Originally posted by: JMapleton
Originally posted by: mugs
Why stop at $5 million? There's no room in your logic for allowing such a huge inheritance. Why not take it all the way - tax any inheritance at 90%. Oh wait, that would negatively affect people like you. :roll:
My logic is that if you want, you should be able to give your child enough money to live off of as a gift. But do not like the idea of giving someone so much money it becomes "power" and a dynasty.
All a human being needs to survive is food, clothing and shelter. The two million you say will be yours is far, far beyond what is needed to meet those requirements. It could be argued that a warm climate would negate the need for clothing and shelter. I say you should inherit enough to purchase an acre of land, you can then farm it to feed yourself. There should be no need whatsoever to live where land is expensive, I'd say your inheritance should be, oh, $30,000. Now if you should earn that much on your own, prior to getting your inheritance, so much the better. You can start right then. Under your new modified plan, you'll just forfeit it all. Just leveling the playing field.
You're a hypocrite, but you haven't realized it yet.
This is my plan for you. Agree or disagree?
blackangst1 nailed it. When you remove the incentive to work, contribute and succeed there are plenty of people in this world that will choose to let others do the work. I'll put my hand up first. Under your plan, I will be receiving a continuous stream of income for doing nothing. Why would I want to get off the couch. I'll let those that are more ambitious do the work.
A Margaret Thatcher quote for you.
"The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money."