3 ms·

> Ban inheritance This is far too simplistic. My children are elementary school age. If I get killed in a car accident, it would be a second tragedy if I could

> Ban inheritance This is far too simplistic. My children are elementary school age. If I get killed in a car accident, it would be a second tragedy if I couldn't at least help provide for them until they reach adulthood from my savings. Instead, I think we should just have very progressive inheritance taxes. Taking care of offspring is one of the fundamental drivers of humanity, so we should all have some ability to do that. But large-scale multi-generational wealth consolidation is a driver of inequality and is bad for society. A progressive tax rate would balance those.

dragonwriter 5y ago
> Instead, I think we should just have very progressive inheritance taxes. Or you could just have progressive income tax, treat income from gifts and inheritance as income, and allow tax recognition both in advance of income and deferred over a period of years for windfalls (relative to prior-years actual income) so that one-time or irregular income events aren't overtaxed. We don't need a lot of specialized taxes if we just have a well-thought out general income tax.
Barrin92 5y ago
>If I get killed in a car accident, it would be a second tragedy if I couldn't at least help provide for them until they reach adulthood from my savings. tbf in a society that would use inheritance to improve the commons your kids would probably be fine. But yes a progressive tax is probably the more realistic option. That said I actually sympathize with OPs take because inheritance is for some reason one of the most accepted, but also most obvious examples of unearned wealth.
- munificent 5y ago
  > inheritance is for some reason one of the most accepted, but also most obvious examples of unearned wealth. I've been thinking about this Steven Pinker quote for literally decades: "No society can be simultaneously fair, free, and equal. If it is fair, people who work harder can accumulate more. If it is free, people will give their wealth to their children. But then it cannot be equal, for some people will inherit wealth they did not earn."

dragonwriter 5y ago

> Instead, I think we should just have very progressive inheritance taxes. Or you could just have progressive income tax, treat income from gifts and inheritance as income, and allow tax recognition both in advance of income and deferred over a period of years for windfalls (relative to prior-years actual income) so that one-time or irregular income events aren't overtaxed. We don't need a lot of specialized taxes if we just have a well-thought out general income tax.

Barrin92 5y ago

>If I get killed in a car accident, it would be a second tragedy if I couldn't at least help provide for them until they reach adulthood from my savings. tbf in a society that would use inheritance to improve the commons your kids would probably be fine. But yes a progressive tax is probably the more realistic option. That said I actually sympathize with OPs take because inheritance is for some reason one of the most accepted, but also most obvious examples of unearned wealth.

munificent 5y ago
> inheritance is for some reason one of the most accepted, but also most obvious examples of unearned wealth. I've been thinking about this Steven Pinker quote for literally decades: "No society can be simultaneously fair, free, and equal. If it is fair, people who work harder can accumulate more. If it is free, people will give their wealth to their children. But then it cannot be equal, for some people will inherit wealth they did not earn."