PDA

View Full Version : Rudy supports the Family Farmer... but only if you are worth $1,000,000 or more...


jAZ
05-10-2007, 03:07 PM
http://www.anamosaje.com/NewsArchive/2007/May/3/news.html#1

Giuliani Snubs Jones County
by Michelle Phillips

OLIN–Last weekend Deb and Jerry VonSprecken of Olin received a call from former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani’s campaign office asking them if they would be interested in holding a campaign rally on May 4, after she had donated to his campaign.

“We thought it would be an honor and agreed,” said Jerry.

The campaign office continued to contact the VonSpreckens throughout last weekend and were told a security check would be needed. The couple passed the security check and began putting plans in place.

“We started making phone calls. We got the sheriff and fire department and Olin school was going to let out early. We were also expecting kids from the Anamosa school,” Jerry explained. “Deb even went around and personally invited people.”

On Tuesday Deb received a call from Giuliani’s Des Monies office and was asked to call New York.

“They wanted to know our assets,” she revealed, and added that she and Jerry have a modest 80 acre farm and raise cattle.

Later she received a call from Tony Delgado at the Des Monies location.

“Tony said, ‘I’m sorry, you aren’t worth a million dollars and he is campaigning on the Death Tax right now.’ then he said they weren’t going to be able to come,” Deb continued.

The Death Tax is a federal version of the Iowa Inheritance Tax.

The VonSpreckens then called Delgado back and told him how upset they were that the event had been cancelled, how much work they had done and that they had been expecting 75-100 people at their farm.

“I invited him into my home,” Deb said of Giuliani, fighting back tears.

She said she then got a call from New York later the same day asking her to introduce Giuliani at a rally in Cedar Rapids, also scheduled for May 4. They offered her one-on-one time with Giuliani and to have her photo taken with him.

“My feeling is that they’re trying to cover their butts,” said Jerry.

“I may go and give him a piece of my mind, but I’m not going to introduce him,” Deb included.

Preparations had already been put in place for traffic control and bleachers and Deb’s mother, sister and niece were planning to fly from Texas to meet Giuliani.

“Now they pull this,” Jerry exclaimed. “It’s really sad that we aren’t good enough because we aren’t millionaires.”

“This is a horrible retraction we’re having to make. I’m in a state of shock, very hurt and embarrassed. I don’t understand why they don't want to talk to normal people,” she concluded.

Maria Comella, spokesperson for the Giuliani campaign, said, “We’re glad to have Debby and Jerry’s support and are thankful for all their hard work on the campaign. We’re looking forward to our visit to Iowa on Friday and having the opportunity to share Mayor giuliani’s message of fiscal discipline.

Comella did not comment on the cancellation at the VonSprecken home, and said a site had not yet been chosen for a campaign stop.

Mr. Kotter
05-10-2007, 03:12 PM
Wah.

I guarantee, there could be similar sorts of stories written about every single candidate. Every single one.

recxjake
05-10-2007, 03:13 PM
hahaha, Tony is my buddy.... he is the guy I'm working for this summer....

This is the same night (morning) I picked Rudy up at the Cedar Rapids airport and drove him and his crew to a hotel.

There were so many other reasons for why we moved it... 1st, it was terrible weather, raining for days and we didn't want to be in the mud at a farm. 2. It was way to far away from CR to get a good crowd

recxjake
05-10-2007, 03:16 PM
Tony Delgado is a great guy, I just sent him the link to this story... this is crazy.

recxjake
05-10-2007, 03:22 PM
I just got an e-mail back and he said he read this last week, and that it was not even close to what happend. He didn't say it that way at all, and it had to do much more with location than anything. It was just to far away.

jAZ
05-10-2007, 03:58 PM
Wah.

I guarantee, there could be similar sorts of stories written about every single candidate. Every single one.
And if Kerry, Clinton or Obama did this, it would be the endlessly covered by the "liberal media", on Drudge, all over AM radio, and the hot topic on the 24/7 networks.

But since it's Rudy, we won't hear anything about it anywhere but obscure local papers and the net-media.

jAZ
05-10-2007, 03:59 PM
I just got an e-mail back and he said he read this last week, and that it was not even close to what happend. He didn't say it that way at all, and it had to do much more with location than anything. It was just to far away.
Shocking, that Rudy's people dispute the reports of the family.

ROFL

Eleazar
05-10-2007, 04:03 PM
And if Kerry, Clinton or Obama did this, it would be the endlessly covered by the "liberal media", on Drudge, all over AM radio, and the hot topic on the 24/7 networks.

But since it's Rudy, we won't hear anything about it anywhere but obscure local papers and the net-media.

Damn conservative media bias.

jAZ
05-10-2007, 04:12 PM
Damn conservative media bias.
Rudy isn't a conservative... he's a Republican.

recxjake
05-10-2007, 05:05 PM
And if Rudy did have the event in Olin, IA at this farm and talked about killing the death tax.... there would be a story about how it wouldn't effect this farm....

patteeu
05-10-2007, 05:16 PM
I just got an e-mail back and he said he read this last week, and that it was not even close to what happend. He didn't say it that way at all, and it had to do much more with location than anything. It was just to far away.

