Why is it that people are so desperate to own houses?

birkee

B Blank

I am due to inherit maybe £600k and will leave it all to charity.

Your children will benefit by having lower income tax rates. You and your children are different people. Anyone with an ounce of descency wont expect to get unearned wealth off the back of a parents life. They dont deserve a single penny from you, and once you die then your money and assets cease to be yours and should be taken by the state who can use to money to lower income tax on people who work.

Everybody wins. Its fairer because people get what they deserve (i.e. their income) and not what they are lucky enough to inherit.

Wow!
Leaving it to charity will do NOTHING for taxes. Logic fail again.
The government won't even notice it. Logic fail again.

I hope you HAVE told your children "up yours". Love fail.
The hugs and kisses must really fly in your family.

B_Blank

birkee wrote: »

B_Blank wrote: »

Wow!
Leaving it to charity will do NOTHING for taxes. Logic fail again.
The government won't even notice it. Logic fail again.

I hope you HAVE told your children "up yours". Love fail.
The hugs and kisses must really fly in your family.

Not every families happiness is based on money. And not everyone shows their love in monetary terms. I pity your attitude tbh.

Mrs_Arcanum

B_Blank wrote: »

Not really. Inheritance tax is the ONLY form of tax which is completely fair because it has NO EFFECT on the person. They are dead, so they dont need the money anymore. Their children have no right to the money. They didnt earn it so why should they have it?

The fact that the person who has died has already paid tax on the money doesn't come into it I suppose

Without my inheritance I would be renting and resenting every penny paid out, along with having no security.

birkee

[QUOTE B Blank]

Not every families happiness is based on money. And not everyone shows their love in monetary terms. I pity your attitude tbh.[/QUOTE]

You don't get it do you?
You pity my attitude? Don't be so damned condescending!
It's not the giving of money, it's the giving of your ALL to demonstrate your love. Even your life if need be.
But then they didn't earn it, and are not entitled to it. Stuff em!
And you pity MY attitude!

Mrs_Arcanum

Just glad my Father was smart enough to leave his estate in trust so inheritance tax was paid when he died in 73 rather than when the house was sold in 2004. Pity he made a bank a trustee. They actually took more money than the government.

B_Blank

birkee wrote: »

B_Blank wrote: »

You don't get it do you?
You pity my attitude? Don't be so damned condescending!
It's not the giving of money, it's the giving of your ALL to demonstrate your love. Even your life if need be.
But then they didn't earn it, and are not entitled to it. Stuff em!
And you pity MY attitude!

They dont deserve the money. They didnt earn it. I believe people should get out of life what they put into it. NOT happen to get out of it what they get via luck of birth.

How you can not agree with the principle of people getting out of life what they put into it is beyond me. And its against all your other views on care home payments etc.

thistledome

B Blank, what makes you think that children don't deserve an inheritance?

Some of them won't deserve it and some will. What about an adult who has spent 20 years caring for their aged parent and paying most of the bills? Don't they deserve anything when aged parent passes away?

Why would the state be more deserving of aged parent's house than their child?

aliasojo

Everybody wins. Its fairer because people get what they deserve (i.e. their income) and not what they are lucky enough to inherit.


B Blank, my eldest is disabled and unable to completely look after himself. He lives at home with us.

Should the state get our assets and not him? Should he be turfed out to a care home to take his chances rather than inherit our house/his existing home where he could live with help? He will have done nothing to earn it after all.

I suspect he will cost the state a pretty penny in the long term if he doesn't inherit from us.

FATBALLZ

Mrs_Arcanum wrote: »

The fact that the person who has died has already paid tax on the money doesn't come into it I suppose

Yes exactly, so the only person it could be considered unfair to is actually dead, so it's hard to argue a case for doing away with IHT. It certainly isn't unfair to somebody getting a massive unearned windfall that they aren't getting a slightly bigger massive unearned windfall.

FATBALLZ

thistledome wrote: »

Why would the state be more deserving of aged parent's house than their child?

Talking in a generalised sense, it is morally better for the money to go to the state so that the money could be used to give a better start, and more level playing field, for all the young people of society. I don't think, unless you pick out specific exceptional cases, you can say some particular children deserve massive windfalls, bearing in mind it is at the expense of some children who will inherit nothing.