You assume that there is wealth and that it should be regulated
It’s more of a cultural thing, where people actually use their wealth while they can and when they can’t, they pass it over to a charity of their choosing.
If there’s no wealth then there’s no “housing market”, going full classless-stateless-moneyless socialism is such a huge departure from the current state of things it doesn’t make sense to even have this conversation about it. (And giving to charity is all well and good but I generally consider charity to be addressing a failure of society and as long as we’re in fantasy land there should be no need for charitable giving)
Also: weaseling out of addressing any of the holes in your position by changing the subject instead of explaining any detail about your stance is weak.
Not necessarily
You assume that there is wealth and that it should be regulated
It’s more of a cultural thing, where people actually use their wealth while they can and when they can’t, they pass it over to a charity of their choosing.
This at least is very common here
https://www.dyrenesbeskyttelse.dk/testamente
If there’s no wealth then there’s no “housing market”, going full classless-stateless-moneyless socialism is such a huge departure from the current state of things it doesn’t make sense to even have this conversation about it. (And giving to charity is all well and good but I generally consider charity to be addressing a failure of society and as long as we’re in fantasy land there should be no need for charitable giving)
Also: weaseling out of addressing any of the holes in your position by changing the subject instead of explaining any detail about your stance is weak.
Sorry. I meant accumulated wealth. English is my second language
My point is not political. It’s more social. Spend your money while you’re living instead of hoarding it
Politics and society are not and cannot be separated.