[el_zorro]

I'm really curious how you think this will solve anything. Children of wealthy parents don't have to inherit anything to have advantages that most poor children could only dream of. That is, unless you somehow abolish parents using their wealth to give their kids access to better healthcare, higher-quality and healthier foods, better educations, opportunities for travel, exposure to culture, and on and on. And if you say that yes, that is what you mean and all those things are to be taken care of by the state, then you've moved beyond even the socialized policies of the Nordic countries. Not that that's a bad thing, but it would be a little disingenuous to call it capitalism.

[wpietri]

If you abolished inheritance (that is, taxed it at 100%) you would certainly reduce a number of capitalism's structural problems. That's why even many wealthy people are in favor of large inheritance taxes. [1]

That would also provide you a lot of tax revenue for improving education and social services. Or you could just pay it out as a negative income tax or a basic income.

That wouldn't solve every problem of capitalism, but so what? No improvement makes everything perfect, but that's not a reason to argue against improvements.

[1] e.g.: http://www.forbes.com/sites/ashleaebeling/2012/12/11/buffet-...