Leave it to the double filter of the liberal media and jAZ to transform a true story into a fairy tale.

But even if all the details were true, this thread (especially the title that jAZ concocted) is silly because it wouldn't make much sense to hold a rally about the death tax and feature someone who isn't even going to have to pay it. If they did that, jAZ and one of his accomplices in the media would have put together a thread about how deceptive Rudy was to talk about the death tax at a rally on a farm that wasn't even going to be subject to it. It's rare to see a jAZ thread that you can take at face value.

patteeu
05-10-2007, 05:18 PM
And if Rudy did have the event in Olin, IA at this farm and talked about killing the death tax.... there would be a story about how it wouldn't effect this farm....

I see you beat me to that point. Good for you. :thumb:

jAZ
05-10-2007, 05:24 PM
And if Rudy did have the event in Olin, IA at this farm and talked about killing the death tax.... there would be a story about how it wouldn't effect this farm....
Yep, that's exactly right.

That's because his policy isn't really about helping the average farmer at all, is it?

It's about helping the millionaire famer crowd.

Glad you at least recognize this, even if you don't recognize that failure of the policy.

recxjake
05-10-2007, 05:28 PM
Yep, that's exactly right.

That's because his policy isn't really about helping the average farmer at all, is it?

It's about helping the millionaire famer crowd.

Glad you at least recognize this, even if you don't recognize that failure of the policy.

JAZ.... THESE ASSETS HAVE ALREADY BEEN TAXED....!!!

jAZ
05-10-2007, 05:29 PM
I see you beat me to that point. Good for you. :thumb:
Your point was that the policy isn't about helping the family famer at all, but instead it's a policy to help the uber rich... and that for campaign purposes... trying to sell plight of the "(ehem... millionaire) farmer" is much easier than selling the plight of Paris Hilton.

jAZ
05-10-2007, 05:29 PM
JAZ.... THESE ASSETS HAVE ALREADY BEEN TAXED....!!!
Then put Paris Hilton up there and try to sell it.

jAZ
05-10-2007, 05:30 PM
Just admit that Rudy is using the image of the family farmer to try to sell at tax cut for the Paris Hilton's of the world.

recxjake
05-10-2007, 05:31 PM
Your point was that the policy isn't about helping the family famer at all, but instead it's a policy to help the uber rich... and that for campaign purposes... trying to sell plight of the "(ehem... millionaire) farmer" is much easier than selling the plight of Paris Hilton.

So you support taxing dead people's assets? Does Obama?

recxjake
05-10-2007, 05:33 PM
Just admit that Rudy is using the image of the family farmer to try to sell at tax cut for the Paris Hilton's of the world.

Well he didn't use the image of the family farmer... instead he went to Cedar Rapids to a small business called Rexco Equipment and sold a tax cut for dead people.

Mr. Kotter
05-10-2007, 05:33 PM
Just admit that Rudy is using the image of the family farmer to try to sell at tax cut for the Paris Hilton's of the world.

My federal taxes have been cut by more than $6,100 since 2000.

Guess that makes me "rich" and I must hob-knob with Paris Hilton, eh? No thanks, man. :shake:

jAZ
05-10-2007, 05:33 PM
So you support taxing dead people's assets? Does Obama?
yes

jAZ
05-10-2007, 05:34 PM
My federal taxes have been cut by more than $6,100 since 2000.

Guess that makes me "rich" and I must hob-knob with Paris Hilton, eh? No thanks, man. :shake:
When did you die?

jAZ
05-10-2007, 05:35 PM
Well he didn't use the image of the family farmer... instead he went to Cedar Rapids to a small business called Rexco Equipment and sold a tax cut for dead people.
Wait... did the business die?

recxjake
05-10-2007, 05:36 PM
Wait... did the business die?

When the owner dies, his assets won't be taxed under Rudy's plan, but under Obama's plan 45% of his assets will be stolen by the federal govt.... even though they have already been taxed.

Mr. Kotter
05-10-2007, 05:36 PM
When did you die?

I've seen you call Bush's tax cuts, that Dems have opposed....."tax cuts for the rich" too.

Same principle. More hyperbole, propanganda and demogoguery.

If I'm wrong, tell me you DON'T support repealing the Bush tax cuts. :)

jAZ
05-10-2007, 05:38 PM
Just as an aside on this discussion...

When it comes to "framing the debate" on this topic... I think that the Dems are missing the boat if they don't start positioning this as the "Paris Hilton Tax Cut". That's the a very powerful (in a bad way for the GOP) image.

Mr. Kotter
05-10-2007, 05:39 PM
Just as an aside on this discussion...

When it comes to "framing the debate" on this topic... I think that the Dems are missing the boat if they don't start positioning this as the "Paris Hilton Tax Cut". That's the a very powerful (in a bad way for the GOP) image.

ROFLROFLROFL


Back on topic: are you going to answer my question? :)

recxjake
05-10-2007, 05:39 PM
Just as an aside on this discussion...

