socialism in America.

[Martinghoul]

A very good way to win an argument as to what people should do would be to set a good example and show them the benefits.

Have you really disinherited your children or are you a liar?

I happen to be in a position to answer this. I have also stated that much before in another thread.

My kids are getting nothing, as I believe in a fair playing field for all the reasons mentioned by @Sig (in fact, the field isn’t particularly fair even then, as wealthy people can afford a better educational and professional outcomes for their children, all else being equal).

Fundamentally, for me, it’s reasonably simple. Would it be fair for a kid to inherit their parent’s debt? I am reasonably sure that most people in this day and age would consider such a practice barbaric and outdated. Why then should it be any different with respect to assets?

 

[digitalnomad]

You and Sig are completely off your rockers on this issue. Furthermore, with this mentality of “giving your money away” neither of you have any business in the cut-throat game of speculation. People who donate in this business do it on a voluntary basis. It’s my opinion, but I respect your views as well. I’ll end it there.

 

[Martinghoul]

You and Sig are completely off your rockers on this issue. Furthermore, with this mentality of “giving your money away” neither of you have any business in the cut-throat game of speculation. People who donate in this business do it on a voluntary basis. It’s my opinion, but I respect your views as well. I’ll end it there.

I see my views on this as simple common sense. I have thought long and hard about the various angles. I just cannot see any good reason to leave my kids a bunch of money, especially given it’s reasonably clear that it can cause various unpleasant effects.

 

[Sig]

You and Sig are completely off your rockers on this issue. Furthermore, with this mentality of “giving your money away” neither of you have any business in the cut-throat game of speculation. It’s my opinion, but I respect your views as well. I’ll end it there.

Those feelings make me feel nothing but sadness for you. You may find the thread "Millions made, much of the world seen, what now?" to be illuminating. https://www.elitetrader.com/et/thre...orld-seen-what-now.319486/page-8#post-4629839 As it turns out, there is far far more to life than earning and holding on to as much money as you possibly can. In fact money generally only gets you to the second step on Maslow's Hierarchy, and if you're not careful you can waste a life away only to realize that the journey was the destination and be left with a profound "now what" moment. I can only hope for your sake that happens when you're still young enough to realize you were chasing an essentially meaningless goal, and even better that it happens before your kids leave home and you never end up trading off time with them for essentially meaningless wealth. Ironically, you may even find that wealth is much easier to create when you start caring less about it and put it in the right perspective, certainly the case for me.

 

[digitalnomad]

If that’s how you feel, give me all your money and keep everything else. Then you’ll see how the worlds heart bleeds for you.

 

[Sig]

If that’s how you feel, give me all your money and keep everything else. Then you’ll see how the worlds heart bleeds for you.

I find this anger and personal attack on those who advocate against selfishness to be fascinating. I spent 20 years in the military, started 2 successful companies, and certainly make money trading but do it mainly for the enjoyment of the challenge. All from a lower middle class background with no financial contribution from my folks, who did provide a lot of love and a great childhood. If that's some kind of "bleeding heart" type to you, then I do idley wonder how you measure up to your own criteria, for curiosity's sake alone? Because that is all entirely irrelevant. As I pointed out over and over but seem to have difficulty conveying, my personal actions have absolutely nothing to do with a logical argument about if a custom/practice/law is rational or morally defensible. Generally one only stoops to that level when they've run out of rational explanations for their point of view. And that's getting to be the really fascinating part of this discussion, observing the Confirmation Bias at work so transparently.

I had honestly never thought about inheritance much until the term "earned" was thrown out in this thread and I asked myself "do children really do anything to earn an inheritance"? I'm still genuinely curious as to if that question has a valid answer. If you have one, I'm all ears. Up to now I've heard nothing defensible, but that certainly doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Come on guys, focus on the question!

 

[Sig]

I've visited all 50 states, lived in 9 of them (military transfers). I have thousands of friends and acquaintances, most of them deeply conservative (20 years in the military). And neither I or a single person I know has ever claimed to witness first hand someone buying a lobster and then selling it to get cash. And I'm pretty confident in saying it hasn't happened to you either, you're incorporating a story you saw go around your bubble as if it's not only real but reflects the vast majority of SNAP payments. Either that or you're one exceptional person who lives in some crazy spot where this is rampant (if so, where did you witness this, just out of curiosity?) I'm sure this has happened at least once, among the hundreds of millions of SNAP payments that go out there will certainly be some fraud and fox and friends will be able to record an instance of it. And we should do our best to eliminate it and punish those responsible. That's a reasonable reaction. An unreasonable reaction is to advocate for elimination of the program, which best I can tell is what you're looking for? Not clear given your writing style. Or is it that you want limits on how long an "able bodied" person can get SNAP. Oh, we already have that, passed in the Clinton years of all things.

"SNAP rules require all recipients meet work requirements unless they are exempt because of age or disability or another specific reason. (Children, seniors, and those with disabilities comprise almost two-thirds of all SNAP participants.) Forty-three percent of SNAP participants live in a household with earnings." and "ABAWDs can only get SNAP for 3 months in 3 years if they do not meet certain special work requirements. This is called the time limit.
To be eligible beyond the time limit, an ABAWD must work at least 80 hours per month, participate in qualifying education and training activities at least 80 hours per month, or comply with a workfare program." https://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/able-bodied-adults-without-dependents-abawds

Here's what the right wing (and extreme left wing for that matter) do to mess with your thought process. They take something that's complex and nuanced. They oversimplify it to us vs them, us hard working families have our money stolen by the government and redistributed to lazy layabouts leeching off our hard earned money. Then they throw in a highly charged anecdotal story, generally told in a breathless manner.."They're buying porterhouse steaks with their SNAP card and selling them for drug money!!!!". And then they make the logical leap...this is a horrible awful evil communist (or fascist, or whatever other ist your group loves to hate) program, we should get rid of it immediately or cut it at least. Don't fall for this shit. Let's do some simple math. 43% of participants are working. So if you assume 44% are children and therefore aren't working, and 43% are working, you've got a grand total of 13% OF ALL SNAP PARTICIPANTS! who meet your preconceived lazy and worthless notion. Given that 2/3 of SNAP participants are either elderly, children, or disabled, then given the math above it's a miniscule number of able bodied adults lying about sucking up SNAP benefits. And given the 3 month time limit, doing so for 20 years as you assert just isn't happening.

