5 ms·

Strip the wealthy if their wealth and most will probably become wealthy again. If you don’t call it intelligence what would you call it.

lotsofpulp 6y ago
> most will probably become wealthy again. Source?
- magicsmoke 6y ago
  This sounds like something that a study of Chinese upper-class and their 1949 pre-revolution family history could shed some very interesting results on.
- arghnoname 6y ago
  There's a book that attempts to look at this called, "The Son Also Rises." It tracks wealth by surnames and argues that the ability to gain (or regain) wealth is inheritable. This thesis is in contradiction to some of the ways I've experienced the world, but it is a source supporting the parent's claim. For my own political inclinations I'd be happy to hear many others that support the opposite claim.
  - Talanes 6y ago
    I've only dug into the briefly, so forgive me if I'm missing something obvious, but it looks like his research was mostly just tracking surnames? How would you differentiate between family lines that actually lose and regain wealth over generations, and those that happen to maintain it over that span? Like say the Smith family was traditionally privileged and wealthy, but my great-great-grandfather lost his fortune. Am I actually any more likely to rise in fortune than the Jones' family next door that have been generationally poor for hundreds of years? Or does it only seem like that because I have many distant cousin's whose families maintained their advantages?
    - xyzzyz 6y ago
      It tracks rare surnames, so there aren’t many distant cousins to skew the results. The point of focusing on rare surnames is so that you can be more certain that people carrying them today are actually direct descendants of people in the old records. Second thing is that the fortune is typically not tracked here, because it’s really hard to get any historical data about fortune of any individuals, much less those not so famous. What Clark et al do is track status, and average out: for example, you can look at the people who graduated Oxford hundreds of years ago. As it turns out, their descendants today are overrepresented among UK’s doctors and lawyers. On the other hand, people carrying common job-related last names, like Smith or Taylor, are underrepresented as lawyers and doctors. In fact, in today’s UK, people carrying last names of Norman conquerors are still overrepresented among high status occupations in UK, although not by much, given a millennium of a regression towards the mean. I recommend reading the book, it’s great.
      - Talanes 6y ago
        Maybe I was unclear because I picked a generically common surname for my example, but I was also assuming both people were descended from a common successful ancestor.
        xyzzyz 6y ago
        The core of Clark’s argument is that the advantage is not due to accumulated fortune, but rather is genetic in nature.
  - dredmorbius 6y ago
    http://faculty.econ.ucdavis.edu/faculty/gclark/the_Son_Also_Rises.html http://faculty.econ.ucdavis.edu/faculty/gclark/the_Son_Also_... https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691162546/the-son-also-rises https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691162546/th... https://archive.org/details/CSPAN2_20151004_190000_Book_Discussion_on_The_Son_Also_Rises https://archive.org/details/CSPAN2_20151004_190000_Book_Disc... https://www.worldcat.org/title/son-also-rises-surnames-and-the-history-of-social-mobility/oclc/876384555 https://www.worldcat.org/title/son-also-rises-surnames-and-t... http://gen.lib.rus.ec/book/index.php?md5=76BC054612F39ED6CBDE7059AF51350E http://gen.lib.rus.ec/book/index.php?md5=76BC054612F39ED6CBD... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Son_Also_Rises_(book) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Son_Also_Rises_(book)
  - knolax 6y ago
    Did they look at societies where last names are passed on matrilineally but social status/family continuity isn't? You would get the same results if the ability to gain wealth were truly a matter of genetics, but not if it were simply a matter of environmental benefits conferred from wealth.
  - mcv 6y ago
    Being born in the right family is absolutely a major predictor of success. The wealth opens up opportunities, but even without it, the guidance and example of family members helps a lot. The name recognition may too.
mrtnmcc 6y ago
Brand recognition
harimau777 6y ago
I think that's likely untrue if you include connections, training, and education in your definition of wealth.
jdavis703 6y ago
American wealth is closely tied to how wealthy a given persons parents were [0]. Given this, I’m skeptical that the wealthy would become wealthy again. The counterpoint is the richest Southern families quickly recovered their positions in the years after the Civil War [1]... but that relied heavily on racist policies, and of course these families still owned capital like land. 0: http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/assets/2015/07/fsm-irs-report_artfinal.pdf http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/assets/2015/07/fsm-irs-repo... 1: https://www.nber.org/papers/w25700?utm_campaign=ntwh&utm_medium=email&utm_source=ntwg2 https://www.nber.org/papers/w25700?utm_campaign=ntwh&utm_med...
- golergka 6y ago
  But intelligence is directly connected to it, too. And I'm not even speaking about generic aspect: it's the cultural thing of how important education is perceived to be. In Russia, two generations after the revolution you could still guess where did the family originally come from originally by this cultural divide alone.
- ulucs 6y ago
  Wealth is (obviously) corralated with many properties that make it easier to gain wealth. To look at the effect of parents' wealth (and solely that) on children, you need to look into lottery winners or Bitcoin/APPL holders.
sudosysgen 6y ago
There is no significant relationship between any measurable attribute of someone and their wealth, except for the wealth of their parents. So no. There are a few relationships between IQ and conscientiousness and wealth, but they break down towards the extremes are not strong enough in magnitude to account for even single-quartile mobility.