When it comes to "framing the debate" on this topic... I think that the Dems are missing the boat if they don't start positioning this as the "Paris Hilton Tax Cut". That's the a very powerful (in a bad way for the GOP) image.

ROFL.... and who do all the hollywood actors give money too? Obama

jAZ
05-10-2007, 05:43 PM
I've seen you call Bush's tax cuts, that Dems have opposed....."tax cuts for the rich" too.

Same principle. More hyperbole, propanganda and demogoguery.

If I'm wrong, tell me you DON'T support repealing the Bush tax cuts. :)
I support repealing them, at the very least at the highest levels.

Mr. Kotter
05-10-2007, 05:45 PM
I support repealing them, at the very least at the highest levels.

So you think a teacher in the lowest paid teaching state in the country should not have received the $6,100 tax cut I have during the past 7 years?

You think I, and people like me, should pay much more than we do....currently?

If I'm wrong, please tell us what your position on taxes for people like me would be?

If you would, please? :hmmm:

jAZ
05-10-2007, 06:05 PM
So you think a teacher in the lowest paid teaching state in the country should not have received the $6,100 tax cut I have during the past 7 years?

You think I, and people like me, should pay much more than we do....currently?

If I'm wrong, please tell us what your position on taxes for people like me would be?

If you would, please? :hmmm:
If you care to discuss this at all, you'll need to disclose the details of your tax return. Feel free to do so.

banyon
05-10-2007, 06:08 PM
Leave it to the double filter of the liberal media and jAZ to transform a true story into a fairy tale.

But even if all the details were true, this thread (especially the title that jAZ concocted) is silly because it wouldn't make much sense to hold a rally about the death tax and feature someone who isn't even going to have to pay it. If they did that, jAZ and one of his accomplices in the media would have put together a thread about how deceptive Rudy was to talk about the death tax at a rally on a farm that wasn't even going to be subject to it. It's rare to see a jAZ thread that you can take at face value.

I agree that the thread title is misleading. It makes people think the inheritance tax affects estates of only $1 million or more.



It's 2 million.


And 3.5 in 2009, not even including the deductions possible.

From Dollars and Sense: (http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2003/0103hunter.html)
The New York Times reported that when the pro-repeal American Farm Bureau Foundation was challenged to produce one real case of a farm that was lost because of the estate tax, it could not cite a single example. In April 2001, the Bureau's president sent an urgent memo to its affiliates stating, "it is crucial for us to be able to provide Congress with examples of farmers and ranchers who have lost farms due to the death tax." Still, no examples were forthcoming


Rudy won't find one either.

Mr. Kotter
05-10-2007, 06:14 PM
If you care to discuss this at all, you'll need to disclose the details of your tax return. Feel free to do so.

Why not just issue a framework: tax rates for a variety of incomes, exemptions for children, medical, charitable deductions, and maybe home mortgages, for example. You could be pretty general, really....

But I'm SURE you wouldn't want to address generalities like "under $75-100K"....because you wouldn't want the public to be able to understand what you're really proposing, would you?

jAZ
05-10-2007, 06:21 PM
Why not just issue a framework: tax rates for a variety of incomes, exemptions for children, medical, charitable deductions, and maybe home mortgages, for example. You could be pretty general, really....

But I'm SURE you wouldn't want to address generalities like "under $75-100K"....because you wouldn't want the public to be able to understand what you're really proposing, would you?
Yeah, you want to cry about your own plight, but don't want to be specific about your tax returns in question.

Don't try to inject your story into an unrelated thread if you aren't willing to tell your story in full.

jAZ
05-10-2007, 06:23 PM
I agree that the thread title is misleading. It makes people think the inheritance tax affects estates of only $1 million or more.



It's 2 million.


And 3.5 in 2009, not even including the deductions possible.

From Dollars and Sense: (http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2003/0103hunter.html)
The New York Times reported that when the pro-repeal American Farm Bureau Foundation was challenged to produce one real case of a farm that was lost because of the estate tax, it could not cite a single example. In April 2001, the Bureau's president sent an urgent memo to its affiliates stating, "it is crucial for us to be able to provide Congress with examples of farmers and ranchers who have lost farms due to the death tax." Still, no examples were forthcoming


Rudy won't find one either.
Sorry, I should have said "multi-millionaire farmer".

Mr. Kotter
05-10-2007, 06:33 PM
Yeah, you want to cry about your own plight, but don't want to be specific about your tax returns in question.

Don't try to inject your story into an unrelated thread if you aren't willing to tell your story in full.

ROFLROFLROFL

That's a fuggin' cop-out and you know it....

You've just demonstrated WHY the American people don't trust the Democratic party on taxes.

They want to raise them on just about anyone--including many middle class people, but they don't have the balls to admit it. :)

banyon
05-10-2007, 06:44 PM
So you think a teacher in the lowest paid teaching state in the country should not have received the $6,100 tax cut I have during the past 7 years?

You think I, and people like me, should pay much more than we do....currently?

If I'm wrong, please tell us what your position on taxes for people like me would be?

