Someone inheriting it hasn't worked for it so possibly their "right" to it isn't quite as clear cut.

How do you know that???? Perhaps the son/daughter took care of the parent in the parent's older age, maybe even sacrificing their own life to provide comfort for the elder parent.

Anyway, it's completely irrelevant. The person who decided to give the money to a son/daughter/whatever is saying, "this is my money/property, I'm giving it to this person". It is a legal and binding contract. Even if you don't like the recipient and feel the recipient isn't as industrious, you still have to respect the original legal contract.

And for all we know, maybe there are terms in the will - such as, the son/daughter receive $$$, but an executor must watch over to make sure that the son/daughter does XYZ, in accordance with any wishes of the parent (which might have included charity...if I died filthy rich, I'd certainly give money to WIC and other school food programs...but that would be my choice).

Again, I have no idea what the terms were with the Walton family. I also don't care. It was the family's money, he can do with it as he wishes. It was HIS. This is what the Austrian economists mean when they talk about the fundamentals of a free economy - the right to private property, and everything that goes with it.

The government and looters of the world have no right (legal or moral) to get their hands on it.