Estate Tax: What the Walton Family Stands To Gain

Well folks. You know what they say:

The poor are fighting to get money, while the rich are fighting to keep their money.

JM. Thanks. At least you realize that it is the Walton’s money. They are not fighting to “gain” or “get” anything. They just want less of it swiped. “The poor” do not play into it: those who want to take the Walton’s money are already rich, and want to squander it or us it to pad their own pockets.

However, if we did connect these unrelated groups: the poor and the rich Waltons, what can we get?

I added up the Walton heirs on the Forbes 400, and got less than 120 billion dollars between them. we can give the poorest 1/3 of Americans each a one-time payment of $1,200. Yeah, that’s going to help our poor people some, for one year. Can’t do it after that: doing it this one time left those Waltons penniless.  We didn’t really end up doing much by doing this after all, did we?

The estate tax could cost the Walton’s $8.7 billion and cause them to lose control of the company.

This reminds me of THE WALTONS tv show from the 1970’s when in one episode John Walton struggled to hang on to his lumbermill during the Depression, or face losing it and the title to Waltons mountain.

I’m sure todays Waltons would do what the tv Waltons did and all chip in to save their stake. I know they would gladly get in a truck for deliveries and greet their customers at the door.

When corerent writes:
“The poor” do not play into it.
That sums it up in coherents world.

Then there are the policies you advocate which typically harm the poor first, and most of all.

Gupta1 has now taken twice his prescribed medicine (downed with a couple of beers) when you look at his last statement about the Waltons being in danger of losing control.

JM: The poor certainly don’t play into the estate tax issue. After all, the estate tax ends up going to the richest and most powerful organization in the country (world).

I don’t think the Waltons are in danger of losing control. At worse, the tax policy would force the heirs, assets, and company to locate off-shore. Many would applaud this.

The Waltons could be forced along with the company off-shore?
That would be like a summer vacation for them there since they would be right at home.

It’s just that the hatred and the bright-green jealousy of the Walton’s seems so petty and pointless. The effort would be better spent building someone up than cutting someone down. If you cut them down enough to be level to the ground (paupers), all their money is enough to buy 1/3 of American each a rusty 1989 Chevy Cavalier two-door. Big deal.

You know, those Walton heirs have 3 million times as MUCH money as I do… but, hard as it may be, I have the strength to go on living!

We need the Waltons to start building up their employee’s by providing jobs that will promote more than just above poverty lifestyles.
When that comes, no one will care how much they have for themselves.

My husband and I both work for WM and together we make a little over $34,000 at this time.  I consider that “more than just above poverty”.

JM in USA

I stand by last statement (hiccup). Only one of Sam’s kids participates in any active role in the companies daily operations, and even then it is not on the same magnitude as the executives do on a daily basis. Sam’s grandchildren will probably have no role in running the company. NO, they are not going to lose their fortune. Sam’s grandkids will be like any other third generation from the original. They will spend their time surfing, skiing and generally be drifting rich kids.

Ever hear of Paris Hilton, JM? I rest my case… I mean beer bottle (hiccup).

8 billion is about 8 billion more than anyone should have to pay in taxes!
Estate Tax is theft.

I am tired of this country punishing people for success.

“Punishing people for success”?  Since when is being born considered a billion dollar success?  The problem isn’t who has money, or who doesn’t have money.  The problem is that people generally don’t care about other people.  The drive of a market based, capitalist economy is essentially to provide a good or service that people need or want.  Wal-Mart neither manufactures it’s own goods, nor identifies with individual communiteis to offer what those people need or want.  They impose the tag line about “low prices” on every community, assuming people will take anything if it’s cheap enough.

Wal-Mart may be a big success in the world bank, and on the ranch in Bentonville, but it is a FAILURE for American communities.

In truth, Wal-Mart came up with a great business proposal… a great way to make money, but the only “success” here is that Wal-Mart found a cheaper way to get goods, (mostly from China) and are keeping the bear’s share of the contribution margin for the senior officers, rather than putting that money into keeping American communities sustainable.  (As an aside, Wal-Mart recieves more of China’s exports than the entire nations of Canada, Australia, and Russia.)

“Since when is being born considered a billion dollar success?”

Someone chose to give them that money freely. Is it really any of our business?

“Wal-Mart neither manufactures it�s own goods, nor identifies with individual communiteis to offer what those people need or want”

For the second point, you are very wrong. That is how they end up making their money: offering people in communities what they want/need. There is even a lot of local targetting. NO retailer can succeed at all without satisfying customer needs.

“They impose the tag line about �low prices� on every community, assuming people will take anything if it�s cheap enough. “

Huh? Do you think communities prefer to be ripped off by having to buy overpriced goods??? You are not making much sense.

dplfunk
Well said. Wal-Mart is a success, but only in the small inner circle.
They have failed the rest of America by perpetuating our manufacturing base to foreign soil.
That will always be Wal-Marts legacy.

Walmart employee, it takes BOTH of you to make that amount.  Each one of you on your own would be just above the poverty level.

Coherent, the point is that Big T said that they were being punished for success, and they weren’t successful - just lucky enough to be born into that family.

Wal-Mart doesn’t care about the people in America (or the people anywhere else in the world) - they care about making more money.  The majority of global corporations have no loyalty to anyone except their shareholders.

True Generic. Most companies do not have any loyalty for their employee’s.
Yet some still think that you should be loyal to them (working off the clock) and not having a union (because that way the ‘associate’ has no say in his/her workplace).

I had a chance to watch a group of UFCW marchers yesterday in the Migrant worker march.
I have to tell you all this.
The ufcw marchers looked like a hobo group of ex- communicated mafia type people.
They all looked like they had been beat up by life.
The ufcw members are nothing more than a group of low income society mooches that want something free on the backs of wal-mart associates.

I am so tired of all the press about wal-mart.
Here is the fact.
The company employes over 1.6 million people in this country. The unions look at this as nothing more than a cash cow.  The unions will give wal-mart employees nothing except an empty wallet and a stack of broken dreams.

Let’s hypothetically say that Wal-Mart changes its business practice toonly buying and selling goods Made in the USA....

Do any of you WMWers honestly think that Wal-Mart would last much more than a month selling only domestically made goods??? 

If you think that this possible, you are ignorant.  Many of you act and speak like Wal-Mart is the only retailer that imports merchandise.  Let me give you a little clue......that is retail in America today!!!!!!!!!!  The days of Made in America are just about gone.  Get over it. Move on.  You will not change it.

Sure...lets throw in the towel till every industry is out of this country. Then we will be a third world ourselves. Oh sorry, we will have lots and lots of low, low paying service jobs that give us part time employment or contract work for a year or two.
You can’t see the forest for the trees.