If you would, please? :hmmm:

We should incentive teaching in public schools way more than we currently do.

If that's a tax incentive I'm okay with that, but I think a serious student loan repayment program is a must. Who wants to take on @$40k in debt (or $60k with a master's) if you are going to be so poorly compensated.

My roommate taught in a rural Missouri school for 7 years, but quit and went to law school because he found that he was never going to be able to save the $ to buy a house or anything on his salary and his district was already squeezed for funds.

banyon
05-10-2007, 06:45 PM
ROFLROFLROFL

That's a fuggin' cop-out and you know it....

You've just demonstrated WHY the American people don't trust the Democratic party on taxes.

They want to raise them on just about anyone--including many middle class people, but they don't have the balls to admit it. :)

With those tax cuts of over $6k, what does your wife do for a living? (if that's not too personal).

Mr. Kotter
05-10-2007, 06:46 PM
We should incentive teaching in public schools way more than we currently do.

If that's a tax incentive I'm okay with that, but I think a serious student loan repayment program is a must. Who wants to take on @$40k in debt (or $60k with a master's) if you are going to be so poorly compensated.

My roommate taught in a rural Missouri school for 7 years, but quit and went to law school because he found that he was never going to be able to save the $ to buy a house or anything on his salary and his district was already squeezed for funds.

A man with a plan. You should run for office. :clap:

Instead, blokes like jAZ do....:banghead:

Mr. Kotter
05-10-2007, 06:47 PM
With those tax cuts of over $6k, what does your wife do for a living? (if that's not too personal).

Job shares a teaching position half-time....with 4 kids, we decided the sacrifice was worth it. The tax cuts helped making that decision easier.

banyon
05-10-2007, 06:49 PM
A man with a plan. You should run for office. :clap:

Instead, blokes like jAZ do....:banghead:

What would be your thoughts on ending teacher tenure and extending the school year? (these are policies I have considered supporting, but which the NEA (a big Dem donor) usually objects to with a passion).

NewChief
05-10-2007, 06:51 PM
So you think a teacher in the lowest paid teaching state in the country should not have received the $6,100 tax cut I have during the past 7 years?

You think I, and people like me, should pay much more than we do....currently?

If I'm wrong, please tell us what your position on taxes for people like me would be?

If you would, please? :hmmm:

I got that whopping $250 credit for classroom expenses. I love how they left it off the form this year, and you had to write the stupid thing in.

Mr. Kotter
05-10-2007, 07:00 PM
What would be your thoughts on ending teacher tenure and extending the school year? (these are policies I have considered supporting, but which the NEA (a big Dem donor) usually objects to with a passion).

I'm on board for both. Tenure, as is....is not a good thing. At a minimum, it needs drastically reformed IMO. I'd also think, extending the school year by 20-30 days SHOULD be seriously considered. I understand why both are opposed by NEA, but the time has come.

You got my vote, on education issues...so far anyway. Heh.

Mr. Kotter
05-10-2007, 07:00 PM
I got that whopping $250 credit for classroom expenses. I love how they left it off the form this year, and you had to write the stupid thing in.

I used TurboTax....so it was no problem for me.

jAZ
05-10-2007, 07:07 PM
You've just demonstrated WHY the American people don't trust the Democratic party on taxes.

They want to raise them on just about anyone--including many middle class people, but they don't have the balls to admit it. :)
Actually, you've just demonstrated why you have no credibility around here. You are either ignorant or a liar. But you never let that stop you from running your mouth. Because it's not the issues you care about... it's the antagonist game that's your thing.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/04/21/us/0421-nat-webTAX.gif

jAZ
05-10-2007, 07:13 PM
Job shares a teaching position half-time....with 4 kids, we decided the sacrifice was worth it. The tax cuts helped making that decision easier.
So your income went down? That seems relevant.

jAZ
05-10-2007, 07:17 PM
So your income went down? That seems relevant.
Oh... wait!

Maybe you were earning $200,000 in joint income after deductions.

jAZ
05-10-2007, 07:19 PM
Oh!!!! I'm sorry... that's $75/ month over 7 years enabled your wife to work part time instead of full time!

Kudos!

banyon
05-10-2007, 07:24 PM
NewChief, did I get your vote too?

I'd be curious to hear your views since I normally don't wind up agreeing with Kotter and disagreeing with you.

Mr. Kotter
05-10-2007, 07:34 PM
Oh!!!! I'm sorry... that's $75/ month over 7 years enabled your wife to work part time instead of full time!

Kudos!:spock:

Eh...your math, like, sucks.

In 1999, my federal tax bill was approximately $6,000 more, ANNUALLY, per year than it has been the last 3-4 years. Part of that has been, with the three new "exemptions" (for a total of four children)....but well over half, has come from the so-called "tax cuts that only benefit the 'rich'." At least $3,500 per YEAR....or just under $300 per month. Coupled with decreased child care expenses, it has saved us about between $500-600 per month...so the real "hit" to our income was about 13-14K per year, as opposed to the 20K in lost wages. When you consider additional savings, that resulted from her being able to stay home....it was probably a real hit of less than 10K.

