[extropy-chat] Inheritance

[Brent Neal]

 (7/31/05 5:05) The Avantguardian <avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com> wrote:

>      Although life is a mixed game, the chance
>component to it gives people who start out life with a
>huge amount of wealth an unfair advantage, no matter
>how poor or wise their moves. The advantage of wealth
>belongs to whoever is good at the strategy and has a
>few lucky breaks. Ergo earning a million dollars means
>that a person deserves that advantage because she has
>earned it. Inheriting a million dollars means that
>person has an unearned advantage that will contribute
>to preventing people who are better at the game from
>actually winning it. 


Without trying to nitpick too much, let me point out here that your unsupported assertion of an "unfair advantage" doesn't seem to bear out. First, it seems like your use of the term 'unfair' is the result of a value judgement, not an unbiased, rational criterion.  The statistics we've already seen about the longevity of family wealth is a powerful data point arguing against their being some 'unfair' advantage.

Further, even though there seems to be some disagreement as to how many wealthy people in this country are self-made, the fact that the low-end number I saw was 40% indicates that whatever advantage the born-wealthy have is, it is certainly not insurmountable.  And it most certainly does not "prevent people who are better at the game from winning it."  The fact that person A inherited a large sum of money does not prevent person B from starting a business from scratch and prospering.

In fact, as an anecdotal aside, it was noted that businesses that were strapped on start-up cash had a better success rate than businesses that were flush with venture capital.  "Lean and hungry" and all that jazz. The statistics were published in Forbes, back in 2001 or so. 

B
-- 
Brent Neal
Geek of all Trades
http://brentn.freeshell.org

"Specialization is for insects" -- Robert A. Heinlein