I’ve long been convinced (ever since I came across an argument from Bertrand Russell about it) that democracies ought to have a near 100% inheritance tax rate. If we as a society have decided that inheriting political power is undesirable, and that a person ought to rise in the world of politics by their own merits, then there’s no reason the same shouldn’t be true for economic power and standing.
I believe there ought to be a small allowance, probably pegged to the cost of living (out of my rear end, something like the median cost of a home), but after that, tax it at something absurd like 80-90%.
I recognize that the wealthy will always have advantage in society, and this proposal does nothing to stop the wealthy from buying their children every advantage while alive–not to mention this being economically and politically unfeasible (I’ve had self-described commies tell me it was too far even for them) and rife with opportunity for abuse–but in all seriousness generational wealth is totally at odds with meritocracy and a liberal society.
Agent2255 on
There’s nothing wrong with it.
If a person’s parents have made all the smart choices and saved enough money, so that they can pass it over to their kids, how is it fair for the government to tax a portion of it?
It’s a fact that for many parents, climbing the financial ladder and leaving money for their kids is one of the most important aspirations. It makes no sense to implement an inheritance tax, that would take a portion of their hard-earned money, which is meant for their kids.
The author talked about the uber-rich and upper middle class, but there are lots of middle-class folks out there, who climbed the social mobility ladder from the most poorest economic backgrounds. To implement an inheritance tax on these people, is to spit on all the sacrifices they have made, so their children can lead better lives.
I agree with the solutions in the last paragraph, but absolutely disagree with an inheritance tax.
9 Comments
Lol if social mobility is dead and generational wealth is all that matters, then capitalism becomes a hard hard sell.
Just get wealthier parents
Inheritance taxes are a good thing
Mfw the Economist becomes Piketty-pilled
Steps to success:
– Be born rich.
– Become president.
– Shit on the poor.
– Build gold statues of yourself by the beach in a foreign country.
– Rinse and repeat.
See also, the longer companion piece:
[How to get rich in 2025](https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2025/02/27/how-to-get-rich-in-2025)
https://preview.redd.it/o6gr92ntvyle1.jpeg?width=1013&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=44e792199f68d1603f11d00494d11157489e9a2f
I’ve long been convinced (ever since I came across an argument from Bertrand Russell about it) that democracies ought to have a near 100% inheritance tax rate. If we as a society have decided that inheriting political power is undesirable, and that a person ought to rise in the world of politics by their own merits, then there’s no reason the same shouldn’t be true for economic power and standing.
I believe there ought to be a small allowance, probably pegged to the cost of living (out of my rear end, something like the median cost of a home), but after that, tax it at something absurd like 80-90%.
I recognize that the wealthy will always have advantage in society, and this proposal does nothing to stop the wealthy from buying their children every advantage while alive–not to mention this being economically and politically unfeasible (I’ve had self-described commies tell me it was too far even for them) and rife with opportunity for abuse–but in all seriousness generational wealth is totally at odds with meritocracy and a liberal society.
There’s nothing wrong with it.
If a person’s parents have made all the smart choices and saved enough money, so that they can pass it over to their kids, how is it fair for the government to tax a portion of it?
It’s a fact that for many parents, climbing the financial ladder and leaving money for their kids is one of the most important aspirations. It makes no sense to implement an inheritance tax, that would take a portion of their hard-earned money, which is meant for their kids.
The author talked about the uber-rich and upper middle class, but there are lots of middle-class folks out there, who climbed the social mobility ladder from the most poorest economic backgrounds. To implement an inheritance tax on these people, is to spit on all the sacrifices they have made, so their children can lead better lives.
I agree with the solutions in the last paragraph, but absolutely disagree with an inheritance tax.
Anybody got a non-paywalled link?