hereditary wealth is heriditary power

[Advocate]

"A hereditary monarch is as absurd a position as a hereditary doctor or mathematician."

Moreover, so long as wealth is power, inherited wealth is inherited power. We are still living under a feudal system. The upper-crust of society does not depend on individually earned merit, but inherited assumption of merit by bloodline and credentialed integration. You cannot individually earn your way into the "elite" in America, no matter what sort of saint you may be. "Blood will tell." is still the creed of the 1% of the 1%.

This is the primary reason for the failure of Objectivism as well. However earned the wealth, as soon as the legitimate earner is free to give their wealth to their children, the whole idea of merit is dispensed with. Inherited wealth is impermissible in a civilized society. Merit is incompatible with inherited wealth on a fundamental level. Family ties are inherently divisive. It takes a village to raise a child, but only a family to raise a "family-values" bigoted narcissistic egotist.

[Impenitent]

"A hereditary monarch is as absurd a position as a hereditary doctor or mathematician."

Moreover, so long as wealth is power, inherited wealth is inherited power. We are still living under a feudal system. The upper-crust of society does not depend on individually earned merit, but inherited assumption of merit by bloodline and credentialed integration. You cannot individually earn your way into the "elite" in America, no matter what sort of saint you may be. "Blood will tell." is still the creed of the 1% of the 1%.

This is the primary reason for the failure of Objectivism as well. However earned the wealth, as soon as the legitimate earner is free to give their wealth to their children, the whole idea of merit is dispensed with. Inherited wealth is impermissible in a civilized society. Merit is incompatible with inherited wealth on a fundamental level. Family ties are inherently divisive. It takes a village to raise a child, but only a family to raise a "family-values" bigoted narcissistic egotist.

greed is as beautiful as jealousy

-Imp

[henry quirk]

so: where's the cut off?

I leave my kid hundred bucks, a hundred thousand, a hundred million...I leave him favorite book, my library of classics...my meager business, my empire

where's the line between what is acceptable to bequeath and what is not acceptable?

and: when does a man's property become someone else's?

is it when that man sez so, or when envying busy bodies say so?

[Immanuel Can]

greed is as beautiful as jealousy

-Imp

Nice! Well said.

What the simpletons who still believe in and crab about "inherited wealth" don't get is that the top 1% is mobile...who's in it changes, depending on how they handle the opportunities and resources they get. "Inherited wealth" statistically tends to last only about two generations, and 70% of America's extremely wealthy families lose it within one inheritor generation. Meanwhile, new Bill Gateses, Jeff Bezoses, and such rise and fall every day. It's all about how you use what you get...not about what other people have.

Moreover, on a world scale, most people who complain about unfair wealth distribution are in the word's top 8% themselves, and don't know it. I'll bet they don't think it's THEIR wealth that they are campaigning to redistribute. But I've worked and lived in the developing world, and I can tell you that for every jealous middle-classer in this world, there's a person in the developing world who has far more justification to complain about what that middle class gets, that they don't.

Meanwhile, these simpletons sip their expensive, designer lattes while they type their gripes on a computer that depends on technology they got from the wealthiest society that has ever been on the planet.

A bunch of green-eyed weenies. That's all they are.

[Advocate]

>so: where's the cut off?

Well it's not at a billion. That's literal insanity. Severe inequality always sparks a battle between revolt and suppression. As long as the floor needs to be raised, the ceiling must be lowered. It wouldn't even take much if efficiency was introduced as any sort of priority..

>I leave my kid hundred bucks, a hundred thousand, a hundred million...I leave him favorite book, my library of classics...my meager business, my empire

Does your child have the proper credentials to run the business effectively? Businesses are a social good, not an individual one.

>where's the line between what is acceptable to bequeath and what is not acceptable?

It should be limited sentimental items only, and there should be a 100% inheritance tax otherwise, to incentivize people sharing and caring for each other over time. But in any case, wealth above some level includes actual power over others, however it's conferred, and must be tied to merit.

>and: when does a man's property become someone else's?

If it's legitimately his, never. Want to discuss the legitimacy of ownership? It's not whatever he can lay hands on and control.

>is it when that man sez so, or when envying busy bodies say so?

That's not even an argument. Government always has, and has had to exist.

[henry quirk]

Well it's not at a billion.

so: I can't leave my kid, my brother, a total stranger a billion bucks cuz it's not fair, yeah?


Does your child have the proper credentials to run the business effectively? Businesses are a social good, not an individual one.

businesses are property & profit-makin' ventures...social good ain't got diddly to do with it

my kid's creds ain't none of your concern


It should be limited sentimental items only, and there should be a 100% inheritance tax otherwise, to incentivize people sharing and caring for each other over time. But in any case, wealth above some level includes actual power over others, however it's conferred, and must be tied to merit.

I'm very sentimental about my billion bucks

no, I'm not payin' a dime on it: my expensive shyster will see to that

who sez what is meritorious?


Want to discuss the legitimacy of ownership?

sure

I say I own whatever I fairly transact for or make myself

you?


That's not even an argument.

wasn't meant to be


Government always has, and has had to exist.

in some form, gov always has & always will exist...however, it has never existed evenly, consistently, coherently for all people, all the time, everywhere...always, there are little mobile pockets of freedom, folks livin' freely, transactin' freely, not becuz of gov but in spite of it