4 ms·
This is ridiculous property-rights absolutism. Obviously it would wrong to leave them completely bereft and unable to support themselves, but people with compro
by blackbagboys 9y ago
This is ridiculous property-rights absolutism. Obviously it would wrong to leave them completely bereft and unable to support themselves, but people with compromised mental faculties lose plenty of other rights; there's no reason they get to sit like a senile dragon on a hoard of accumulated wealth.
- kbos87 9y agoAre you serious? That wealth belongs to them until they make a sound decision to part with it. If that means they’ve decided to purchase something and haven’t been deceived, great. If that means they pass it on to someone of their choosing when they die, that’s their right too. When someone takes advantage of their weakened mental state, that is just plain reprehensible.
- Geekette 9y ago"This is ridiculous property-rights absolutism. ... there's no reason they get to sit like a senile dragon on a hoard of accumulated wealth." WTF. It isn't ridiculous to respect the fact that unless explicitly given to you, other people’s property is NOT yours and this applies to your parents too. It’s amazing that this has to be disputed at all but it explains why one sees some people with families going beyond will-making to planning for divestiture of their wealth to occur while alive later on.
- fspeech 9y agoPeople can feel aversion to the idea out of love or respect for their parents instead of pure legalism.
- gras 9y agoSo what's your alternative to private property if you want to erode (or abolish) it? I don't see how you having power over someone and them owning things they don't use justifies thieving from them.