This blog post explores how game theory can explain ancient debt inheritance practices. It argues that varying customs, like the complete forgiveness of debts upon death or the inheritance of debt by heirs, can be understood as strategic responses to different social and economic environments. Where strong social ties and community enforcement existed, debt forgiveness could be sustainable. Conversely, in societies with weaker community bonds, inheriting debt incentivized responsible lending and borrowing by holding both parties accountable, even beyond death. This system, akin to a repeated game in game theory, fostered trust and facilitated economic activity by increasing the likelihood of repayment.
Inherited wealth is increasingly rivaling earned income in importance, especially in advanced economies. As populations age and accumulated wealth grows, inheritances are becoming larger and more frequent, flowing disproportionately to the already wealthy. This exacerbates inequality, entrenches existing class structures, and potentially undermines the meritocratic ideal of social mobility based on hard work. The article argues that governments need to address this trend through policies like inheritance taxes, not just to raise revenue, but to promote fairness and opportunity across generations.
HN commenters largely agree with the premise that inherited wealth is increasingly important for financial success. Several highlight the difficulty of accumulating wealth through work alone, especially given rising housing costs and stagnant wages. Some discuss the societal implications, expressing concern over decreased social mobility and the potential for inherited wealth to exacerbate inequality. Others offer personal anecdotes illustrating the impact of inheritance, both positive and negative. The role of luck and privilege is a recurring theme, with some arguing that meritocracy is a myth and that inherited advantages play a larger role than often acknowledged. A few commenters point out potential flaws in the Economist's analysis, questioning the data or suggesting alternative interpretations.
The blog post "Inheritance and Subtyping" argues that inheritance and subtyping are distinct concepts often conflated, leading to inflexible and brittle code. Inheritance, a mechanism for code reuse, creates a tight coupling between classes, whereas subtyping, focused on behavioral compatibility, allows substitutability. The author advocates for composition over inheritance, suggesting interfaces and delegation as preferred alternatives for achieving polymorphism and code reuse. This approach promotes looser coupling, increased flexibility, and easier maintainability, ultimately leading to more robust and adaptable software design.
Hacker News users generally agree with the author's premise that inheritance is often misused, especially when subtyping isn't the goal. Several commenters point out that composition and interfaces are generally preferable, offering greater flexibility and avoiding the tight coupling inherent in inheritance. One commenter highlights the "fragile base class problem," where changes in a parent class can unexpectedly break child classes. Others discuss the nuances of Liskov Substitution Principle and how it relates to proper inheritance usage. One user specifically calls out Java's overuse of inheritance, citing the infamous AbstractSingletonProxyFactoryBean. A few dissenting opinions mention that inheritance can be a useful tool when used judiciously, especially in domains like game development where hierarchical relationships are naturally occurring.
Summary of Comments ( 1 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43248993
Hacker News users discussed the practicality and cultural context of the debt settlement methods described in the linked article. Some questioned the realism of the scenarios presented, arguing that the proposed game theory model oversimplifies complex social dynamics and power imbalances of ancient societies. Others highlighted the importance of reputation and social capital in these pre-legal systems, suggesting that maintaining community trust was a more powerful motivator than the threat of ostracization presented in the game theory example. Several commenters pointed out similar historical examples of debt inheritance and social mechanisms for resolving them, drawing comparisons to practices in various cultures. There was also discussion about the effectiveness of ostracization as a punishment and how it compares to modern legal systems.
The Hacker News post titled "Game Theory and Settling the Debts of the Deceased in Ancient Times" (linking to a blog post on politicalcalculations.blogspot.com) has generated a modest discussion with a few interesting points.
One commenter highlights the complexity of inheritance laws throughout history, pointing out that primogeniture (the eldest son inheriting everything) was a relatively late development. They mention that earlier systems often involved complex divisions of property among heirs, potentially including daughters and other relatives, sometimes with specific items allocated to specific individuals. This commenter suggests that understanding these nuances is important for interpreting historical legal texts and practices related to debt and inheritance.
Another commenter focuses on the practicalities of debt enforcement in ancient societies, arguing that it would have been extremely difficult to collect debts from someone who had moved away or disappeared, especially in the absence of sophisticated record-keeping and communication systems. They suggest the blog post's game theory analysis might oversimplify the situation by assuming perfect information and enforceability.
A third commenter raises the issue of social reputation and its role in ensuring debt repayment. They contend that in tight-knit communities, the threat of reputational damage could have been a powerful motivator for heirs to honor their deceased relatives' debts, even without strict legal obligations. This perspective emphasizes the social and cultural context alongside the purely economic considerations presented in the blog post.
A final commenter briefly touches on the concept of "debt bondage," suggesting that in some ancient societies, unpaid debts could lead to enslavement of the debtor or their family members. This comment hints at the potentially severe consequences of debt in those times.
While the discussion thread isn't particularly extensive, it does offer some valuable perspectives that add nuance to the blog post's analysis. The commenters bring in important considerations related to historical inheritance practices, the practicalities of debt enforcement, the role of social reputation, and the potential for severe consequences like debt bondage.