3 ms·
Out of interest, because this has a substantial effect on the meaning of your comment: Do you literally mean all your descendents? E.g. in 200 years there will
by quietbritishjim 5y ago
Out of interest, because this has a substantial effect on the meaning of your comment:
Do you literally mean all your descendents? E.g. in 200 years there will be 100ish people still substantially benefitting from your wealth? That's how your post reads and is probably how most people would interpret it but I suspect it may not be what you meant.
Or do you just mean your wealth just benefits your immediate descendants? (What you've written would be a very odd way to say that because most people would describe those people as "my children".) Obviously there would still be an indirect effect all the way down e.g. your grandchildren would probably get a better education which would let them earn more for themselves, etc., but that would fade out eventually through the generations.
- zeckalpha 5y agoIf it is well managed and a safe withdrawal rate is maintained, it very well could go to all descendants.
- altusbrown 5y agoGood luck though when the person who learned how to be an assassin/shark and was able to build and maintain the wealth has handed it off to their kids (or grandkids) who probably never had much contact with them (what with all the assassin/sharkiness), and are now trying to judge well managed and safe from what they were exposed to as children. Which was probably massive wealth, and people who aren't always scamming you (because the filtering happened off screen). Especially since you either have to pick someone (or a small group) from the set to judge, or have to deal with an ever increasing and ever more distant from the original wealthbuilding set of decision makers. Definitely possible to do, but very, very, very unlikely and rare (based on clear examples around us).
- CyberRabbi 5y agoI haven’t fully considered what the best way is to ensure my dynasty but I imagine that my first born male son should inherit the lion’s share of the wealth. So no, in practice it probably wouldn’t be all my descendants, just my direct male line.
- CRConrad 5y agoWow. All hail Misogynicus Maximus.
- CyberRabbi 5y agoNo, the point is that a daughter would not need inheritance as much if she marries well. She would still get something, just not the lion share. Everyone benefits that way. That’s actually philogyny.