You are correct on this being just another redistribution program for radical leftists, like Obama, Pelosi and Reid, to "spread the wealth around."

However, if it is a mutual company like New York Life or Mass Mutual etc the % they charge on policy loans is part of their overall profit and at the end of the year profits are re-distributed to policy owners as a dividend.

It was nothing more than a redistribution of wealth targeting landlords and rewarding tenants.

It certainly adds up but it will have college FAFSA consequences if the account, IRA etc gets large enough & it's in their name.It's the ONLY form of 'income redistribution' I agree with :)

What if a beneficiary passed away, is that share redistributed to other beneficiaries or passed on to a specific heir of the beneficiary  (e.g. eldest son).  

Mine are working through hs/college with the expectation that they pay for their own education, cars, homes, etc. but they're going to get what I don't spend (and the government doesn't "fairly redistribute" for me). 

The ultra rich and powerful would lose their wealth as it get redistributed. 

Which could potentially be managed by bringing in crops from other states, redistributing supply chains if you will.It’s possible that desalination is a viable option, but my understanding is that, that technology still has some less than desirable environmental impacts (I could be wrong).

And ever ask why these big corporations are all for "redistribution" tactic's and social enterprise?

I think the issue would be the ownership structure in relation to passing something on - if someone who owns the property dies, is it inherited by their multiple children and then you have to navigate all of their schedules and desires, or is it owned in joint tenancy -- if you happen to die before you sell your shares you are just unlucky because the ownership is redistributed to the other owners and not passed onto heirs?