4 ms·

Bill Gates makes a similar point in his review of Piketty's Capital in the 21st Century: https://www.gatesnotes.com/Books/Why-Inequality-Matters-Capital-in-21st

Bill Gates makes a similar point in his review of Piketty's Capital in the 21st Century: https://www.gatesnotes.com/Books/Why-Inequality-Matters-Capital-in-21st-Century-Review https://www.gatesnotes.com/Books/Why-Inequality-Matters-Capi...

sologoub 10y ago
From Gates: >Take a look at the Forbes 400 list of the wealthiest Americans. About half the people on the list are entrepreneurs whose companies did very well (thanks to hard work as well as a lot of luck). Contrary to Piketty’s rentier hypothesis, I don’t see anyone on the list whose ancestors bought a great parcel of land in 1780 and have been accumulating family wealth by collecting rents ever since. In America, that old money is long gone—through instability, inflation, taxes, philanthropy, and spending. This is exactly why I don't buy the "rentier class" argument. Even the mega-wealthy families of the robber-baron era are not that well represented in these lists. The other take on the wealth that is rarely discussed is the incentive that the ability to secure the lives of ones offspring provides - it is a very powerful drive. I suspect a large number of very talented individuals would accelerate their retirement if they were not able to pass their wealth on to their kids. While I heavily rely on my skills/labor for income, even I would make very different choices if I had no hope of passing on at least something. Fair or not, it's a pretty primal instinct.
- charlesdm 10y ago
  I don't agree with Piketty, but do note that he's looking at things from a mainly European perspective. Europe probably has a lot more old money + there is still some (very) wealthy aristocracy around. I in fact personally know a family that still owns land they somehow acquired in the 1700s. But they're not the billionaires or hundred millionaires that roam todays capitalistic system. They're.. well off? I would call it FU money, but given they (sort of) have to pass it down the generations for forever, they definitely spend a lot less of it and enjoy it less.
- kamaal 10y ago
  >>Even the mega-wealthy families of the robber-baron era are not that well represented in these lists. May be because bulk of that wealth is locked in Trusts. And passed on through Trusts. The Bezos, Zuckerberg's and Gates will leave behind Trusts which their descendants will inherit. You won't find their names in the richest person list in the next few decades. Their descendants will almost be as rich as the richest guy of their times. They will just be rich through a proxy.
  - sologoub 10y ago
    Any sources of these stats? I've actually had "you probably have a trust fund" thrown at me in college because I drove a sports car, but I worked 3 jobs to afford it and pay for education/rent/etc, so apologies if I'm overly skeptical about the trust fund claim.
    - xapata 10y ago
      In your estimate, of the people driving sports cars during college, how many worked 3 jobs to pay for the car and college?

sologoub 10y ago

From Gates: >Take a look at the Forbes 400 list of the wealthiest Americans. About half the people on the list are entrepreneurs whose companies did very well (thanks to hard work as well as a lot of luck). Contrary to Piketty’s rentier hypothesis, I don’t see anyone on the list whose ancestors bought a great parcel of land in 1780 and have been accumulating family wealth by collecting rents ever since. In America, that old money is long gone—through instability, inflation, taxes, philanthropy, and spending. This is exactly why I don't buy the "rentier class" argument. Even the mega-wealthy families of the robber-baron era are not that well represented in these lists. The other take on the wealth that is rarely discussed is the incentive that the ability to secure the lives of ones offspring provides - it is a very powerful drive. I suspect a large number of very talented individuals would accelerate their retirement if they were not able to pass their wealth on to their kids. While I heavily rely on my skills/labor for income, even I would make very different choices if I had no hope of passing on at least something. Fair or not, it's a pretty primal instinct.

charlesdm 10y ago
I don't agree with Piketty, but do note that he's looking at things from a mainly European perspective. Europe probably has a lot more old money + there is still some (very) wealthy aristocracy around. I in fact personally know a family that still owns land they somehow acquired in the 1700s. But they're not the billionaires or hundred millionaires that roam todays capitalistic system. They're.. well off? I would call it FU money, but given they (sort of) have to pass it down the generations for forever, they definitely spend a lot less of it and enjoy it less.
kamaal 10y ago
>>Even the mega-wealthy families of the robber-baron era are not that well represented in these lists. May be because bulk of that wealth is locked in Trusts. And passed on through Trusts. The Bezos, Zuckerberg's and Gates will leave behind Trusts which their descendants will inherit. You won't find their names in the richest person list in the next few decades. Their descendants will almost be as rich as the richest guy of their times. They will just be rich through a proxy.
- sologoub 10y ago
  Any sources of these stats? I've actually had "you probably have a trust fund" thrown at me in college because I drove a sports car, but I worked 3 jobs to afford it and pay for education/rent/etc, so apologies if I'm overly skeptical about the trust fund claim.
  - xapata 10y ago
    In your estimate, of the people driving sports cars during college, how many worked 3 jobs to pay for the car and college?