Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by literallycancer 3183 days ago
Maybe they simply think of the assets as "family assets" regardless of who actually owns them? Why assume they are malicious?
1 comments

because the people that actually own the assets need to agree for this to be ok.
His issue was that people talk about assets as if they were theirs, not that they using them as if they were. It's quite possible that they simply don't have a dysfunctional family and can agree on what's to be done with them, hence it doesn't matter who actually owns them, and not making the distinction in conversation isn't an issue.
"agree"

Exactly my point. I understand what you are saying - but in conversation, my reaction is much more like the parent comment, it sounds like an entitled POV. Many people who say such things, in my anecdotal experience, feel they have a right to the wealth, and may not have agreement.