# Your opinion on inheritance?



## Deleted User (Jan 13, 2021)

I can't decide whether this genuinely a good or bad thing that parents do for their kids, or someone to leave it for. In theory, it sounds wonderful, but sometimes it creates wars between families as some members decide they deserved it more than the one who was chosen.


----------



## Ricken (Jan 13, 2021)

Boesy said:


> as some members decide they deserved it more than the one who was chosen.


See that's the problem.  Assets should be dispersed as decided in the owner's will
Any "I deserve this more" is selfish and thoughtless in the wake of just losing a family member

When there is no will, there's bound to be chaos


----------



## FAST6191 (Jan 13, 2021)

Can vary depending upon how much it is -- multi generational stuff (some of which I have been a beneficiary of, though by no means was it a lot as that many generations do dilute the pots somewhat) can make for some fun times and has seen people able to enjoy a life of leisure or pursue paths that others might have to think very long and hard about (30K a year is hard to live on, 30K plus trust fund means you might well be able to be an archaeologist rather than boring yourself as an accountant and wasting a life as it were).

If it is a lot and you are not prepped for it then you have the lottery/insurance payout/sudden wealth problem wherein there is a decent chance said inheritor will be following you into the grave in fairly short order (1 million is easy to spunk but buys a lot of drugs, fast friends, loose women and silly cars before you plough into the wall experiencing all of them at once) or at least end up utterly broke.

Can also make for an interesting tax situation if not handled properly.

At this point if you get yourself some dementia then a few years of care of that usually solve that problem -- vast fortunes I have seen spent wiping drool from a vegetable stuffed into an old country estate turned care home. Is also a rather popular way to go out as well.

For the most part I view it as anything I get is a nice perk but generally what is yours is yours, do with it as you please. SKIing as it is known (spending kids inheritance) is a top plan. At the same time I have no objection to old money doing old money stuff.

I have seen mightily bitter feelings, the vultures descend to get their bit (usually leaving the more good natured to clean up), odd quirks and general "great now I have to get rid of this or find a space" (though that means I ended up with some pretty sweet furniture), and all of those as a big surprise that I did not see coming. Haven't seen the dodging arguments leads to more problems (sell it all and split the proceeds does mean if someone actually wanted the items because sentimental then... yeah) but have heard of it.


----------



## notimp (Jan 14, 2021)

FAST6191 said:


> At the same time I have no objection to old money doing old money stuff.


Thats investing in structural changes world wide, that are so vast in scope, that countries cant afford to f.e. change regulation on a whim, because it would impact such a large percentage of their economy, longterm.

Very stabilizing force. If regionally bound.  Also hard to loose money that way - if there are no wars.


edit: Also fits in here - not sure if its the direction the OP wanted the thread to go, but its an interesting social study I once found as a teenager. Mostly fits, because Trump is on his way out..


----------



## Frankfort42 (Jan 15, 2021)

I'm not pro-socialism, which would stop inheritances from taking place and I'm not a fan of the Government taxing them. The family unit is the strongest and most important part of life so it just makes sense to allow the family to take any assets that are left for them when their loved one dies. I don't think inheritance money would harm a persons character as if they have no self control or are using drugs then going down a spiral is a given outcome regardless of how much money or assets they have. Bad people are just bad people, but I believe families should be able to keep their own assets. Life isn't fair and we're not all created equally. If you're on the bottom stop bitching and climb up.


----------



## Deleted User (Jan 15, 2021)

i've never benefited from inheritance, and probably never will, but people have a right to their family assets, and thus, they shouldnt be taxed, that's what VAT is for


----------



## FAST6191 (Jan 15, 2021)

Frankfort42 said:


> I don't think inheritance money would harm a persons character as if they have no self control or are using drugs then going down a spiral is a given outcome regardless of how much money or assets they have.



While there are those that have to work really hard to not flame out regardless then I would say there are plenty of other examples of sudden injections of cash (lottery, sale of company, insurance payout...) causing the average factory worker/office drone to go off the rails that likely would not have, or would have funds limit the extent of their vices.


----------



## Supernova89 (Feb 6, 2021)

Ends up showing what your family is really for, a lot of negative things comes up with inheritance.


----------



## notimp (Feb 18, 2021)

Azerus_Kun said:


> i've never benefited from inheritance, and probably never will, but people have a right to their family assets, and thus, they shouldnt be taxed, that's what VAT is for


Slight problem with that. Lets say you had rising concentration of wealth for the past 20 years thats grown and never stopped to grow.

At some point you are banking on 'people hire lousy money managers' in the future, to hopefully lose everything they had within three generations - or you will never end up at 'equal opportunity' for people to start out with.

Not that that would be a thing in practice anyhow - but people might notice, that you are telling them BS for 20 years, and demand a system reset.

Again, there is a structural reason, why everyone wants millenials to get over being a lost generation, tries to teach Gen-Z that their future is in inventing digital goods, people would like to have (because you can have an infinite amount (growth), with nothing else but copy and pasting)... And people starting to get angry over not enough living space being available for families in europe, because all is bought up for financial specualtion. The kind thats not that risky, mind you.

All of that is 'market'.

So how do you reset it? Having the USD crash? War?


The point being -

- inheriting money, and connections is an advantage starting out
- having inherited that advantage becomes more and more the only predictor on future success

- you dont want to have growth, because climate.
- you dont want to have 'individualism', because someone might not care about climate.


- you want religion to move everyone into setups, where you propose that future growth is in fantasy markets. Have everyone play fantasy markets - to the point where consumption 'desires' are directed away from people actually owning stuff in the real world, and if you can get better compliance for serfdom, by having at least half of people personally betting on virtual growth ("Everyone is an investor!") and loosing, then by all means - make that the wave of the future, right?

As much as the thing with compound growth is, that its compound growth - at one point, that becomes a real problem in societies. And then you have revolts.

But millenials wont revolt. Half of them will inherit, and suppress the other half not to see themselves as a lost generation.

So everything can continue, as its set up.

No change needed.

The social unrest in the US is just a fluke, that can be kitted over, by championing identity politics. Isn't that what everyone believes?
(And france curenctly is signaling would destroy its socuety, but - nevermind that...)

edit: 

edit:

New fields of growth also solve your problem. (If enough people can make a living out of growth you, and I quote "dont know a thing about where it will come from yet" (Davos).) Because thats also equal to 'a reset' or at least a positive motivational perspective.

But then you currently have 'future growth expectance' around virtual concepts noone has EVER build a valuable company out of. Like - the concept of a blockchain for instance.

But if they do - by god, if they do -- you'd all of a sudden need all the bitcoin-bros, that were so loyal for all those years in the first place...


Seems like a good tale about current economic and social problems to me. Not that anyone would care, as I said before.


----------

