• bigschnitz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    What’s wrong with that?

    Doesn’t it seem a little unfair if ones ability to own land is dictated by the lottery of what their parents have achieved?

    This could be the beginning of a slow slide back towards feudalism and lords with no social mobility for the lower classes.

    • Badass_panda@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Is it unfair that having wealthy parents gives you an advantage in life?

      Yeah, it is… buy that doesn’t make it unethical for parents to help their kids, it means the society has to improve the safety net.

      • Croquette@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s the wrong message that you are getting out of that article. The problem is that more and more people need their parents help to get in the market.

        That trend means that at one point, help from parents will be obligatory to buy a first house, closing the market to anyone that doesn’t have rich parents.

        • PowerCrazy
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I got some bad news to you re: the market being closed to poor people.

          • bigschnitz@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yes, it’s bad news. That’s the point of the article, to draw attention to a bad societal trend, it’s social commentary. Identifying a problem is the first step to solving it.

      • bigschnitz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Sure, it’s not unethical for a kid to accept (necessary) help to survive, though it is to vote for or otherwise institute a society where that is necessary. The point the article is attempting to make is social commentary to draw attention to the fact that increasingly the lottery of inheritance is the only means of owning a home.

        The first step to resolving the issue is identifying it. Nobody likes the implication that their success is not earned, by making that uncomfortable point the author is attempting to cause people to support change to correct this trend.