4 ms·
> you need to radically reduce the cost of goods and services Yes. Starting with housing, most people's #1 expense (and, complicating matters, many other peop
by nugget 9y ago
> you need to radically reduce the cost of goods and services
Yes. Starting with housing, most people's #1 expense (and, complicating matters, many other people's #1 investment).
- zo1 9y agoOnly because we live in a weird generational "reset" society, for lack of a better term. Instead of parents passing off their house/savings to their progeny, it's expected that each person must start off from zero when they come of age. We should be promoting solid wealth creation and stability, and the passing of it to future children.
- kobeya 9y agoWe should be promoting therapies which lead to healthier, longer lives. Dependence on generational wealth transfer throws an incentive kink in that.
- zo1 9y agoI don't see any reason why you can't do both? Then the problem becomes one of how to "promote generational wealth transfer" while "keeping people health and living longer". I don't buy the whole "you need to work yourself to death in order to get ahead" stuff. Also, no need to make your children "rich". Just make sure they have things quantitatively better than you had. Just having a home for their children to subsequently live in without worry is definitely attainable for most people if they don't do anything stupid.
- kobeya 9y agoI was trying to imply “live forever” without saying it since that results in a bunch of ignorant responses (not yours). If you don’t die — which should be the end goal, no? — how do you leave a sufficient amount to your kids while keeping enough to live well yourself? If you never move into a nursing home — because you are as healthy at 65 as you were at 25 — then how do they stay in your house? I’m against burdening our young people with debt, for sure, but I don’t see generational wealth as a long term solution to that either.
- antisthenes 9y agoNothing could be further from the truth. It's why in developed societies capital (and most forms of wealth) tends to accumulate in the hands of the few over time. A "reset" society would have, at the very minimum, something like a 90% inheritance tax and much much higher capital gains tax, as well as provisions on land value tax so high value scarce land cannot be hoarded as well. I'm honestly not sure how one can look at the countries who are doing well right now and say what you said. It's like opposite land.
- TheSpiceIsLife 9y agoBecause we're not concerning ourselves with the plush lives of the top few percent. The parent comment is referring to the majority of middle and low income families who's children come of age with zero wealth. All of the countries doing well have a problem, right now, where middle income earners can't afford to buy homes in the cities people want to live in, while the top income earners are saying things like young people can't afford to buy houses because they're blowing all their money on smashed avocado on toast.[1] 1. https://twitter.com/60Mins/status/864065346516377600/video/1 https://twitter.com/60Mins/status/864065346516377600/video/1