4 ms·
> Not to mention the incredibly stupid modern practice of splitting the inheritance between your children rather than passing it in its entirety to ONE child.
by mkjones 15y ago
> Not to mention the incredibly stupid modern practice of splitting the inheritance between your children rather than passing it in its entirety to ONE child.
I'm not sure if this is a troll. What is incredibly stupid about the common practice of splitting inheritance equally between your children? What do you propose as a more optimal way to choose the single child who receives everything?
- danssig 15y agoMy guess is he must be the firstborn. I can't think of any other way that sentence makes sense.
- kstenerud 15y agoActually, I am the second born. I am making my own way.
- kstenerud 15y agoThere is a word in Japanese "tawake", which means "stupid" or "foolish", but the literal translation is "splitting the rice field". Every time you split your fortune, it becomes far less powerful. As generations pass, your "fortune" splits and splits until you've got a bunch of insignificant sums among your descendants. This is why the powerful families choose ONE child who will receive the inheritance, while the rest must make their own way. The common practice is for the firstborn to take the inheritance, but the best practice is to wait and see how each of your children deal with money before deciding.