Quote Originally Posted by Nessus View Post
Hang on, I think I'm missing something. Hazir's post reads, to me, that the state just gets the entire inheritance (I'm not saying anything about the merits of the idea here). Okay, fine. So your kid with two decently earning parents who own a home get killed, the kid goes into the system and is fed and housed by the state (or foster parents in practice, but anyhows). Kid turns 18, he has the clothes on his back and whatever she's earned working at Mickey Dee's after class. How is that kid any more shafted than the kid with parents who have virtually nothing to contribute to the kid's own new household?
The difference is that under the current system, the kid has indirect access to whatever money his parents had as he grows up, and then gets all the money once he turns 18. He faces no disadvantage relative to children who didn't lose their parents (in terms of money anyway). The Hazir alternative is being forced into whatever standard of living the state can guarantee you (which let's be honest is never particularly high) and then start life at 18 with absolutely nothing.