Going the other way is far worse. Imagine a 100% inheritance tax. You basically get punished for helping your children and encouraged to spend your remaining money in a unproductive way. Inheritance only affects the children when the parents are already dead. It's too late to achieve equality when the children are already in their 40s. They've benefited from their parents during the time they were alive the most. Even a low inheritance tax doesn't make sense because the money was already taxed when it was earned.
Equality is probably unachieveable unless we physically seperate parents from their children or abolish money altogether.
Not even slightly true. 100% inheritance tax means relative equality between members of the same generation. There are still differences in upbringing to contend with, but the extra tax money can fund education or other compensatory measures.
There's nothing stopping you from buying your children houses and transferring money to them while you're still alive to set them up for success. Including all the other things like paying for their education and perhaps other expenses.
There's absolutely 0 need for inheritance if you want to set your children up in life, barring of course sudden death (which, even then, is still easily circumvented via life insurance policies)
Equality is probably unachieveable unless we physically seperate parents from their children or abolish money altogether.