• gusgalarnyk@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    23 hours ago

    They have to have more than one heir at any time though right? So like that can’t be true unless they own enough wealth that even when split and taxed their primary heir’s still have too much.

    In that case I agree, rinse and repeat. No one should own more than something like 20 million in wealth.

    • finitebanjo@piefed.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      15 hours ago

      Theres this thing called estate planning where you decide how and when your wealth gets used after you die.

      It doesn’t automagically get dispersed, it’s given to a chosen heir or select few at most.

      • gusgalarnyk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        14 hours ago

        I’m familiar with estates. I’d love to see or read any data you have on “a chosen heir or select few at most” being the only possible (or even overwhelming majority) outcome. That doesn’t make any logical sense and isn’t how it’s historically worked in the past from my knowledge.

        I have no doubt the majority of cases show wealth being paid out to more than one heir on average and that the dilution, although obviously not enough to combat wealth inequality, is still some amount of dilution.