4 ms·
No. It should not. What will hurt them is how you raise them (By heirs I'm talking about children). Give them the best education money can buy and beyond the es
by sdfasdfa 14y ago
No. It should not. What will hurt them is how you raise them (By heirs I'm talking about children). Give them the best education money can buy and beyond the essentials (food, roof, clothes) make them work for whatever else they want.
Want a car? Get a summer job. Want a new video game console? Do some extra chores. Want extra money for your date? A job in the weekends would not be bad.
Do you get my point?
By the time they inherit money they will learn not to depend on it.
It all depends on how you raise them. If you do a crappy job to begin with then even with no money they will probably be screw. Tell me I'm wrong.
- schrodinger 14y agoI'm coming to agree with part of your point but just for the sake of constructive criticism your tone is off-putting, and probably the source of most of your downvotes. Also, I don't agree that distributing equity of the company that employees have worked for is a hand-out; rather, it IS teaching you to fish: you now have ownership of the company, and are more inclined to learn the implications and your interests are more directly aligned with the company. Rather than being incentivized to do the least work possible without getting fired (not saying that that is what most workers do, just that it is what a no-equity position incentivizes at least in the short-medium term), the interests of the employees are now directly aligned with the company. I fail to see how that's a bad thing.