- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The Law by Frédéric Bastiat
Posted on 6/24/26 at 1:01 pm to SuperSaint
Posted on 6/24/26 at 1:01 pm to SuperSaint
quote:
I may have met both of you
Nope. I ran into the poster I'm thinking of when he was in New Orleans for work last year.
0
Posted on 6/24/26 at 1:05 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
A. Then there would be conflict with people trying to dig it up
Because it only has value to the living.
Maybe just destroying the property is the best way to avoid/alleviate societal conflict?
quote:I suspect most property in wills/successions is tactile.
B. Most property isn't tactile these days
Posted on 6/24/26 at 1:07 pm to 4cubbies
quote:Why would the destruction of wealth be the best way forward? We have a path of disposition that preserves the value of the property while also being relatively low cost to implement (wills and intestacy laws)
Maybe just destroying the property is the best way to avoid/alleviate societal conflict?
Posted on 6/24/26 at 1:16 pm to SquatchDawg
quote:
In the past it was more of leaving a means of survival - housing, farm, livestock, etc. rather than accumulated wealth.
Thank you. This makes sense a legitimate reason for succession, as it's really in the interest of continuing the human race. Someone leaves tools for survival to their descendants to help ensure they will reproduce and help our species continue.
ETA: please provide a short bio at your leisure
This post was edited on 6/24/26 at 1:39 pm
Posted on 6/24/26 at 1:16 pm to AllbyMyRelf
quote:
Why would the destruction of wealth be the best way forward?
If the stated goal is conflict avoidance, destruction of property seems to be the best way forward.
Posted on 6/24/26 at 1:17 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
Maybe just destroying the property is the best way to avoid/alleviate societal conflict?
Do you conceptualize the world as a Paleolithic thinker in other areas of your life?
quote:
I suspect most property in wills/successions is tactile.
The rich people you are imagining don't have vault swimming pools like Scrooge McDuck.
Posted on 6/24/26 at 1:20 pm to 4cubbies
quote:I can’t agree with that. Inheritance rules are a solution to conflict by clearly outlining who gets what, thus reducing extraneous claims to the property, all while preserving the property.
If the stated goal is conflict avoidance, destruction of property seems to be the best way forward.
Your destruction rule makes everyone poorer while solving no obvious problem.
Posted on 6/24/26 at 1:22 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
If the stated goal is conflict avoidance, destruction of property seems to be the best way forward.
Why do you hate your family?
Posted on 6/24/26 at 1:27 pm to 4cubbies
quote:But not to your kids?
Because it only has value to the living.
Posted on 6/24/26 at 1:27 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Like our founding documents for example? 250 years ago a drafting committee had been working 2weeks on just that sort of thing.
Idk if that makes sense either. 
Posted on 6/24/26 at 1:29 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
I’m looking for a compelling argument that justifies their origination beyond ego and “why shouldn’t I get to determine who gets or what happens to my stuff when I die?” which is ultimately just ego anyway
You want an argument that explains human nature? It's the exact reason communism always fails. The human element gets in the way. When people exchange their work and effort for monetary compensation, that they, in turn, use to purchase things, and then some a-hole who is perpetually poor demands they take it or that they shouldn't get to own anything, then human nature steps in and enrages all humans. Every human is angered by the injustice of theft, whether it be by individuals or government.
Posted on 6/24/26 at 1:30 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
Idk if that makes sense either.
quote:Are the DOI and Constitution not examples of such "lists"?
wouldn't we all leave elaborate lists of how we want the world to look after we're gone that would be binding?
Posted on 6/24/26 at 1:31 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Why do you hate your family?
You're back on my good side.
Posted on 6/24/26 at 1:32 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
If the stated goal is conflict avoidance, destruction of property seems to be the best way forward.
What?
You are that woman in the Bible that agreed to split the living baby boy.
Don't be that woman.
Posted on 6/24/26 at 1:35 pm to 4cubbies
The concept of inheritance is based in our biological and evolutionary connection to our family.
Posted on 6/24/26 at 1:39 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Are the DOI and Constitution not examples of such "lists"?
They are. But you're implying that we owe it to the Founders to adhere to their wishes for no other reason than because that's what they wanted.
If I die and leave a list of a new form of government, why shouldn't that list be honored?
This post was edited on 6/24/26 at 1:46 pm
Posted on 6/24/26 at 1:46 pm to AllbyMyRelf
quote:
I can’t agree with that. Inheritance rules are a solution to conflict by clearly outlining who gets what, thus reducing extraneous claims to the property, all while preserving the property.
Humans are selfish, irrational and vindictive. Potential logical heirs are often intentionally omitted from wills, resulting in intense conflict and litigation.
This post was edited on 6/24/26 at 1:47 pm
Posted on 6/24/26 at 1:47 pm to 4cubbies
quote:Let’s say someone is cut out of the will. We can still dispose of the property as set forth in the will. The person cut out is no worse off than they would be if the property was destroyed.
Humans are selfish, irrational and vindictive. Potential logical heirs are often intentionally immitted from wills, resulting in intense conflict and litigation.
Posted on 6/24/26 at 1:52 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
If I die and leave a list of a new form of government, why shouldn't that list be honored?
Posted on 6/24/26 at 1:52 pm to 4cubbies
quote:That was not the stated intent in those lists. They laid out a vision, and an amendable path to attain it, or not. But their wishes were clear.
But you're implying that we owe it to the Founders to adhere to their wishes for not other reason than because that's what they wanted.
quote:For the same reason your singular vote does not carry similarly disproportionate weight. However, w/ regard to the future 4cubbies Prison Condition Improvement Foundation (4PCIF), you absolutely can exercise that sort of posthumous control.
If I die and leave a list of a new form of government, why shouldn't that list be honored?
Page 23 of 26
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News