doesn't kick in until after the first 1.5 million or so. But I never heard anything about a 'limit'. The question before Congress, as I understand, is whether that kick-in level should be raised to infinity; in other words should there be no estate tax at all. You seem to be saying that that kick-in level should be decreased to zero. Or perhaps you're saying something else. It's hard to tell between all the venom. At any rate, even though I support and fight for radical change in society, I have no interest in competing for who has the most radical position. Also, the idea that you will effect radical change by simply steamrolling all opposing points of view is somewhat idealistic. Also, it smacks of fascism. If you actually want to change things, as opposed to just impress people with how radical you are, than it might be good to try to understand where people are coming from, in order to better be able to persuade them or, gasp, horror, come to a mutually acceptable compromise.

Pardon me if I misconstrued something you said. The tone is just a little harsh to me.

[Guaranteed]

37. Yeah, it's a lower limit. Not an upper limit.

A lower limit up near a million dollars.

But, yeah, I'm a commie radical! I'm CRAZZZZAAAAAAY!!!

Ask anyone. That's my M.O. Crazy Commie BullGooseLoony.

The crazy commie who has no sympathy for those inheriting million-dollar-plus estates. Radical left.

Gimme a fucking break. You're goddamned right the tone is harsh. That anyone would go along with the idea that the estate tax- the million-dollar-plus estate tax- needs to be repealed is fucking RIDICULOUS.

So get a clue, and be a Democrat.

[DLnyc]

44. Okay, but actually I OPPOSE the repeal of the estate tax.

So I guess I wasn't able to explain my point of view to you very well at all, if you still think I support the repeal. Let me try one last time:

I ABSOLUTELY BELIEVE IN A STRONG ESTATE TAX.

Also, I think that the 1.5 million 'lower-limit' or kick-in level, is reasonable and perhaps a good idea in order to PREVENT THE REPUBLICANS FROM DIVIDING THE VAST MAJORITY OF AMERICANS who support the estate tax PROVIDED THERE IS A FAIRLY HIGH KICK-IN LEVEL.

Also, I will defend to the death your right to be a commie radical, or any other kind you may choose to be.

Also, I respectfully maintain my right to disagree with some of your opinions, if I can figure out what they are.

[wuushew]

27. Focus on Farms Masks Estate Tax Confusion

-snip-

Neil Harl, an Iowa State University economist whose tax advice has made him a household name among Midwest farmers, said he had searched far and wide but had never found a farm lost because of estate taxes. "It's a myth," he said.


http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/0408-02.htm

[mongo]

9. Maybe that at some point

Estate taxes do more to put wealth into fewer and fewer hands than anything.

When you have to sell the family business to a giant real-estate mega corp to pay the taxes, all you are doing is concentrating more wealth into fewer hands.

But hey, you don't have squat, so no one else should either. The local fat cat in your town is no different than the Hilton family, right?

Whooo - EAT THE RICH - YEAH!!!

(It is awfully hard to be a centrist on DU)

[Guaranteed]

13. I don't think that's realistic. nt

[Jackpine Radical]

4. I was thinking maybe the word "What" in your subject line

is somewhat premature.

[Guaranteed]

15. You mean, the assumption that they think anything at all?

Many of them seem to be "led" than thought-driven.

[TheStates]

7. I want to hear what a centrist thinks about CAFTA.....

And signing away all our trade agreements to NAFTA and CAFTA......And then on top of that, signing a bankruptcy bill for credit card companies.

Are these ideas you support?

[mongo]

11. Hell NO on all accounts

and I believe in health care for all Americans. A single payer system.

If we want to repeal any taxes, lets start with Bush's income tax cuts.

[TheStates]

12. Thats what I thought. Those senators in support aren't centrists. nt

[Finder]

22. No way...not even close. (nt)

[Lady President]

30. Centrist here-- Against CAFTA and NAFTA

However, my family is from Youngstown and Akron, so I was probably more aware of the damage to families when jobs go overseas.

In general, I think because of the Clinton influence most centrist were for NAFTA. After seeing the results, against CAFTA. Just my best guess, your mileage may vary.

I work for a large bank that issues credit cards-- I'm keeping my mouth shut on that one.

[Oerdin]

21. Not even worth...

Spending the time on with an honest anwser.

[Guaranteed]

26. Not even worth thinking about, apparently.

Do you have the first clue as to what I'm even getting at?

[mmonk]

28. Some centrists think compromise

to make the best decision. Sometimes, they are unaware of the extreme right's intentions and instead, think they are just conservatives. I used to be a centrist. Now I'm a radical or at least called one.

[Guaranteed]

35. I used to be a centrist/moderate, as well...

Although I think I was always fairly liberal.

Now I think of myself as a strong to moderate liberal.

[Guaranteed]

34. I think we've gotten a bit TOO focused, in this thread.

I was trying to root out what a centrist thinks watching Democrats reacting differently to the issues that the Repugs put forward...

One capitulating, and one being "crazy"....."out of the mainstream"




Still kind of wondering, there.

[Finder]

43. True, we did...

but I don't think you are crazy or out of the mainstream. I think it is a good debate and one that needs to occur. I see both sides--as a centrist.