Forum
#Topics
+Start a topic
?Search __________________________________

-Log In
-Register
steal this book/movie/song.
Log In to post a reply
68 messages
View: flat \ threaded
________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

cyberpainter
cyberpainter
5926 posts

Re: Food for thought 1: Inheritance

hito wrote:
I don't quite know how any true capitalist could support the idea of people inherting wealth. Surely true capitalism would be repulsed at the idea that somebody gets money for nothing (and I am not talking about being a lazy boss). I am talking about the children of creative people getting money from the hard work of their ancestors. Surely money should only go to those who earn it. If a capitalist starts to allow wealth to go to associates, friends or family, then they could start to extend that principal to society in general. If lazy, good-for-nothings can get money simply by association then surely a community can get money too. Given that capitalists reject the idea that anyone deserves wealth without effort they will reject the extension to family. Given this, the cost of records by dead artists should not include anything other than money going to those who made it and the cost of manufacture. So beatles records should be about half price, elvis records very cheap, Tyrannosaurus Rex albums near free but this is not the case. Why? Because the capitalist system allows for socialist principles such as common wealth.


If I have money I should be able to give or leave it to who I choose. Why should some stranger have more right to someone's money than one's own family? Capitalism doesn't reject wealth without effort which is the basis for your argument. That is false. It's based on getting whatever the market will bear. Effort plays very little part in worth.

May 30, 2010, 08:02



________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Topic Outline: