4 ms·

Right, most "super rich" people don't get "super rich" by doing super stupid things.

taotau 4y ago
True...ish, but i bet a percentage of them get rich by focussing on what they are good at and neglecting their families, just making piles of money available. There's probably enough kids getting 10K a month pocket money to make GPs stragetgy viable.
lozenge 4y ago
The Chinese proverb “rags to rags in three generations” says that family wealth does not last for three generations. The first generation makes the money, the second spends it and the third sees none of the wealth.
- ctchocula 4y ago
  One explanation could be a difference between China and the West. Historically the West relies on primogeniture where the eldest son inherits a vast majority of the fortune and other sons need to move out and build a career for themselves. Classical China OTOH would split their fortune (which for 90% of folks was land since most were farmers) between their sons. Primogeniture encourages maintaining wealth across generations through the eldest son while the latter could mean the fortune gets spread out and eventually lost within 3 generations. For example, see research by Thomas Piketty about how ppl who were rich in 16th century Italy are still absurdly rich today.
- bobnamob 4y ago
  That phenomenon probably has more to do with wealth being spread increasingly thin across ever-larger generations
  - b112 4y ago
    Maybe? Certainly more offspring was normal, the further back you go. So wealth division could more easily happen. But most cultures had the idea of the "first born", the official heir... for this very reason! Most of the loot, holdings, tended to go the eldest.
    - algorias 4y ago
      This is no longer legal in many jurisdictions. Family members often have a minimum allocation of the inheritance (e.g. 25% must be equally split among all children)
      - ntoskrnl 4y ago
        What jurisdiction is this?
        plonk 4y ago
        France has a floor on the percentage each descendant gets.
      - b112 4y ago
        Interesting, and most places it is culturally unacceptable regardless. Yet the proverb is historical, as all proverbs are, and my response was intended to refute the dissolution of wealth, historically, by spreading it too thin. Our ancestors didn't do that.
  - usrusr 4y ago
    Another element is how ambition to have your own achievement can team up with risk taking. It's usually not the humble playboy who consumes away the fortune, it's one who tries to step out of the shadow cart by inheritance by growing the fortune through a series off get-richer-quickly schemes.
  - scoopertrooper 4y ago
    Probably less so in China given that, until recently, they had severe restrictions on the number of children per a family. Though your point is valid it's only part of the story. I've seen many scions from China attending western universities in a state of decadence, barely focused on their course work, all too willing to live off their parents' past efforts, while driving expensive cars and walking around in clothes and accessories worth tens of thousands of dollars.
  - Bud 4y ago
    No part of this is even close to correct. No, wealth is not being evenly spread, it's becoming more and more concentrated. And no, generations are not getting "ever-larger", either; birth rates are down. Even the "probably" is wrong. :)
forty 4y ago
Most super rich get super rich by having super rich parents. It doesn't say anything about how they act.

True...ish, but i bet a percentage of them get rich by focussing on what they are good at and neglecting their families, just making piles of money available. There's probably enough kids getting 10K a month pocket money to make GPs stragetgy viable.

lozenge 4y ago

The Chinese proverb “rags to rags in three generations” says that family wealth does not last for three generations. The first generation makes the money, the second spends it and the third sees none of the wealth.

ctchocula 4y ago
One explanation could be a difference between China and the West. Historically the West relies on primogeniture where the eldest son inherits a vast majority of the fortune and other sons need to move out and build a career for themselves. Classical China OTOH would split their fortune (which for 90% of folks was land since most were farmers) between their sons. Primogeniture encourages maintaining wealth across generations through the eldest son while the latter could mean the fortune gets spread out and eventually lost within 3 generations. For example, see research by Thomas Piketty about how ppl who were rich in 16th century Italy are still absurdly rich today.
bobnamob 4y ago
That phenomenon probably has more to do with wealth being spread increasingly thin across ever-larger generations
- b112 4y ago
  Maybe? Certainly more offspring was normal, the further back you go. So wealth division could more easily happen. But most cultures had the idea of the "first born", the official heir... for this very reason! Most of the loot, holdings, tended to go the eldest.
  - algorias 4y ago
    This is no longer legal in many jurisdictions. Family members often have a minimum allocation of the inheritance (e.g. 25% must be equally split among all children)
    - ntoskrnl 4y ago
      What jurisdiction is this?
      - plonk 4y ago
        France has a floor on the percentage each descendant gets.
    - b112 4y ago
      Interesting, and most places it is culturally unacceptable regardless. Yet the proverb is historical, as all proverbs are, and my response was intended to refute the dissolution of wealth, historically, by spreading it too thin. Our ancestors didn't do that.
- usrusr 4y ago
  Another element is how ambition to have your own achievement can team up with risk taking. It's usually not the humble playboy who consumes away the fortune, it's one who tries to step out of the shadow cart by inheritance by growing the fortune through a series off get-richer-quickly schemes.
- scoopertrooper 4y ago
  Probably less so in China given that, until recently, they had severe restrictions on the number of children per a family. Though your point is valid it's only part of the story. I've seen many scions from China attending western universities in a state of decadence, barely focused on their course work, all too willing to live off their parents' past efforts, while driving expensive cars and walking around in clothes and accessories worth tens of thousands of dollars.
- Bud 4y ago
  No part of this is even close to correct. No, wealth is not being evenly spread, it's becoming more and more concentrated. And no, generations are not getting "ever-larger", either; birth rates are down. Even the "probably" is wrong. :)

forty 4y ago

Most super rich get super rich by having super rich parents. It doesn't say anything about how they act.