Let’s Call Him ‘77% BERNIE’: Sanders Wants To SPIKE Estate Taxes – Here’s The 411

Written by Wes Walker on February 1, 2019

The Democrats are always looking for new and better ways to squeeze blood from a stone in taxes. They have no choice — the Government Leviathon they’re growing is one thirsty beast.

It’s a simple equation. More taxpayer money in the government’s hands is more POWER in their hands.

The beating heart of the left’s model of government is ever-increasing centralized power; if power is the beating heart, your tax dollars are the lifeblood.

Is it any wonder Bernie & Co. look longingly at billionaires the way Homer Simpson looks at a donut?

Bernie thinks he’s found yet another way to raid our piggy banks.

Sen. Bernie Sanders presented a plan Thursday to expand estate taxes on the wealthy, including a new 77 percent rate on billionaires’, as he becomes the latest liberal Democrat to advocate a levy on the rich to combat income inequality.

‘The fairest way to reduce wealth inequality, invest in the disappearing middle class and preserve our democracy is to enact a progressive estate tax on the inherited wealth of multi-millionaires and billionaires,’ Sanders tweeted of his proposal.

Sanders dropped his plan amid speculation he’ll make another run for the Democratic presidential nomination next year.
Source: DailyMail

Hold on a sec.

Just one question about all that wealth you’re coveting: Wasn’t all of that wealth taxed already? You know, back when it was earned in the first place?

So, why does the government have more right to that AFTER-TAX money than the dearly departed’s heirs?


Oh, you think you have a right to it because there’s a LOT of it? So what? By global standards, ‘rich’ is not what Bernie would paint it out to be. In 2013, Gallup put the global median income number at less than $10k per year.

Should anything over 40k then be seen as ‘extravagant wealth’ that should be rapaciously taxed? Seems a tough sell.

But back to the Bernie numbers. He’s calling this ‘fair’.

Hold your horses there Trotsky. “Eat the Rich” is hardly a new idea.

Who exactly is this hypothetical ‘rich’ guy we’re fleecing here?

What if he’s got a lot of money because he’s lived frugally, didn’t own a second car, (or any additional houses, like Bernie does), has invested wisely and has seen his patience pay off handsomely?

What if the dead guy slaved away for 85 hour weeks (or more, if it’s a farm) building a small business to hand down to his kids? What if the value of that company — including land and equipment or machinery — is above that ‘acceptable’ tax threshold? Do you still fleece him?

What if a widow leveraged the life insurance payout of her dead husband to invest in some modest apartment buildings that have performed well, while allowing renter an affordable place to live? What if those properties put her over the ‘unacceptable’ threshold?

Should those then be liquidated and sold to billionaires with enough capital to pay for it, while the lions’ share of the sale goes to the government and the scraps go to the heirs?

Doesn’t that have the real-world effect of concentrating wealth into fewer and fewer hands? — The very problem he’s purporting to ‘solve’?

Hands that go on to become powerful lobbyists who are grateful that they no longer have any competit—

Oh wait– could THAT be what’s really going on here, Mr, Altruism?

Create powerful friends who owe you something in return?

We’ve all seen who the Democrats partied with in Puerto Rico during the ‘government shutdown’ — that was NOT a good look, by the way.

Sarah Sanders Slams Democrats For Partying In Puerto Rico During Gov’t Shutdown

Lobbyists. And got a private showing of ‘Hamilton’ while you were at it.