3 ms·

>I have not once heard a compelling argument for why inheritance is a good thing for society. You must not have kids, do you? It may not be good for society, b

by pvnick 13y ago

>I have not once heard a compelling argument for why inheritance is a good thing for society. You must not have kids, do you? It may not be good for society, but do you seriously want to prohibit parents from being able to pass things down to their children? That's a bit of a monstrous proposition, don't you think? Many families attach emotional significance to tangible property (land, a house, furniture, life insurance, etc), and stealing that from them because "you didn't earn that" is morally reprehensible.

morgante 13y ago
> You must not have kids, do you? It may not be good for society, but do you seriously want to prohibit parents from being able to pass things down to their children? I don't have kids yet, but I do not intend to leave anything to them once I do. I'll make sure they get a good education, but will be donating my estate to charity. > Many families attach emotional significance to tangible property (land, a house, furniture, life insurance, etc), and stealing that from them because "you didn't earn that" is morally reprehensible. It's no more "morally reprehensible" than any other taxation. In fact, compared to "stealing" my personal wages (ie. income taxes), it's significantly more moral—it was never there's in the first place.
- thatswrong0 13y ago
  The estate tax does sometimes force people to liquidate their assets in order to pay it. I'd say that's pretty morally reprehensible and a violation of property rights.
- crusso 13y ago
  but will be donating my estate to charity I find that people throw out that line and keep to it about as well as people keep to their diets. They make proclamations, but when it comes time to actually NOT put their kids in their Will, they balk. Once you have kids, they become a part of you. And jeez, wait until you have grandkids. That completely upends what you think of as "important".

by pvnick 13y ago

morgante 13y ago

> You must not have kids, do you? It may not be good for society, but do you seriously want to prohibit parents from being able to pass things down to their children? I don't have kids yet, but I do not intend to leave anything to them once I do. I'll make sure they get a good education, but will be donating my estate to charity. > Many families attach emotional significance to tangible property (land, a house, furniture, life insurance, etc), and stealing that from them because "you didn't earn that" is morally reprehensible. It's no more "morally reprehensible" than any other taxation. In fact, compared to "stealing" my personal wages (ie. income taxes), it's significantly more moral—it was never there's in the first place.

thatswrong0 13y ago
The estate tax does sometimes force people to liquidate their assets in order to pay it. I'd say that's pretty morally reprehensible and a violation of property rights.
crusso 13y ago
but will be donating my estate to charity I find that people throw out that line and keep to it about as well as people keep to their diets. They make proclamations, but when it comes time to actually NOT put their kids in their Will, they balk. Once you have kids, they become a part of you. And jeez, wait until you have grandkids. That completely upends what you think of as "important".