Politics My views on inheritence and why it's bad for everyone

[Benny78]

Inheritance is bad and creates laziness. It breeds a s**t standard of work for a high price. Entitlement to charge an absurdly high price also. These businesses should be auctioned off by the government upon the owners death, and the proceeds given to the owners children. Not the company itself. It breeds a legacy of degenerates obtaining wealth they're not worth. If the kids are worth their salt they will use the money to start a successful business from scratch.

 

[The Dice Man]

You may like France then. My wife’s uncle never had kids but he is leaving all his property (including a valuable 300,000 euro estimated wine collection) to my wife.. she’s named in his will but unless he signs it over to her while he’s still alive the government will take 75% of the estate.

I don’t agree with that at all.

My wife has never relied on other people or been lazy waiting for her family to die. She will retire by 40(I’ll be 57). She is making her own way so I don’t agree with your generalisation about laziness.

 

[quotemokc]

So you are kind of saying that you are ok with the government being lazy and inheriting businesses but not individuals?

 

[ShanDog]

Gee I'd love to know what it's like inside the minds of some people. Would be an experience.

 

[Benny78]

So you are kind of saying that you are ok with the government being lazy and inheriting businesses but not individuals?

No the government would auction them publicly and the highest bidder wins. With big business, non-citizens and conflict of interests excluded from participating.

The government regulates the auction and vets the buyer. None of the profits go to the government.

 

[Benny78]

You may like France then. My wife’s uncle never had kids but he is leaving all his property (including a valuable 300,000 euro estimated wine collection) to my wife.. she’s named in his will but unless he signs it over to her while he’s still alive the government will take 75% of the estate.

I don’t agree with that at all.

My wife has never relied on other people or been lazy waiting for her family to die. She will retire by 40(I’ll be 57). She is making her own way so I don’t agree with your generalisation about laziness.

This is nothing like my proposal. The proceeds go to the owners children not the government.

 

[quotemokc]

No the government would auction them publicly and the highest bidder wins. With big business, non-citizens and conflict of interests excluded from participating.

So lets say this can happen and when Jeff Bezos dies who has enough money to buy Amazon?

Nevermind that this would never happen, businesses would just pass ownership down before someone dies.

When Martha Ford dies should the government own the Detroit Lions even though the Ford family has owned them since 1963?

 

[Taylor]

If a business is not publicly traded then it would most likely be owned by a trust with many family members, partners, children, special people listed as joint owners or perhaps different share types of a corporate trustee.

Effectively looking like this:
BIG COMPANY (owned by) BIG COMPANY TRADING TRUST with BIG COMPANY INVESTMENT Pty Ltd as Trustee, of which the ownership is listed as an array of people.

If one of those people passed away, the rest can carry on as though nothing happened.

 

[Fat Yak]

Inheritance is bad and creates laziness. It breeds a s**t standard of work for a high price. Entitlement to charge an absurdly high price also. These businesses should be auctioned off by the government upon the owners death, and the proceeds given to the owners children. Not the company itself. It breeds a legacy of degenerates obtaining wealth they're not worth. If the kids are worth their salt they will use the money to start a successful business from scratch.

Your parents are poor yeah?

 

[Reynolds Number]

I do not agree with the OP.

But I am not shocked to be sitting here reading the opinions of disgruntled intelligent and tertiary qualified individuals who are starting to question a world where the ability to get any decent job is based on your family, friends, where you went to schools and aspects of your personality such as good looks and hobbies etc.

I kinda like reading alternative perspectives on life. It at least makes you realise that not everyone is middle class and in an office job.

 

[Present Not Past]

It wasn't very healthy for James Packer.

 

[Seeds]

So you are kind of saying that you are ok with the government being lazy and inheriting businesses but not individuals?

The govenrment is the taxpayer. I.e. the government is everyone.

 

[Seeds]

Inheritance is a disgrace. It should be eliminated from our society. The only wealth you should have is the one you earn yourself. This means dramatically lower income taxes.

 

[ShanDog]

Inheritance is a disgrace. It should be eliminated from our society. The only wealth you should have is the one you earn yourself. This means dramatically lower income taxes.

Working together in small units to best position future generations within your tribe/family for success is one of the evolutionary drivers that separated us from the other monkeys. Birthright has been a feature of every society since they existed. Why is it suddenly a disgrace and not a purposeful, reasonable and desirable thing for people to do?

