Well, as I mentioned above it's not simple. I believe in fairly weak rights to inheritance. Fair enough that parents would seek a modest degree of security and opportunity for their children. However, the current system where some people are born with more wealth than the general population can ever hope to attain, is plainly unjust. I don't believe your parents can 'earn' your money for you - ideally the children of the rich should have to prove their worth like everyone else, and be given the opportunity to fail. Of course the game will never be fair - but I'd prefer to push it in that direction.
Being given large amounts of money is no garuantee of success. How can the parents giving the money that they own to their children be unjust? Unequal, sure, but no ones rights were violated in the transfer. Every suggestion for 'pushing the game in a fair direction' I've ever heard involved a violation of a person's rights.
Who are you, or who is the state for that matter, to dictate what gifts may be given? Very totalitarian of you.
Being given large amounts of money is no garuantee of success.
It kind of is - especially as most peoples definition of success is to get a large amount of money. Granted there will always be exceptional fools who manage to wrestle defeat from the jaws of victory, but even the laziest braindead moron can have someone conservatively manage their estate while they live out their life in comfort. This is a post about homelessness, hence that's a fairly natural definition of failure - doubt you'll find many children born into great wealth who have managed to become homeless?
How can the parents giving the money that they own to their children be unjust?
Firstly it is unjust because it's debatable whether the parents have really earned or deserve that money - if they have ridiculous amounts, I would argue they don't deserve it. Justice and ownership are quite separate concepts. Secondly, I'd love to see you try to argue that those children have earned the money, that they deserve it, and deserve to live charmed lives without ever having to work a single day while those around them struggle - they are the ultimate beneficiaries.
Who are you, or who is the state for that matter, to dictate what gifts may be given? Very totalitarian of you.
I am nobody expressing an opinion, I dictate nothing. Is it just for the rich and their undeserving children to perpetuate their own unfair advantage? If the state could ever purge itself of their influence, it might be something that could work for the betterment of society as a whole.
How do you define what is unearned? Do people have rights to inheritance?