• CannonFodder@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      1 day ago

      Not to mention access to opportunity. Yes it’s more complicated. But shouldn’t people be allowed to support their children?

          • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            18 hours ago

            No one can hoard the ability to raise one’s children to the point that people don’t have children. People and corps have hoarded housing to the point that empty homes out number the homeless at a rate of 35:1

            • CannonFodder@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              18 hours ago

              The reference to providing for one’s children was in relation to to comment about inheritance. Bitching that someone has it easy because they inherited wealth is saying you don’t think people should be able to inherit wealth which is saying parents shouldn’t be able to leave money and look after their own children.
              And I don’t disagree that empty houses are a problem - they should be taxed to the moon. And a lot of cities have started doin that now. Maybe that will relieve some pressure on the housing / renting market, which is good.

              • pipi1234@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                17 hours ago

                Fair enough. Then put a cap on the amount of properties that can be inherited by a single individual. Anything in excess of 1 should go to a public pool of properties for renters to buy.