 

[owen87]

Working together in small units to best position future generations within your tribe/family for success is one of the evolutionary drivers that separated us from the other monkeys. Birthright has been a feature of every society since they existed. Why is it suddenly a disgrace and not a purposeful, reasonable and desirable thing for people to do?

It's pretty upsetting if you come from a family that doesn't leave you anything I imagine?

 

[ShanDog]

It's pretty upsetting if you come from a family that doesn't leave you anything I imagine?

I imagine it would be. Similarly, I could find my inheritance pretty upsetting when compared to the windfall rich people get. Comparing yourself to everyone else is a quick way to always be unhappy and discontent. It leads to ideas like this thread OP.

 

[Mofra]

There is the issue in that it would impact on the will of parents to want to work hard and provide for their families. We have a history in Australia of people immigrating with nothing, begin exposed to opportunity and circumstance they could not dream of in their original countries and making a new life in the knowledge that their children will have an easier time of life than they did.

Unintended consequences should always be considered when proposing new ideas.

 

[Balls In]

Unintended consequences should always be considered when proposing new ideas.

Most small businesses are family owned and operated and often their skills are honed across generations. What happens if three generations are working together in a uniquely skilled profession when grandad carks?

 

[Seeds]

Working together in small units to best position future generations within your tribe/family for success is one of the evolutionary drivers that separated us from the other monkeys. Birthright has been a feature of every society since they existed. Why is it suddenly a disgrace and not a purposeful, reasonable and desirable thing for people to do?

It is an evolutionary desirable thing for people to do I completely agree. And in a world where tax revenue wasnt needed I would encourage inheritance. However, protecting the wealth one creates for themselves is also an evolutionary desire. We hate it when others take our stuff that we have worked hard for ourselves. By not taxing inheritance we effectively force a greater theft by the government of wealth made by our own hands as the government needs to get tax revenue from somewhere. I.e. No inheritance tax means higher personal income taxes.

Not only should both forms of income be taxed but inheritance should be taxed far more for various evolutionary reasons:

Higher personal post tax income incentivises people to work whilst inheritance income does the opposite. Thus taxing inheritance rather then our own income creates more net stuff for us all to use.

Inheritance incomes provides less happiness then income earned through work. Studies conclusively show this. We value something more if we have worked for it.

Inheritance leads to more unequal socieities. Marginal utility of extra income for rich people is much higher then that of poor people. Not to mention greater inequality leads to less trust in society which negatively mpacts everyone as it leads to more corruption, violence and theft. More security costs is needed. People are naturally angry and grow more inflamed amygdalas and thus experience more negative emotions.


Wealth from work and capital creation is far more valuable to us then wealth created from inheritance. And on top of this wealth is higher too when inheritance is taxed instead of work and capital creation. If we care about improving happiness its an absolute no brainer to tax inheritance far more then personal income. Its a rare win-win situation.

 

[Frank Bunn]

protecting the wealth one creates for themselves is also an evolutionary desire. We hate it when others take our stuff that we have worked hard for ourselves.

Protecting the wealth we create for our children is also an evolutionary desire.

Inheritance incomes provides less happiness then income earned through work. Studies conclusively show this.

What studies?

Inheritance leads to more unequal socieities. Marginal utility of extra income for rich people is much higher then that of poor people. Not to mention greater inequality leads to less trust in society which negatively impacts everyone as it leads to more corruption, violence and theft. More security costs is needed. People are naturally angry and grow more inflamed amygdalas and thus experience more negative emotions.

Essentially what you are doing is valuing the state/society over family. But we have no evolutionary impulse towards the state.

Inheritance is a way for hard working people who started poor to pass their assets to their families. Society is less unequal than ever. Prohibitions on inheritance have not contributed to that.

 

[its free real estate]

Man, some people are dumb.

If inheritance was going to be confiscated the following things would happen:

1. People rich enough would create complex financial instruments to get around it.
2. People who can't afford lawyers and accountants would simply give their money to their kids before they died.
3. Everyone else would spend it.

 

[Jibroni]

Inheritance has been around since the times of the Old Testament, passing one ones wealth to future generations/ charities after a well earned life isn't a bad thing.

The issue is that a fair portion of Western Society does not seem happy to live "within their means" and want to be like to the successful ones, whoever they maybe.