To give my wife an extra 20-25 hours per week at home, it was worth it....in our view.So your income went down? That seems relevant.Eh, actually not. As I just illustrated it was really about a $12K hit for my wife; but I've also added at least $10K during the same time.

Income has actually been within about a range of about $5-6K during the entire time.

Try again....:rolleyes:

jAZ
05-10-2007, 07:41 PM
NewChief, did I get your vote too?

I'd be curious to hear your views since I normally don't wind up agreeing with Kotter and disagreeing with you.
Isn't tenure one of those benefits that's offered to incent people to not drop out of teaching after a few years because the pay is so bad?

If so, it has pluses and minuses.

I am working to help put together support for a statewide program that would fund jobs for math and science teachers to work in university and business labs over the summer. Helps account for the need for a pay differential (that the unions don't typically permit) between the math/science teachers... while helping keep them current in their field.

University technical faculty typically do this with during the summers at major companies (if they aren't doing it through out the year as welll). It's a very good model for both the teachers (continuing education, increased pay), the students (higher caliber, better prepared teachers), the universities/business (new talent pool at reduced costs).

Additionally, I'd at least make a partial change in the tax structure by allowing for low or no taxes on different high demand, low pay jobs like teachers and nurses. We already do this for soldiers in war zones, so it's not anything majorly revolutionary.

jAZ
05-10-2007, 07:43 PM
Looks like Kotter missed this post.
You've just demonstrated WHY the American people don't trust the Democratic party on taxes.

They want to raise them on just about anyone--including many middle class people, but they don't have the balls to admit it. :)
Actually, you've just demonstrated why you have no credibility around here. You are either ignorant or a liar. But you never let that stop you from running your mouth. Because it's not the issues you care about... it's the antagonist game that's your thing.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/04/21/us/0421-nat-webTAX.gif

jAZ
05-10-2007, 07:48 PM
...but well over half, has come from the so-called "tax cuts that only benefit the 'rich'." At least $3,500 per YEAR....
So the 3% tax cut earned you $3500 a year?

So after deductions you earned $115K/year as a school teacher? Where!?!

Mr. Kotter
05-10-2007, 07:49 PM
I'm okay with a $200-300K and above repeal.....so put that in your pipe and smoke it, jAZ. :p

I did notice that your little chart said NOTHING of their position....on amounts for exemptions, deductions, and tax credits that were all a part of the Bush "tax cuts." And, frankly, THOSE are the items that most middle class folks have benefited from.

I'd be interested to hear, when pressed on the issues, what specific plans Obama has for those types of provisions....which have benefited middle class tax payers, but "cost" the government revenues which too many politicians are all too eager to get their grubby little paws on again.:hmmm:

Mr. Kotter
05-10-2007, 07:51 PM
So the 3% tax cut earned you $3500 a year?

So after deductions you earned $115K/year as a school teacher? Where!?!

You are conveniently overlooking increased deductions, exemptions, and a variety of tax credit which were part of Bush's "tax cuts".....which I, and many others have benefitted from.

Nice try though.

jAZ
05-10-2007, 07:55 PM
I'm okay with a $200-300K and above repeal.....so put that in your pipe and smoke it, jAZ. :p

I did notice that your little chart said NOTHING of their position....on amounts for exemptions, deductions, and tax credits that were all a part of the Bush "tax cuts." And, frankly, THOSE are the items that most middle class folks have benefited from.

I'd be interested to hear, when pressed on the issues, what specific plans Obama has for those types of provisions....which have benefited middle class tax payers, but "cost" the government revenues which too many politicians are all too eager to get their grubby little paws on again.:hmmm:
You are a fraud. And no amount of :p will change that perception around here.

You piss and moan about fictional outrage and when confronted with facts, you do anything but admit that you were wrong.

{for the nth time}You'd serve yourself much better to ratchet down your ignorant GOP talking point rants and ratchet up your knowledge{/for the nth time}

jAZ
05-10-2007, 07:55 PM
You are conveniently overlooking increased deductions, exemptions, and a variety of tax credit which were part of Bush's "tax cuts".....which I, and many others have benefitted from.

Nice try though.
You tell me what you are talking about.

mlyonsd
05-10-2007, 08:13 PM
The funny thing is stupid threads like this are proof the left is absolutely terrified of Rudy.

And stupid threads like this are exactly what people in the midwest will see thru and see them for what they are, just a smoke screen on real issues.

banyon
05-10-2007, 08:15 PM
The funny thing is stupid threads like this are proof the left is absolutely terrified of Rudy.

And stupid threads like this are exactly what people in the midwest will see thru and see them for what they are, just a smoke screen on real issues.

Anything on point to say, or are you just here to call people stupid today?

mlyonsd
05-10-2007, 08:27 PM
Anything on point to say, or are you just here to call people stupid today?
You, if you truly believe the thread title that Rudy doesn't care about farmers since the author doesn't really ask the man himself.

banyon
05-10-2007, 08:33 PM
You, if you truly believe the thread title that Rudy doesn't care about farmers since the author doesn't really ask the man himself.

