Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To disagree with inheritance as a concept

259 replies

HeadsDownThumbsUp · 03/06/2013 22:41

Just that. I think it's odd that the concept of inheritance is barely questioned in our society.

I don't think that anyone can really talk about social mobility in a meaningful way, or interrogate the class system, while wealth is still inherited.

Inheritance IS the class system.

In my opinion, inherited wealth is incompatible with a meritocratic society. It is also add odds with entrepreneurialism, and more generally the notion that wealth is earned through hard work, and thus deserved.

Thoughts?

OP posts:
Crumbledwalnuts · 04/06/2013 00:28

Unconvinced or not - what do you think has motivated every living sentient being since the dawn of time ? Reproducing offspring and caring for it. You might well be unconvinced by it, or that the earth goes round the sun, but it's right there. It's why Communist states have all sought to turn family member against family member, because they understand the strength of family and its imperative to care for each member and survive. Even people like Arisbottle agree: they want a different kind of inheritance but still one which will help their offspring thrive.

claig · 04/06/2013 00:29

"here, claig, have my tinfoil hat."

Keep yours, I've already got one!

Monty27 · 04/06/2013 00:29

Head Meritocratic isn't a layperson's word. To use such language may be construed as arrogant. That's what I'm getting at. You know, people that may not be that well educated or in a profession where that term might be used? For whatever reason they have.

MorrisZapp · 04/06/2013 00:30

Most people's most valuable asset is the home they live in. I don't see how any but the most cash rich could be expected to share their wealth before they die, especially as they don't know how long they need to plan on being alive for.

Any thoughts re where people's money should go to, if not to the state?

WafflyVersatile · 04/06/2013 00:30

The issue with any system is trusting those in control. They never seem to be very trustworthy, not for long....

or there is anarchy......

I can't see that working either. All you can do is try to control for the less noble human urges, like stockpiling money and power.

PlentyOfFreeTime · 04/06/2013 00:31

Don't see why banning inheritance would naturally lead to a more meritocratic society.

You could have used your dosh within your life-time to 'buy' your children privilege and 'contacts' e.g. via purchasing them a good education by sending them to top notch public schools.

The eventual inheritance is just the icing on the cake as their education / contacts will have secured them the best jobs anyway.

Crumbledwalnuts · 04/06/2013 00:32

Oh Claig you are so ahead of me

WafflyVersatile · 04/06/2013 00:33

With his tinfoil hats?

LessMissAbs · 04/06/2013 00:33

YANBU. I know my view is controversial, but I would rather see inheritance taxed very harshly (far more harshly than at present), and personal taxation on earnings, which people actually work for, reduced accordingly.

I find it bizarre and dishonest that people, on the one hand, will support high taxation of hard workers and criticise the highly paid, yet on the other, say nothing about unearned wealth.

I'm not particularly socialist, as I believe success and wealth in life should be given through effort and hard work, but I feel sorry for the people who don't get help. Its actually bloody ridiculous that you could be a hard working, highly qualified person in a reasonable job, and have little to look forward to in life than maybe buying a one bedroom flat and scrimping and saving, and be taxed through the nose for your efforts, while someone else could achieve little, do hardly any work ,yet have a far higher standard of living.

Inheritance is insidious, creates family divisions and can make family members behave horribly, and is a de-motivator.

Original poster
HeadsDownThumbsUp · 04/06/2013 00:34

Morloth - you could approach this as an inheritance tax issue, or as a question of people spending/gifting/redistributing wealth at an early stage instead of keeping it tied up unproductively. Both have different merits, imo. And I don't have a plan...

Crumbled - that all sounds very grand, but when it comes down to the nitty gritty, out ideas about how biological imperatives effect our social behaviour and legal systems are all very speculative, and nothing to ground an argument of. It's often just a case of observing the status quo, and presuming that the status quo must be beneficial.

If people want to 'help their offspring thrive' then - excellent. I just think that putting that capital to use, to help them thrive, is more socially advantageous in general than locking it away for generation upon generation.

OP posts:
claig · 04/06/2013 00:35

"Oh Claig you are so ahead of me"

No, Crumbled, we are all on the same path, "all in it together", against the communists who wish to destroy society

Crumbledwalnuts · 04/06/2013 00:36

With his rounded understanding of communism and the family. He (he?) is well informed and bright.

