4 ms·

I don't think it's fair to say that MacKenzie Scott or the Waltons didn't earn their wealth. I mean I am on conservative side economically but the case of MacKe

I don't think it's fair to say that MacKenzie Scott or the Waltons didn't earn their wealth. I mean I am on conservative side economically but the case of MacKenzie Scott seems like a classic "we form a team, split tasks and try to do as well for ourselves as we can" kind of deal. Exactly the way marriages should be. If a family runs a business and a lot of family members are involved one way or another it's not fair to say the wealth is inherited. Nor is it fair to say a wife who supported her husband in both everyday and business matters didn't earn her wealth. As to sources: what politically motivated newspaper claims in an opinion piece isn't meaningful. I look at the list of richest Americans and I see the vast majority (90%+) or even all of them were involved in building the fortune. When googling around for numbers it seems most sources claim that vast majority of world population millionaires are self made and even bigger percentage of billionaires are. Personally all the people I know who did well for themselves didn't inherit anything. I am sure my perspective is shaped by being born in a very poor communist country but it seems the actual numbers worldwide don't contradict my intuition that fortunes bigger and smaller are mainly built and rarely inherited.

whimsicalism 5y ago
> I don't think it's fair to say ... the Waltons didn't earn their wealth. Look, I'll grant you that Scott is "arguable" as I said, Koch is also very arguable. I don't think you can seriously claim the Walton heirs earned their wealth, but I don't think it is particularly relevant to the debate. > what politically motivated newspaper claims in an opinion piece isn't meaningful I only cited the WaPo because it collated the econometrics papers that showed the claim. Look, you choose whether you want to believe, whether it is peer-reviewed economics research and meta-analysis or "googling around for numbers." We all know how reliable Google is :) > it seems most sources claim that vast majority of world population millionaires are self made I also googled this "claim", and huh, guess what showed up? A bunch of "politically motivated newspaper claims" but this time they were relying on this obviously biased source (https://www.wealthx.com/report/world-ultra-wealth-report-2019/ https://www.wealthx.com/report/world-ultra-wealth-report-201...), not peer-reviewed economics research. Ultimately, you choose what to believe but almost all the evidence points to the majority or close to the majority of private wealth being inherited by the wealthy. > Personally all the people I know who did well for themselves didn't inherit anything 1. This is 100% contextual to America 2. Many people are very shy about admitting an inheritance. I also don't really trust you to be a good judge of if someone is "self-made" if you honestly think the Walton's didn't inherit their wealth - pretty much every one of them is described as an heir/heiress and they were not actively that involved in the business. You choose what to believe, but ultimately "facts don't care about your feelings." You seem to be reasoning backwards from your political beliefs to the conclusions you want to hear.

whimsicalism 5y ago

> I don't think it's fair to say ... the Waltons didn't earn their wealth. Look, I'll grant you that Scott is "arguable" as I said, Koch is also very arguable. I don't think you can seriously claim the Walton heirs earned their wealth, but I don't think it is particularly relevant to the debate. > what politically motivated newspaper claims in an opinion piece isn't meaningful I only cited the WaPo because it collated the econometrics papers that showed the claim. Look, you choose whether you want to believe, whether it is peer-reviewed economics research and meta-analysis or "googling around for numbers." We all know how reliable Google is :) > it seems most sources claim that vast majority of world population millionaires are self made I also googled this "claim", and huh, guess what showed up? A bunch of "politically motivated newspaper claims" but this time they were relying on this obviously biased source (https://www.wealthx.com/report/world-ultra-wealth-report-2019/ https://www.wealthx.com/report/world-ultra-wealth-report-201...), not peer-reviewed economics research. Ultimately, you choose what to believe but almost all the evidence points to the majority or close to the majority of private wealth being inherited by the wealthy. > Personally all the people I know who did well for themselves didn't inherit anything 1. This is 100% contextual to America 2. Many people are very shy about admitting an inheritance. I also don't really trust you to be a good judge of if someone is "self-made" if you honestly think the Walton's didn't inherit their wealth - pretty much every one of them is described as an heir/heiress and they were not actively that involved in the business. You choose what to believe, but ultimately "facts don't care about your feelings." You seem to be reasoning backwards from your political beliefs to the conclusions you want to hear.