• @cosmicrookie
    link
    1
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Oh - i know that it is a big thing. I am just arguing that it shouldn’t be. Why not let your family make a life for themselves or even better, help them learn how to make their own successes. From what I hear, generational wealth gets lost anyway, so teaching people to make money (and spend it right) is much better than giving it to them

    • @Serinus
      link
      18 months ago

      We should probably tear down all the infrastructure every 20 years and make each new generation build that too. Why should we get to benefit from railroads built in the 1920s? Why are we allowed to use planes that are 30 years old? Our generation didn’t make those.

      There was a time where a major goal was to make sure each younger generation had more opportunity than the previous. Personally I think that’s a more noble thing than “you can’t have my stuff, get your own.”

      • @cosmicrookie
        link
        1
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        I think you misunderstood the point. It’s not that I don’t want others to have my stuff. It’s the act of gathering that I am against. This was a reply to my post about why it was so important to own a house instead of renting, saying that its was to pass on to the family. To me, that does not seem like strong enough reason. People will find their own ways anyways, with or without a house passed on by their parents. At best they will spend the money from the sales of a house, on vacations, or maybe help them pay off some debt.

        • @TheControlled
          link
          18 months ago

          You’re arguing with him about what you think should be, but they’re talking about what is. Generational wealth is important and can set up future generations for health and happiness. That’s it. Nothing more to it. You don’t like it? Go get em, cowboy.