Inheritance

There are reasons for keeping inheritance around such as enlightened self-interest and a right to one’s possessions whereabouts after death. I will argue that Inheritance is not always justified given Haslett’s equal opportunity within capitalism reasoning behind abolishing inheritance. Giving everyone equal footing to start from not only promotes higher levels of competition but also levels the playing field. There is less importance on wealth and a chance to focus more on natural ability and productivity. This allows for greater potential for change or economic standing.
As inheritance itself shows how those who are already wealthy lessen the chance of others having the same opportunities to rise up. Haslett states, “...for people to be productive it is necessary not just that they be motivated to be productive, but that they have the opportunity to be productive”(Haslett 128). Giving everyone an equal footing and shared starting points brings about not only a larger group of minds, but a set of people that now also have a higher motivation to strive. With an equal opportunity stance there is the removal of the possible potential of great minds being set back due to a lack of personal resources.
“...the more people there are who come to realize their productive potential, the greater overall productivity will be. Second, the closer we come to equal opportunity for all, the more people there will be with an excellent opportunity to become something other than an ordinary worker, to become a professional or an entrepreneur of sorts.” (Haslett 129)
So having a concept that, by birth right, gives individuals an advantage ruins this potential state of mind. Now it does pose the potential to have more overqualified people then we can handle within our economy but there is an evening factor when all have equal footing to start off. This can lead to more equal potential people expanding beyond our own economy, also once predisposed to be out of reach except for those