@Cesare Anasazi
at the same time, things like where they live and their born-into wealth isn't random, but inherited from their ancestors. so wouldn't the question then be: "how much of the blood tied to this wealth, this land, this knowledge is inherited?"
saying it is random would de-value the achievements of their ancestors. AND it is used to justify the horrendous immigration policy.

You would need to elaborate or rephrase question, I dont get what you are asking.

Please dont write a whole novella here

I mean: it is quite clear, that it is NOT luck, that you were born where you were born and into the living standards into which you are born, as that is the direct consequence of the actions of your direct ancestors...
so, they reap the rewards for what their ancestors did, inheriting the consequences of their positive actions.
I know it sounds stupid, but shouldn't they then also inherit the consequences of their ancestors' negative actions?
that is the question that is being asked in a lot of cases in Germany... most of the time indirectly.
I personally have to disagree with the notion, but if you want to stay completely consistent, it is a viable question to ask.

there's one other statement made in this specific context, actually even more frequently but the entire premise is incorrect:
1." it is luck to be born into Germany, others couldn't choose to be born into other circumstances, so it's not actually our wealth, it is randomly inherited" (completely disregarding the contributions of ancestry to wealth or poverty, usually while giving responsibility for negative actions)

nah I was just thinking of how to phrase it and if there's another statement on the topic which is frequently being made.

No one owes anyone anything just cause they were born in different places

agreed.

If my parents worked a lot and gave me their wealth as inheritance that's between me and them

period

like I said: I do believe, that you rightfully inherit the works of your ancestors.

If my father worked so hard he lost a thumb I dont need to lose one to inherit his wealth

What if your parents stole the wealth you inherited from them, from Jimmy's parents?

but with the good, shouldn't you also inherit the bad?
I do not think that you should, but it would be more consistent.

If they stole it, they should be punished. If it's proven they stole it and I was unaware I need to get back what's left but not penalized

If I stole something then gave it as a gift, person who has the gift doesnt deserve any punishment

You know that this is the argument for slavery reparations and the like, right?

No idea, I am russian, we're enslaved each other lol

@Tonight at 11 - DOOM honestly, all manners of aquiring wealth is viable in a historical context... we are kinda in a world where killing and stealing is quite natural...
in terms of societal norms, they should be punished, ofc. but the person doing the deed, not their children. problem is: you inevitably also punish the child, but I guess that is also then kinda their inheritance?

No one owes me shit except my boss

oh and Deezer

I pay them

xD

And when it comes to migration I am undecided yet

it is a tricky topic.

I think relaxed border is the best thing but only if country has no welfare period

and low regulations

how about only a social security net for citizens?

no clue, why countries give anything to non-citizens, honestly.

Under my preffered system there cant be one, really

Objectivism argues for exclusivly voluntary tax

I can understand that, but Germany actually went pretty well with one for a while...

So only private charities

then it just got out of hand.

Well, it's a principle of the thing

yes

but as Sargon sais about liberalism: there are practical contradictions to some principles, which are viable in certain cases.

it may contradict the principle, but as long as you do not stray too far from it, and it is pracical, it is also viable.

I dont make distinction between morality and practicality

It is immoral to tax no matter how "practical" it might be

What I found particularly unsettling in the "We are Deutch" video Soygon talks about in his response, at least back when I first saw it back in the day, was how aggressive the "new Germans" were depicted to be. Especially considering the "backwards, bigoted" enemy were also depicted holding placards with politicians from foreign polities. I specifically remember Hungary and Netherlands.

No, look, when you've identified evil, you've cornered evil, it can't spring up somewhere else, it literally cannot physically manifest anywhere else in the world, because evil is a frail little creature that can only exist in one place. Thus Nazis evil, everyone else good. Unless you're for borders, then you're also evil, which means you're a Nazi. See? It works flawlessly.