That question has a lot of variables that need to be properly defined.
How many are in the next generation to inherit? Passing the money/property to the next generation doesn’t actually fix anything, after all.
If they are already counted as 1% on their own, they must be excluded from the inheritors, even if it puts them in the .01%.
If not already in the 1%, how many would have their share of inheritance bump them into 1% territory?
If it would not bump them to 1%, how many inherit full or partial control of anything particularly impactful, like a business, commercial buildings, or huge tract of valuable land? Because that’s likely to put them squarely into the 1% in short order, as well.
Given the above variables, how much will the 1% figure shift? For example, you have 5 1% people, and each of them has 3 kids, who in turn each have 3 kids. So you off the 5, and now the 1% has fundamentally changed because where -all 5- qualified, now -only 5- will qualify due to the sheer mass of overall population, but you now have 15 people who would have otherwise qualified as 1%. Take those out and you now spread that among 45… and eventually they aren’t rich anymore sure (or more likely the inheritance line dies out), but that’s really complicated math.
At what dilution point should this stop? There will always be a top 1%, and they will always own disproportionately more than others, so what should we deem a fair stopping point?
My math skills are nowhere near good enough to solve that complex of an equation.
Unless we are talking about outright sizing their ill-gotten gains along with their head… I’m down for that option, as it simplifies the math substantially.
That question has a lot of variables that need to be properly defined.
My math skills are nowhere near good enough to solve that complex of an equation.
Unless we are talking about outright sizing their ill-gotten gains along with their head… I’m down for that option, as it simplifies the math substantially.