SkyBlueFlux
Well-Known Member
As somebody who’s kids will end up paying IHT on my assets (though hopefully not for a long time) there’s something profoundly perplexing to me about inherited wealth.
People’s number one argument against IHT tends to be along the lines of “I worked hard all my life to set up my kids/family for the future, so it’s wrong to stop me passing the earnings from that hard work onto my kids”.
Yeah okay, sure, maybe you worked hard… But did they? The people actually receiving the wealth. What have they done to deserve that, exactly? Existed?
I find it weird that these are sometimes the same people who talk about layabouts getting handouts for nothing on the one hand, but then are rabid about giving their own handouts on the other. Money for nothing is fine as long as it’s my kids getting it and not some stranger? Seems a touch hypocritical. The benefit is completely de-coupled from the cost. If they want the benefits they should earn it, I thought that’s what rugged capitalism was about?
Confusing. I get it is a matter of opinion but it will never make sense to me. I might want to put a backstop in place to ensure my family avoids destitution after I’m gone, sure, but other than that? They can carve their own path. They should carve their own path. Until we’re at the point where we as a society live in abundance and work is no longer necessary, it doesn’t square with me.
Politics of envy in this respect looks a lot to me like moral consistency.
People’s number one argument against IHT tends to be along the lines of “I worked hard all my life to set up my kids/family for the future, so it’s wrong to stop me passing the earnings from that hard work onto my kids”.
Yeah okay, sure, maybe you worked hard… But did they? The people actually receiving the wealth. What have they done to deserve that, exactly? Existed?
I find it weird that these are sometimes the same people who talk about layabouts getting handouts for nothing on the one hand, but then are rabid about giving their own handouts on the other. Money for nothing is fine as long as it’s my kids getting it and not some stranger? Seems a touch hypocritical. The benefit is completely de-coupled from the cost. If they want the benefits they should earn it, I thought that’s what rugged capitalism was about?
Confusing. I get it is a matter of opinion but it will never make sense to me. I might want to put a backstop in place to ensure my family avoids destitution after I’m gone, sure, but other than that? They can carve their own path. They should carve their own path. Until we’re at the point where we as a society live in abundance and work is no longer necessary, it doesn’t square with me.
Politics of envy in this respect looks a lot to me like moral consistency.