43 ms·

What is the point of generating wealth if not to pass it down to your children? In your value system, is blowing it on yourself better? EDIT: to be clear, the

What is the point of generating wealth if not to pass it down to your children? In your value system, is blowing it on yourself better? EDIT: to be clear, the main point of generating wealth is to generate value for society. Society then pays you for that value with the wealth that you get... Now I am pointing out that on the personal level, helping your future generations is a totally admirable goal.

Hizonner 3y ago
You're missing more than one other option there...
barelyauser 3y ago
False dichotomy. You and your children are not the only humans to exist on earth.
- edgyquant 3y ago
  >False dichotomy I don’t think you know what this means
kelnos 3y ago
> In your value system, is blowing it on yourself better? Maybe? Like, certainly it's nice and good to pass along something to your children. But giving them the ability to just sit around and play video games every day for the rest of their life? What's good about that? (Yes, I know, many inheritors end up doing productive things with their money.) I would advocate for dropping the inheritance tax exemption to something much much lower, and then taxing nearly all (or even all) of an inheritance above that amount. As much as I am not a fan of Bill Gates, I 100% approve of his plan to earmark pretty much all of his wealth for philanthropy before he dies. I am still uncomfortable with the idea that we have to depend on the largess of a few billionaires in order to direct resources to make the world better. But I think that's massively better than passing on tens or hundreds of millions of dollars to offspring who didn't do anything to earn it. > to be clear, the main point of generating wealth is to generate value for society. Society then pays you for that value with the wealth that you get... That sounds like an overly idealized view of how things work. Many people get super rich for reasons that have little to do with generating wealth for society. And even if they do generate wealth for society, their reward is usually comically greater than the wealth they generate.
- xyzelement 3y ago
  It seems like we're approaching this from opposite value systems. I think about it as a dad. The most important thing for me is to ensure a good life for my descendants (and by good life I don't mean sitting around playing video games.) If you cap my ability to do that, that removes the main driver of my motivation. Why allow kids to benefit from their parents at all? EG, why do immigrant kids get to benefit from their hardworking parens' ability to come to this country and build a life?
7952 3y ago
In a sense you are spending it on yourself. Because providing for your children makes you feel better. Wealth gives you the freedom to make that choice. Another person may decide to buy a massive yacht instead. Perhaps a better question is to ask if great responsibility comes with great power. Because extreme wealth is great power. And money is not some mandate for power.

Hizonner 3y ago

You're missing more than one other option there...

barelyauser 3y ago

False dichotomy. You and your children are not the only humans to exist on earth.

edgyquant 3y ago
>False dichotomy I don’t think you know what this means

kelnos 3y ago

> In your value system, is blowing it on yourself better? Maybe? Like, certainly it's nice and good to pass along something to your children. But giving them the ability to just sit around and play video games every day for the rest of their life? What's good about that? (Yes, I know, many inheritors end up doing productive things with their money.) I would advocate for dropping the inheritance tax exemption to something much much lower, and then taxing nearly all (or even all) of an inheritance above that amount. As much as I am not a fan of Bill Gates, I 100% approve of his plan to earmark pretty much all of his wealth for philanthropy before he dies. I am still uncomfortable with the idea that we have to depend on the largess of a few billionaires in order to direct resources to make the world better. But I think that's massively better than passing on tens or hundreds of millions of dollars to offspring who didn't do anything to earn it. > to be clear, the main point of generating wealth is to generate value for society. Society then pays you for that value with the wealth that you get... That sounds like an overly idealized view of how things work. Many people get super rich for reasons that have little to do with generating wealth for society. And even if they do generate wealth for society, their reward is usually comically greater than the wealth they generate.

xyzelement 3y ago
It seems like we're approaching this from opposite value systems. I think about it as a dad. The most important thing for me is to ensure a good life for my descendants (and by good life I don't mean sitting around playing video games.) If you cap my ability to do that, that removes the main driver of my motivation. Why allow kids to benefit from their parents at all? EG, why do immigrant kids get to benefit from their hardworking parens' ability to come to this country and build a life?

7952 3y ago

In a sense you are spending it on yourself. Because providing for your children makes you feel better. Wealth gives you the freedom to make that choice. Another person may decide to buy a massive yacht instead. Perhaps a better question is to ask if great responsibility comes with great power. Because extreme wealth is great power. And money is not some mandate for power.