Comments on: Limit the estate tax charitable deduction http://blog.oup.com/2012/12/limit-the-estate-tax-charitable-deduction/ Academic insights for the thinking world. Sat, 25 May 2013 23:50:31 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2 By: John http://blog.oup.com/2012/12/limit-the-estate-tax-charitable-deduction/#comment-327582 John Fri, 21 Dec 2012 19:33:06 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/?p=33215#comment-327582 This could be the same as the reply above. It seems to me that rather than raising revenue, your proposal will simply motivate philanthropic giving to be done during the donor's life rather than at their death. If an individual wishes to support causes, it makes sense to do it while we are alive rather than dead anyway. From a government skeptic's point of view, I am fairly convinced that I can find worthwhile organizations that will be much more efficient and effective in their cause than any government agency could ever be. On a note of "Who's Money is it Anyway?", the notion that a government has some kind of preordained right to any accumulated wealth no matter how large or small makes no sense to many people. Flipping the argument, if the government deserves some of that wealth, why doesn't it deserve all of it? Maybe because it would cause people to cease trying to create and accumulate it in the first place? Can it be had both ways?--"Please be economically productive. Please give us what you have produced." This could be the same as the reply above. It seems to me that rather than raising revenue, your proposal will simply motivate philanthropic giving to be done during the donor’s life rather than at their death. If an individual wishes to support causes, it makes sense to do it while we are alive rather than dead anyway. From a government skeptic’s point of view, I am fairly convinced that I can find worthwhile organizations that will be much more efficient and effective in their cause than any government agency could ever be.
On a note of “Who’s Money is it Anyway?”, the notion that a government has some kind of preordained right to any accumulated wealth no matter how large or small makes no sense to many people. Flipping the argument, if the government deserves some of that wealth, why doesn’t it deserve all of it? Maybe because it would cause people to cease trying to create and accumulate it in the first place? Can it be had both ways?–”Please be economically productive. Please give us what you have produced.”

]]> By: George Cisneros http://blog.oup.com/2012/12/limit-the-estate-tax-charitable-deduction/#comment-327471 George Cisneros Fri, 21 Dec 2012 13:28:56 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/?p=33215#comment-327471 This is an incredible thought! Whenever something makes sense pragmatically, there is usually always rippling benefits, which we know is of economic principles. One of the most devastating realities, but rarely spoken of, is the negative impact of almost all giving done only at death. This speaks volumes to the kids. As if, we so don't trust you, that we held onto our wealth as long as we could, and now that we have to give it away, we would rather it be to these strangers than you! That's the micro. The macro is how wealthy given without wise oversight - history shows how abusive it becomes in other's hands. The positives is that wealthy giving while they are alive is more respected by the public in general. It also gives them the chance to grow stronger bonds with their children and grandchildren, which were probably strained during the years they were so focused on creating the wealth. Thank you again, brilliant. This is an incredible thought!

Whenever something makes sense pragmatically, there is usually always rippling benefits, which we know is of economic principles.
One of the most devastating realities, but rarely spoken of, is the negative impact of almost all giving done only at death. This speaks volumes to the kids. As if, we so don’t trust you, that we held onto our wealth as long as we could, and now that we have to give it away, we would rather it be to these strangers than you! That’s the micro.
The macro is how wealthy given without wise oversight – history shows how abusive it becomes in other’s hands.
The positives is that wealthy giving while they are alive is more respected by the public in general. It also gives them the chance to grow stronger bonds with their children and grandchildren, which were probably strained during the years they were so focused on creating the wealth.
Thank you again, brilliant.

]]>