> Also even if its 'only' zero sum, that money is still going somewhere, either allowing someone else to make a long term investment, or something more immediat

> Also even if its 'only' zero sum, that money is still going somewhere, either allowing someone else to make a long term investment, or something more immediate. I'm not sure I understood your point correctly, but most wealth that is passed between generations is passed in the form of investments, not cash, so that wealth is performing the same societal benefit as your pension. What I meant by long term risk was that rich kids can afford to start businesses, because if they fail, they can fall back on their family's wealth to bounce back. I would avoid adopting the world view that money is the root of all evil (or leads to power...). If you gave everyone $1B, no one would be measurably more powerful than they are today, because everyone else can afford the same things they can, so prices would rise until an equilibrium is achieved (same goes for educational opportunities, etc, unless you cap teacher pay effectively holding teachers back). Again, a 100% inheritance rate would make society more equal by taking away opportunities from those who had ancestors that worked hard to provide that opportunity for them, not by giving more opportunity to those who weren't so fortunate.