>>>No I don't. If one has amassed a fortune through hard work, it is their prerogative to do whatever they want to with the fruits of their labors (after taxes, of course). That includes leaving it to their children when they die. Anyway, with inheritance taxes, the government still gets to steal a good potion of the dead person's estate by taxing money that has already been taxed.
>
>Yes, but society does get to decide how its markets and governing structures will operate.
>
>This is why monopolies get deconstructed. In the pursuit of further personal benefit, monopolies restructure markets and exert unnatural influence over government to entrench themselves and prevent innovative newcomers staking a claim, which every true Capitalist will agree is contrary to society's benefit. Rockefeller, Ma Bell, the list goes on of such operators who were broken up to preserve competition and social benefit.
>
>Currently $ is concentrating in the hands of we few who may not be a formal monopoly, but we do co-operate to gather benefit for ourselves and pull up the ladder behind us. Rather than being ashamed, we are proud of accumulated wealth that relies at least in part on decades of systematic underpayment for benefits that we simultaneously see as our right and society's obligation. Unfortunately society does not have a money tree so the cost of this selfishness is going to be borne by the young who are supposed to be a primary social purpose, not a herd to be milked by oldsters. It makes no sense for us to be proud of private assets if the price is a younger generation that will learn to resent us and eventually must cut us adrift or revolt.
>
>It is true that assets pass to children or others when we shuffle along, but that just serves to perpetuate the concentration of wealth in families who already have wealth, with the biggest fortunes passing increasingly into the hands of people who think they are Victorian gentlemen and that "trade" is distasteful. As wealth concentrates, "hard work" becomes a cynical recipe to accumulate more profits for the owning class in exchange for an occasional gift card. This is a reality and while I never would advocate equal outcomes for all, definitely I would advocate equal opportunity being more than a slogan. There are fragmented efforts such as scholarships for tertiary education but we need to go back to having pride in the improved nation we left for those who follow, not the size of the pile we drew to ourselves.
>
>I know your usual response is to donate all my assets if this is what I think - but that's just a taunt, not a solution. The young may be distracted by sex and amusements but they are not sheep and in time they'll come to their senses and give us exactly what we deserve.

Well said.

I was thinking about this issue and I realized there's another perspective. We want these jobs done--we want people to staff our stores and fast food places, and pick our crops, and so forth and so on. But, if we want them done, we should be willing to pay what these things actually cost. If we're not willing to do so, then we don't really want them.

Tamar