Yeah, I remember where I said that. :shake:

Given the story, I think it's a fair jab thread title.

You're not saying that people can only title their threads with what is true only in the most literal and restricted senses of the words are you?

mlyonsd
05-10-2007, 08:35 PM
Yeah, I remember where I said that. :shake:

Given the story, I think it's a fair jab thread title.

You're not saying that people can only title their threads with what is true only in the most literal and restricted senses of the words are you?

Yeah, I remember where I said that.

banyon
05-10-2007, 08:41 PM
Yeah, I remember where I said that.

Well, in any event the substantive point is that the repeal of the estate tax doesn't really help any family farms. Or I tried to talk about education policy for a bit.

Does any of that interest you or would you prefer to continue with the bantering?

mlyonsd
05-10-2007, 08:52 PM
Well, in any event the substantive point is that the repeal of the estate tax doesn't really help any family farms. Or I tried to talk about education policy for a bit.

Does any of that interest you or would you prefer to continue with the bantering?

My initial post was pretty clear towards what I thought the thread tried to accomplish.

I'm heading for bed but at some later day would enjoy bantering about taxes with you.

For your future reference, I'm a flat tax guy. The elevated income tax was probably the worst thing this country ever adopted IMO.

As far as education goes I'm open to suggestions. The fact we have continually poured more money into it then any other country and rank like 13th or worse should tell all of us something.

Chatter for another day.

ps. don't get me going on universal health care.:p

jAZ
05-10-2007, 10:03 PM
The funny thing is stupid threads like this are proof the left is absolutely terrified of Rudy.

And stupid threads like this are exactly what people in the midwest will see thru and see them for what they are, just a smoke screen on real issues.
What's to see through, other than the "losing the family farm due to the death tax" charade.

patteeu
05-11-2007, 05:43 AM
I agree that the thread title is misleading. It makes people think the inheritance tax affects estates of only $1 million or more.



It's 2 million.


And 3.5 in 2009, not even including the deductions possible.


What is it in 2011?

patteeu
05-11-2007, 05:51 AM
Well, in any event the substantive point is that the repeal of the estate tax doesn't really help any family farms. Or I tried to talk about education policy for a bit.

Does any of that interest you or would you prefer to continue with the bantering?

You don't think a family farm could be worth $1 million? Farming takes a lot of land and equipment,

jAZ
05-11-2007, 09:23 AM
You don't think a family farm could be worth $1 million? Farming takes a lot of land and equipment,
At that point, it's closer to the millionaire paying taxes on his lottery winnings.

Mr. Kotter
05-11-2007, 09:28 AM
At that point, it's closer to the millionaire paying taxes on his lottery winnings.

ROFLROFLROFL

jAZ
05-11-2007, 09:41 AM
ROFLROFLROFL
If I inherit a million dollars of net assets... I'm sorry... but I hit the jackpot.

Mr. Kotter
05-11-2007, 09:54 AM
If I inherit a million dollars of net assets... I'm sorry... but I hit the jackpot.

Now THERE is the ever-elusive socialist mindset, that you liberals try to hide. Whatever individual wealth people accumulate, doesn't belong to them or their families....it belongs to the government, to be redistributed for on the principle "....to each, according to need."

Never mind, that the land has been in the family for decades.....and the blood, sweat, and tears shed to make the farm profitable, and to endure all the challenges that farmers face as a result of being at the mercy of nature.....is inconsequential, in jAZ's world. And such wealth is better spent on the "greater good" as determined by bureaucrats in Washington.

Nice.

jAZ
05-11-2007, 09:58 AM
Now THERE is the ever-elusive socialist mindset, that you liberals try to hide. Whatever individual wealth people accumulate, doesn't belong to them or their families....it belongs to the government, to be redistributed for on the principle "....to each, according to need."

Never mind, that the land has been in the family for decades.....and the blood, sweat, and tears shed to make the farm profitable, and to endure all the challenges that farmers face as a result of being at the mercy of nature.....is inconsequential, in jAZ's world. And such wealth is better spent on the "greater good" as determined by bureaucrats in Washington.

Nice.
Ahhh... taxation = socialist!

When all else fails, right?

Saggysack
05-11-2007, 10:03 AM
You don't think a family farm could be worth $1 million? Farming takes a lot of land and equipment,


Family farms are pretty much a thing of the past. Most farms out there are corporate taking farm subsidies after they have made a profit on their products.

I work with a old oil man that absolutely despises corporate farms. So I get to hear the complaints more than I'd like.

Mr. Kotter
05-11-2007, 10:17 AM
Ahhh... taxation = socialist!

When all else fails, right?

Taxation of estates upon death.....yup, that's pretty Socialistic in my book.

Brock
05-11-2007, 10:43 AM
Family farms are pretty much a thing of the past. Most farms out there are corporate taking farm subsidies after they have made a profit on their products.

No on both points.

patteeu
05-11-2007, 12:53 PM
At that point, it's closer to the millionaire paying taxes on his lottery winnings.