PlentyOfFreeTime · 04/06/2013 00:37

So Cameron (whose parents are obviously not skint and will no doubt leave him a nice fat inheritance) was demotivated?

I don't think so.

It's the privilege that your parents money can buy you that actually makes life 'unfair'.

Again, using Cameron as an example, he wouldn't now be PM if his parents had not sent him to Eton.

NeoMaxiZoomDweebie · 04/06/2013 00:37

I have no desire to benefit from my parent's money. My Dad isn't here anymore...and I have encouraged my Mum to spend all her money on a good time!

We aren't rich DH and I...but I'm happier knowing my Mum can live comfortably and spend as she chooses. What I need, I work for.

Crumbledwalnuts · 04/06/2013 00:38

In what way is it speculative? I love your children more than anything in the world. I would die for them. I don't, of course, think I'm alone in this. It only becomes speculative when it doesn't suit someone's desire for someone else's money.

donttrythisathome · 04/06/2013 00:38

Thanks OP for the interesting thread.

I don't think getting rid of inheritance alone would work that well.

Get rid of money instead. Seriously, it is a strange concept, is money, though totally normalised.

Crumbledwalnuts · 04/06/2013 00:39

Ha ha snort. I love MY children more than anything else in the world, though I'm sure yours are awfully nice. Ha way to go crumbled.

Crumbledwalnuts · 04/06/2013 00:39

Ps I'm so sorry but your children can't have my house either Sad

claig · 04/06/2013 00:40

Crumbled I am not a "he" so that communist style of argument won't wash.

I don't know what you are, but am beginning to think you might be an "it" or even a "twit"

RichManPoorManBeggarmanThief · 04/06/2013 00:41

Cultural inheritance doesn't impact everyone equally though. It mainly benefits the offspring of the educated, motivated, aspirational parents who read to their children, work at getting their kids into a great state school and can compensate for the shortfalls if they don't, who provide a role model of at least one parent in continuous employment. Now obviously those parents are also members of society and benefit everyone indirectly, but realistically they do very little to impact the life chances of children whose parents don't or cant do the same for their own children. What you grow up with as your "normal" will have massive impact on your adult life, far more than getting thrown a chunk of cash at some stage. Why do you think the government is so keen to invest in pre-school education? Because you have to intervene early if you want to try to even out life chances.

Arisbottle · 04/06/2013 00:43

I think being skint is for many people a great motivator. I am fiercely ambitious, as is my DH. We have had to be the way because we knew that nobody else would give a fuck and certainly would not pay for anything . I also know that because of my background I have to be twice as good as the next person, if they have a more " middle class" background in order to reach the same height. I have not family contacts, inherited wealth or insider knowledge .

Clearly I do not want my children to grow up in such a harsh environment but I do know that because they benefit from living in a nice area ( only possible because of our income) go to nice schools ( because of where we pay to live) mix with other affluent children, they lack the grit that DH and I have.

Maybe lacking that grit is not altogether a bad thing but I know it has gote far.

Crumbledwalnuts · 04/06/2013 00:43

Life is ridiculous, life's not fair. We do a pretty good job of redistribution, and a balance has to be drawn between that and respect for the individual and the family. There's no way I would work as hard as I do, taking my time away from my children, if I wasn't doing it for them, for their education and security.

claig · 04/06/2013 00:43

"and I have encouraged my Mum to spend all her money on a good time!"

But she won't do it because that is not natural. My grandmother had very little, but she would save to give me presents. She cared more about me and her other children and grandchildren than she did for herself.

That is what the human spirit and family are all about, it is a continuation of self through genes and that is what some forces wish to destroy and break down.

Arisbottle · 04/06/2013 00:44

I agree Richman which is why I would like to leave money to culturally enrich the lives of those children who wouldn't get it otherwise.

Crumbledwalnuts · 04/06/2013 00:45

Claig, someone said you were a "he" - I do apologise. I'm not a twit, I'm just not concentrating and am being a bit silly. And I do agree with you on this, and I like the way you put your argument.