Are there people abusing SNAP. Absolutely? Are there people abusing Social Security Disability Benefits? I'm sure there are. Is the answer to a papercut on your hand to cut it off? Most of us would say you fix the problem, not throw away the entire program because of the actions of a tiny percentage of the participants. You're a reasonable person right? Why aren't you advocating for identifying the extent and location of the problem and rooting it out rather than letting the propaganda types convince you that there's this vast problem that in reality simply doesn't exist?

Just as an addendum to this idea, if you want to stop abuse in a government disability program your first stop ought to be the military. The VA disability system is abused by almost 100% of retired military. They actually devote an entire half-day at the transition assistance (TAPS) class we all go through before we retire to how to game the VA disability system. I found myself in a room full of super conservative military folks, some of whom were friends I'd personally heard espousing views like yours, asking about if they could get a 50% disability from that shoulder injury they got 5 years ago playing basketball in the church league. I literally walked out in disgust and didn't attend the rest of the class! Sleep apnea, which could be solved by simply losing weight, is a 50% disability! Almost every retired military guy I know has at least some "disability" rating, and since you can retire after 20 years of service these are guys in their 30s and 40s working as freaking airline pilots and in one case a fire fighter, despite being supposedly 50% or in some cases up to 75% "disabled" according to the VA!
What's the impact of this? Well anyone with any "disability" gets a set-aside on government contracts, VA medical benefits, and access to a host of other programs. If you're over 50%, which again constitutes a vast majority of what you and I would all call completely able bodied adults, you get part of your retirement pay tax free. That's a direct wealth transfer from people like you and me who don't abuse that system. All the more shameful with all the men and women who came back from the sandbox literally missing limbs and with lifelong disabling injuries who have to compete with nearly every other able bodied retiree for access to the VA's limited budget. I know, it's a lot easier to love the military guy who "earned it" and hate the fat redneck in WV or black woman in the inner city, but abuse is abuse and in my experience my fellow military retirees are the worst at claiming a "disability" where there is none. So if you really want to reform a disability system, start with the gross abuses in the VA system!

 

[piezoe]

I happen to be in a position to answer this. I have also stated that much before in another thread.

My kids are getting nothing, as I believe in a fair playing field for all the reasons mentioned by @Sig (in fact, the field isn’t particularly fair even then, as wealthy people can afford a better educational and professional outcomes for their children, all else being equal).

Fundamentally, for me, it’s reasonably simple. Would it be fair for a kid to inherit their parent’s debt? I am reasonably sure that most people in this day and age would consider such a practice barbaric and outdated. Why then should it be any different with respect to assets?

There is something to be said for this. It is an equation with no emotional parameter. I can't say it is wrong. It may not be defective, but then again it may be in defiance of our humanity. I can not in good conscious be judgemental in this regard. It is either a strength or a weakness. I can not say which. I can not know.

 

[piezoe]

Just as an addendum to this idea, if you want to stop abuse in a government disability program your first stop ought to be the military. The VA disability system is abused by almost 100% of retired military. They actually devote an entire half-day at the transition assistance (TAPS) class we all go through before we retire to how to game the VA disability system. I found myself in a room full of super conservative military folks, some of whom were friends I'd personally heard espousing views like yours, asking about if they could get a 50% disability from that shoulder injury they got 5 years ago playing basketball in the church league. I literally walked out in disgust and didn't attend the rest of the class! Sleep apnea, which could be solved by simply losing weight, is a 50% disability! Almost every retired military guy I know has at least some "disability" rating, and since you can retire after 20 years of service these are guys in their 30s and 40s working as freaking airline pilots and in one case a fire fighter, despite being supposedly 50% or in some cases up to 75% "disabled" according to the VA!
What's the impact of this? Well anyone with any "disability" gets a set-aside on government contracts, VA medical benefits, and access to a host of other programs. If you're over 50%, which again constitutes a vast majority of what you and I would all call completely able bodied adults, you get part of your retirement pay tax free. That's a direct wealth transfer from people like you and me who don't abuse that system. All the more shameful with all the men and women who came back from the sandbox literally missing limbs and with lifelong disabling injuries who have to compete with nearly every other able bodied retiree for access to the VA's limited budget. I know, it's a lot easier to love the military guy who "earned it" and hate the fat redneck in WV or black woman in the inner city, but abuse is abuse and in my experience my fellow military retirees are the worst at claiming a "disability" where there is none. So if you really want to reform a disability system, start with the gross abuses in the VA system!

Thank you so much for this opinion. I wasn't in the military. For that reason I appreciate these frank expressions of opinion all the more.

 

[digitalnomad]

You guys are starting to scare me.

Do you seriously believe that honest hard working parents shouldn’t have a right to leave their assets to their spoiled lazy kids?

Because it appears to be the implication here. Anyone who answers yes to that question should be executed at the lowest cost (of time and money) possible.