lotsofpulp 6y ago

> most will probably become wealthy again. Source?

magicsmoke 6y ago
This sounds like something that a study of Chinese upper-class and their 1949 pre-revolution family history could shed some very interesting results on.
arghnoname 6y ago
There's a book that attempts to look at this called, "The Son Also Rises." It tracks wealth by surnames and argues that the ability to gain (or regain) wealth is inheritable. This thesis is in contradiction to some of the ways I've experienced the world, but it is a source supporting the parent's claim. For my own political inclinations I'd be happy to hear many others that support the opposite claim.
- Talanes 6y ago
  I've only dug into the briefly, so forgive me if I'm missing something obvious, but it looks like his research was mostly just tracking surnames? How would you differentiate between family lines that actually lose and regain wealth over generations, and those that happen to maintain it over that span? Like say the Smith family was traditionally privileged and wealthy, but my great-great-grandfather lost his fortune. Am I actually any more likely to rise in fortune than the Jones' family next door that have been generationally poor for hundreds of years? Or does it only seem like that because I have many distant cousin's whose families maintained their advantages?
  - xyzzyz 6y ago
    It tracks rare surnames, so there aren’t many distant cousins to skew the results. The point of focusing on rare surnames is so that you can be more certain that people carrying them today are actually direct descendants of people in the old records. Second thing is that the fortune is typically not tracked here, because it’s really hard to get any historical data about fortune of any individuals, much less those not so famous. What Clark et al do is track status, and average out: for example, you can look at the people who graduated Oxford hundreds of years ago. As it turns out, their descendants today are overrepresented among UK’s doctors and lawyers. On the other hand, people carrying common job-related last names, like Smith or Taylor, are underrepresented as lawyers and doctors. In fact, in today’s UK, people carrying last names of Norman conquerors are still overrepresented among high status occupations in UK, although not by much, given a millennium of a regression towards the mean. I recommend reading the book, it’s great.
    - Talanes 6y ago
      Maybe I was unclear because I picked a generically common surname for my example, but I was also assuming both people were descended from a common successful ancestor.
      - xyzzyz 6y ago
        The core of Clark’s argument is that the advantage is not due to accumulated fortune, but rather is genetic in nature.
- dredmorbius 6y ago
  http://faculty.econ.ucdavis.edu/faculty/gclark/the_Son_Also_Rises.html http://faculty.econ.ucdavis.edu/faculty/gclark/the_Son_Also_... https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691162546/the-son-also-rises https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691162546/th... https://archive.org/details/CSPAN2_20151004_190000_Book_Discussion_on_The_Son_Also_Rises https://archive.org/details/CSPAN2_20151004_190000_Book_Disc... https://www.worldcat.org/title/son-also-rises-surnames-and-the-history-of-social-mobility/oclc/876384555 https://www.worldcat.org/title/son-also-rises-surnames-and-t... http://gen.lib.rus.ec/book/index.php?md5=76BC054612F39ED6CBDE7059AF51350E http://gen.lib.rus.ec/book/index.php?md5=76BC054612F39ED6CBD... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Son_Also_Rises_(book) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Son_Also_Rises_(book)
- knolax 6y ago
  Did they look at societies where last names are passed on matrilineally but social status/family continuity isn't? You would get the same results if the ability to gain wealth were truly a matter of genetics, but not if it were simply a matter of environmental benefits conferred from wealth.
- mcv 6y ago
  Being born in the right family is absolutely a major predictor of success. The wealth opens up opportunities, but even without it, the guidance and example of family members helps a lot. The name recognition may too.

mrtnmcc 6y ago

Brand recognition

harimau777 6y ago

I think that's likely untrue if you include connections, training, and education in your definition of wealth.

jdavis703 6y ago

American wealth is closely tied to how wealthy a given persons parents were [0]. Given this, I’m skeptical that the wealthy would become wealthy again. The counterpoint is the richest Southern families quickly recovered their positions in the years after the Civil War [1]... but that relied heavily on racist policies, and of course these families still owned capital like land. 0: http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/assets/2015/07/fsm-irs-report_artfinal.pdf http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/assets/2015/07/fsm-irs-repo... 1: https://www.nber.org/papers/w25700?utm_campaign=ntwh&utm_medium=email&utm_source=ntwg2 https://www.nber.org/papers/w25700?utm_campaign=ntwh&utm_med...

golergka 6y ago
But intelligence is directly connected to it, too. And I'm not even speaking about generic aspect: it's the cultural thing of how important education is perceived to be. In Russia, two generations after the revolution you could still guess where did the family originally come from originally by this cultural divide alone.
ulucs 6y ago
Wealth is (obviously) corralated with many properties that make it easier to gain wealth. To look at the effect of parents' wealth (and solely that) on children, you need to look into lottery winners or Bitcoin/APPL holders.

sudosysgen 6y ago

There is no significant relationship between any measurable attribute of someone and their wealth, except for the wealth of their parents. So no. There are a few relationships between IQ and conscientiousness and wealth, but they break down towards the extremes are not strong enough in magnitude to account for even single-quartile mobility.