[inheritance] serves no purpose in a society based on improving the lives of the entire population
I would say that society is served well by the ability of widows to inherit and not be left destitute. Similarly for minor children.
If you're talking specifically about inheritance by adult children, I agree the arguments in favour are weaker.
Re:Who died and left the US $7B?
by kelseyfrog on Wednesday October 09, 2024 @11:22AM
(#41788853)
Is there no system which can provide for widows and minor children yet isn't able to be taken advantage of by the hyperwealthy?
Here in the Netherlands the (once setup as) farmers coop bank is notorious for not doing that, they heavily favour bigco and business models that capture subsidies effectively (which usually means scaling one part to ridiculous proportions).
Re:Who died and left the US $7B?
by bigfatkitten on Tuesday October 15, 2024 @07:39PM
(#41854227)
> The taxes are less than buying the farm outright so it would just be a very cheap buyout.
If you have $300 to your name, you're not getting finance. The bank will just laugh you out the door.
Inheritance, even with normal tax, is a cheap way of keeping money in the family and keeping rich people rich. It is not based on merit, capabilities or need and serves no purpose in a society based on improving the lives of the entire population. (Which you can argue is not what [country with low inheritance tax] is)