I appreciate your sincerity here. It is indeed emotional! This multi-generational effort kind of view is key to many people. And to them, building wealth for t

I appreciate your sincerity here. It is indeed emotional! This multi-generational effort kind of view is key to many people. And to them, building wealth for their children is the most moral thing they can think of. You're right to point that out and you saying it reminds me of a friend who said something similar about the topic. My critique on this side is that the receiver of the wealth seems often to not be happy with it. I'm sure that is not true up to a certain point but past that, the trope of the meaning crisis in some way seems to be accurate from those I've known. I think the giver does not follow the logic to the end that indeed the giving is a gift to themselves and not to their children. They are granting their own dream at the cost of their child's. This is where I think the moral failing is. I certainly believe in contributing what you can to your community and that those whom have the wealth should indeed allocate it as they see fit. I guess my question is in the wisdom of some specific allocations. The generational economic parasite is not happy to be so but is made into the unhappy abomination. It costs both them and society.