Seing one teanny take on half the fediverse is an interesting look. It reminds you exactly why the alt-right is on the rise again...
I like the idea of eliminating the inheritance. But this only in combination with eliminating all other forms of taxation.
@nerdman
That sounds like a horrible idea.
So, I would have to spend all of my money on extremely short term pleasures, and no matter what, I couldn't ensure a good life to my son?
And everything I didn't spend on cakes and single use computers would go to the state?
Don't get me wrong... It's an original idea, but I still think it's laughably bad.
Your son gets:
1) your genes
2) your education
3) your expenditure on him
He'll do way better than most other people. And no one will take from him what he makes.
Sounds like a more fair system, is all.
Oh and whilte it came with the idea all on my own, it's actually one of the 10 points of marxism.
@nerdman
I still have to hold my point:
It would lead to lazyness and wastefulness on levels we can barely imagine.
I doubt it. You'd still have a rich-ass motherfucker to live on a penthouse in like central park new york. People are plenty hedonistic.
I mean... This is all hypothetical. It's one of those things that look genuinely good on paper but that could turn out to be disastrous.
I mean. My idea is that government is forced to sell what it gets to operate. But what if they change the law to rent and not sell? Not letting them do that would be the biggest hurdle.
@nerdman
Wait a minute...
Forcing government to sell everything... You didn't mention that part. 
Fuck you, you're starting to make sense. I'll need to study the hell out of this before I say something that might sound like an agreement.
Oh! I forget to mention that, yes.
Another objection I've heard is, "but what if my kids want to keep home or xxx for sentimental value?" Well they can buy the thing back at auction. With the money they made and were not taxed for even one bit.
Still. How do we keep the government from not wanting to turn renter without watering the tree of freedom? This is the achilles heel of this idea I think.
@nerdman
Yes, the rent part is horrible, because it would give the government 1 generation, before they would own EVERY HOUSE and could return to standart tax/rent model.
That is also why I liked the HAS TO SELL part, since you're returning there to market-price ekonomy. If gov could set price/keep stuff, tbey can gain additional monopoly and power on anything realy fast.
My idea is that
government has to sell everything at auction. I think there's some provision for this if someone dies and there's no inheritors, or with stuff that are proceeds from crimes, so it's not like there isn't a mechanism for it already.
If a family works hard and saves wealth for multiple generations (instead of wasting it on ephemeral stuff), their future descendants will obviously have a better life. Taking that away from them isn't fairness, it's punishment of the successful.
The only argument I can see coming from this is that the accumulated wealth can eventually lead to excessive power disparity and lead to oppression. Well, since that will happen anyway no matter what, the answer to this is the same as every other time this happens: guns.
@nerdman @LukeAlmighty Some pretty obvious flaws here You mention expenditure on children is permitted, so why would I die with money instead of gifting it to my children? Either directly or as assets You can’t tax the gift as would happen in today’s society The government’s one remaining source of income in your scenario is pretty easily loopholed out of existence, and soon after that there is no more government
More like "I take all the good ideas from left and right and fuck people calling me fence sitter because I put a comfy couch and blanket on this fence."