inheritance, production, game theory

i don't have this fully worked out but wanted to rant. let's say production isn't as valuable/necessary etc as some (me) would like to think. let's say that our fore-fathers were hyper-productive and put away stores of every imaginable good for generations to come. in that case, inheritance becomes much more ... interesting for lack of a better word

you will never be able to change atoms into an arrangement than is more optimal than their current arrangement, and there is already enough of anything you could conceive of. since your parents controlled all capital before you (and your siblings) were born, they are the rightful distributors of that property. they may choose to not will you anything, and your (even exceptional) productive capacity is worthless

we are of course on some continuum between the two. however, as we age, we have both accumulated more savings (capital) and thus need to produce less. because there are others who want our savings, and entropy (of capital) would suggest that theft becomes more thermodynamically favourable (for them), we encounter parties who address us with win/lose. in other words - similar distribution of raw materials (not finished goods) would tend to favour win/win trade, while dissimilar (accumulation) of finished goods would favour win/lose. and this may explain why muhammad went from an inclusive spiritual man early in life to a warlord later. and why when we're young we are encouraged to share and often cooperate while the motto of the old is, "get off my lawn!"