Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (248281)	8/31/2005 10:49:31 AM
From: Elroy	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1581045

Her family have the legal right to do with their money whatever they want as long as it isn't against the law. They have the natural right to do whatever they want with the money as long as it doesn't violate anyone else's rights. Giving your money to your children or grandchildren doesn't violate anyone's rights. This whole discussion started from my idea that it may make sense to limit the amount of inherited wealth that can be passed on the inheritors children. The idea is that a grandchild of a hard working entrepreneur doesn't deserve to inherit $1 billion (or whatever) just for being born a child of the entrepreneur's child. If the concept were implemented, of course the law would have to be changed such that an inheritor of great wealth would somehow be limited in his ability to pass that wealth on to his own children, so after the law was changed the grandchild would not have the right of inheritance (the law was changed!). And it was just a free form running idea, with the goal being to reduce the existence of the idle rich. The idea was sort of that the inheritor of immense wealth can only pass on to his kids a good amount (say $10 million) plus whatever he had declared on his income tax forms throughout his life (he should still be able to pass on whatever he himself earns, naturally). So if you inherit $1 billion and spend your life cruising on a yacht carousing young impressionable Ukranian girls and don't earn a dime (you lucky bastard!), your kids get $10 million each and whatever is left of your inheritance goes toward rebuilding New Orleans. On the other hand, if you inherit $1 billion and use it to generate $5 billion in income during your life (you hard working sap), you get to pass on the full $5 billion to whomever you want.

To: TimF who wrote (248281)	8/31/2005 2:58:58 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1581045

Yes, and too many of those resources are getting into the hands of the rich at the expense of the poor. Why I can't say that never happens, for the most part that isn't true. Her ancestors created that wealth. They didn't steal it from the poor. How can you know that? Have you done a search on the Hiltons? Most of the current wealthy had their wealth made on the backs of the poor. You do understand that they were called robber barons not because they were good and honest. Paris Hilton is not entitled to be a millionaire many times over just because she was born into the right family. Her family have the legal right to do with their money whatever they want as long as it isn't against the law. They have the natural right to do whatever they want with the money as long as it doesn't violate anyone else's rights. Giving your money to your children or grandchildren doesn't violate anyone's rights. Yes, and I want the playing field leveled more in that area. There is no reason Paris Hilton should be able to flaunt her enormous wealth because her great grand pappy was industrious.