Is inheritance to family riches counter-productive to a successful capitalist government?
I'm curious to hear what others think on this. I am not one whom is highly educated (at least in depth) on government and politics, Thus I am asking, due to me not specializing in those areas I don't consider myself neither a capitalist nor a socialist, etc. As far as I know about either they both seem to be flawwed but I can't really say with much authority on the issue, not it seems obvious to me however if the end result of capitalism is the rich get richer and the poor get poorer that is not beneficial for capitalism, neither is having everyone payed equally for having different jobs. I am curious on the opinions of others on this though, since capitalism is supposed to be getting the money for the hard work you earn (which I can agree with that) I wonder, if you are born into wealth, or poverty doesn't that kind of go against the goal of capitalism? Should inheritance be regulated? Like I said, I know this is a question sort of against capitalism it is only because I am more familiar with capitalism, I am unbiased, but I'd like to hear your thoughts on the issue. Is generations of accumulated inheritance counter-productive towards capitalism? If you think so, but are still capitalist do you have an idea to solve the issue? If you don't think so, explain why not?
Yes, because...
Side Score: 1
|
No, because...
Side Score: 5
|
|
|
|
1
point
|
1
point
1
point
Inheritance is counter productive to a few forms of economic systems, but capitalism is not one of them. With inheritance, someone can buy means of production and contribute to the capitalistic hierarchy, or they can blow it all on consumer goods which is always a good thing for the person who is selling them. Side: No, because...
|