Moral righteousness goes a long way toward getting the necessities. Not only does a moral life tend to deliver things like this, through diligence and honesty, but those around you are far, far more likely to offer charity in a moment of need when they observe it.
While true, moral righteousness does not need to equal not having money to spend.
Saying 'you cannot take it with you with you die' completely ignores that people often accumulate wealth so their kids will have it after they are gone, not so they can take it with them to the afterlife.
Equating money with evil is partly the reason commie arguments get so much traction; commie philosophy is not so different from Christian dogma as either would like to acknowledge.
As for leaving the toys to the kids.. I see nothing wrong with generational wealth, but little of what I said involved that. Pills? Weed? Alcohol? Consumer goods? Lawyers to connive for state violence to end disputes? Of all the things I listed, only the house might be worth something to the next generation.
Ya know, if it's not sold to finance the retirement experience.
That's the thing, people
do make a living and retirement off that stuff while using it, and not just the people who directly make those products making a living off them. I've met and worked with plenty of upright people in the legal weed industry, and more than a few vets, wand it is one of the few areas of new economic growth in a lot of towns.
There are plenty of towns in rec states where the first new business to open in a small, seemingly dying town in decades is a dispensary. Which will pull more business to a town, because people may want to shop for other things before or after they get their weed.
Weed grows also regularly have to call on HVAC/electrician/fire code/plumber services, as do breweries/distilleries, and pharma plants.
I mean fucking Willie Nelson has his own weed brands, as does Snoop, and how many celebs have done spots for beer companies or pharma brands?