And taxing it is like mugging a lottery winner.

banyon
05-11-2007, 12:55 PM
You don't think a family farm could be worth $1 million? Farming takes a lot of land and equipment,

You, sir, I would refer to post #32.

patteeu
05-11-2007, 12:59 PM
Family farms are pretty much a thing of the past. Most farms out there are corporate taking farm subsidies after they have made a profit on their products.

I work with a old oil man that absolutely despises corporate farms. So I get to hear the complaints more than I'd like.

That may be true, but the whole family farm thing is really a representation of any capital intensive family-owned business (restaurants, small town newspapers, printing companies, auto repair shops, etc.).

Maybe the death tax is a factor leading to fewer and fewer family farms, restaurants, etc.

patteeu
05-11-2007, 01:01 PM
You, sir, I would refer to post #32.

I'm anticipating your answer to the question in post #66. :)

banyon
05-11-2007, 01:20 PM
What is it in 2011?

In 2010 it is ∞. So if you're going to die, do it in the Year of the Tiger.

patteeu
05-11-2007, 01:40 PM
In 2010 it is ∞. So if you're going to die, do it in the Year of the Tiger.

I think I'll make that my goal!

Pitt Gorilla
05-11-2007, 04:19 PM
You don't think a family farm could be worth $1 million? Farming takes a lot of land and equipment,They CAN be worth a million, but none around my family's area was. They weren't even close. My parents farm would sell for far less than $100,00, including equipment.

patteeu
05-12-2007, 08:30 AM
They CAN be worth a million, but none around my family's area was. They weren't even close. My parents farm would sell for far less than $100,00, including equipment.

Subsistence farmers? :p

Seriously, that seems like a pretty tiny farm. I don't know what real estate prices are like in the really rural parts of the country (far from metro areas), but you'd be hard pressed to find any 5 acre plot with a house on it around my area for anything close to $100k.

recxjake
05-12-2007, 09:13 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TsqvUkzpjC4

banyon
05-12-2007, 09:18 AM
Subsistence farmers? :p

Seriously, that seems like a pretty tiny farm. I don't know what real estate prices are like in the really rural parts of the country (far from metro areas), but you'd be hard pressed to find any 5 acre plot with a house on it around my area for anything close to $100k.

Ok, you seem to think these multi million dollar family farms are pretty common place. Why do you think that the policy advocates for repeal couldn't even find one when asked?

patteeu
05-12-2007, 09:34 AM
Ok, you seem to think these multi million dollar family farms are pretty common place. Why do you think that the policy advocates for repeal couldn't even find one when asked?

My point was that I don't think $100K farms are very common. As for $1 million farms, that's not what advocates for repeal had trouble finding, IIRC. I believe the article earlier in the thread's claim was that they had a hard time finding farms that were lost as a result of the tax not a hard time finding farms that qualified for the tax. I'm sure I could point out several $1 million dollar farms within 10 miles of my home. Besides, this is really about a wider range of family businesses than just farms.

mlyonsd
05-12-2007, 01:25 PM
I think farm land around my place runs about $3500/acre.


That means about 285 acres is worth a million bucks. Personally I know of only a few farmers that might not have that much land and I can't think of one corporate farm in my county or any of the adjacent ones. Our best friends have a 1200 acre farm that has been in the family for three generations.

One question, does a farmhouse, machinery, and out buildings count in the million dollar equation?

One other thing, just because a farmer may be a millionaire doesn't mean he has tons of cash flow. He doesn't draw interest on dirt.

Pitt Gorilla
05-12-2007, 02:24 PM
I think farm land around my place runs about $3500/acre.


That means about 285 acres is worth a million bucks. Personally I know of only a few farmers that might not have that much land and I can't think of one corporate farm in my county or any of the adjacent ones. Our best friends have a 1200 acre farm that has been in the family for three generations.

One question, does a farmhouse, machinery, and out buildings count in the million dollar equation?

One other thing, just because a farmer may be a millionaire doesn't mean he has tons of cash flow. He doesn't draw interest on dirt.Wow, perhaps I was wrong. If my family's farm brought that amount per acre, I'd convince my mom to sell now.

Edit: Never mind. I just found out the "average" rate for land where my parents live is less than $700 per acre. Oh well.

patteeu
05-13-2007, 07:19 PM
One other factor that may be relevant in many cases is debt. I'm sure there are a lot of farms with > $1 million of assets that are also carrying enough debt that they aren't worth a full mil. If Pitt means that his parent's farm is only worth $100K after the debts are payed, I could see that being reasonable.

Iowanian
05-14-2007, 11:38 AM
Rudy is a dick holster. He's got very very little chance of acquiring my vote...unless it were a choice of him and Hillary.

Baby Lee
05-14-2007, 12:47 PM
Sully's take

Finally, Rudy Giuliani realizes the only path he can credibly take in this primary campaign. He cannot duck from his core convictions that gay people are equal citizens and decent human beings, that women should have a choice over whether to have an abortion in the first trimester, that personal freedom in a multi-cultural society often means living in a society that may not always reflect your own moral values. Nor should Rudy have to duck these issues. His live-and-let live approach to conservatism is essential to a diverse, civil society. It was once the hallmark of a "leave-us-alone" coalition called the Republican party. It is extremely healthy to have a major candidate stand for these things in the current GOP. There are many people open to voting Republican who simply cannot support the religious intolerance, fusion of faith and politics, and anti-gay hysteria that fuels so much of the Christianist base. I fear the Republicans have to lose the next election really badly before they realize how extreme they have become. But Rudy is giving them something of a life-line. Money quote:

"Where people of good faith, people who are equally decent, equally moral and equally religious, when they come to different conclusions about this, about something so very very personal, I believe you have to respect their viewpoint. You give them a level of choice here."

I disagree with Rudy on his opposition to civil marriage for gay couples...

But he does what no other current candidate has done: positively support an alternative for us under the law. He calls it "domestic partnership," which is what I and my fiance have in DC. It's not marriage; and its mealy-mouthed rights and responsibilities are a social signal to homosexual citizens that their lives and relationships are worth much less than those of their straight peers. But they're not nothing. And they at least begin a conversation among Republicans about what exactly to do about gay people and their relationships. What's staggering about the current field is how none of them even take such a stand - at least with any candor or conviction.

Rudy is also right to reiterate his own long-standing position on gun-control. I am not an opponent of gun rights, but I know many cops who'd like to see better control of guns in the hands of criminals, and the issue has assumed within the GOP an almost theological status as unquestionable doctrine. For Rudy to disown his own experience in this area on NYC would be unconvincing and uninspiring.

My own concerns with Giuliani remain. They have mainly to do with his contempt for civil liberties, his support for torture, and my fear of what damage he would do to the Constitution in the wake of another terror attack. I don't believe he fully understands the difference between being a mayor and being a president, or has any grasp that the leader of a republic is often celebrated for what he doesn't do as much as what he does. But this speech in Houston definitely prompted me to take a second look at Rudy. On abortion we now have one clear pro-lifer, one clear pro-choicer, and one person who will say whatever is necessary at any moment to advance his own career. That's a good trio of choices for Republicans. I'm glad Rudy has added the third choice.

recxjake
05-14-2007, 06:46 PM
ROFL ROFL ROFL

Rudy Goes For the Save
Posted by TOM BEVAN | E-Mail This | Permalink | Email Author
After a spate of bad publicity generated by dissing the Iowa farm family of Jerry and Deborah VonSprecken last week (including a phone call by John McCain trying to capitalize on Rudy's mistake), the Giuliani campaign has announced that - lo and behold! - Deborah VonSprecken is Rudy's new county chairperson in Jones County:

For Immediate Release
Monday, May 14, 2007

Rudy Giuliani Announces Deborah VonSprecken as Jones County Chair in Iowa

New York City - The Rudy Giuliani Presidential Committee announced today that Deborah VonSprecken from Olin, Iowa will serve as the Jones County Chair. As part of Mayor Giuliani's Iowa leadership team Mrs. VonSprecken will spearhead the campaign's organizational efforts in the county. The announcement followed a visit from Rudy Giuliani to the VonSprecken’s family farm in Olin where Mayor Giuliani apologized for the misunderstanding surrounding his last visit to the state. After spending nearly two hours visiting with Mr. and Mrs. VonSprecken, Deborah expressed her interest in supporting Mayor Giuliani and leading his efforts in Jones County.

"I am honored to have Deborah as part of my team in Iowa. As the hard-working owner of a family farm she understands the importance of cutting taxes and implementing fiscal discipline to grow the economy and increase opportunity," said Mayor Rudy Giuliani. "Her support is tremendous and will be of great value to our efforts in Iowa."

recxjake
05-15-2007, 08:49 AM
Rudy takes an Iowa detour


COLUMBIA, S.C. -- While the other candidates schmoozed it up here or engaged in a little debate eve preparation, Rudy flew out to Iowa to personally win two votes.

You guessed it -- he went out to make things right with the VonSprecken family.

And evidently it paid off.

His campaign sent out a release announcing that Deborah VonSprecken will chair his effort in the county where the VonSprecken's have their family farm.

Or, as the release went: "After spending nearly two hours visiting with Mr. and Mrs. VonSprecken, Deborah expressed her interest in supporting Mayor Giuliani and leading his efforts in Jones County."

A source familiar with the situation said Rudy changed his schedule to fly out to eastern Iowa and sit down with the VonSprecken's. He didn't know what had transpired -- a staff-driven gaffe that hit national blogs and eventually made it's way into the Des Moines Register and onto the AP wire -- until he saw it in the clips, the source continued, "but accepts full and total responsibility."

Mr. Kotter
05-15-2007, 09:12 AM
Another example of sterling political acumen....heh

"Two weeks, baby!"

Saggysack
05-15-2007, 09:33 AM
Edit: Never mind. I just found out the "average" rate for land where my parents live is less than $700 per acre. Oh well.

It about the same here. $500-700 per acre.