I question exactly how long-lived this new wealth is or will be.
Look at the Rothschilds - they have figured out a way to take the initial 1700s wealth and keep it (we can assume mostly) together in a relatively cohesive lump for some 300 years.
A less "notorious" example would be the duPonts, easily trillionaires if you were to add up the wealth accumulated amongst this wealthy family.
Against that, someone worth $100 million who gives 90% of it away when he/she passes doesn't seem all that significant.
Not sniping, just expressing a contrary POV to consider...
> keep it .. we can assume mostly.. in a relatively
> cohesive lump for some 300 years.
I think I disagree but it might just be over choice of words. It's an interesting topic that I want to develop and I'll charge on.
On the topic of intergenerational wealth, it's not enough to say that you can keep a lump of wealth. During the 300 years you talk about, governments rose and fell, and currencies and sovereign debt with them. In order to stay above water, you have to float your position across multiple regimes and positions. Or keep it in a lump of gold. That didn't do that - they worked money hard.
Rothschilds took on huge positions in the Napoleonic wars that could easily have gone wrong. They then would have lost it all due to poor timing over the end of the waterloo campaign but leveraged up by taking an audacious position on sovereign bonds that paid off and made them even richer. My point is, they gambled the house at several points.
Part of what's striking about the Rothschilds specifically is that they kept a healthy mindset across several generations. This is a wildly interesting topic that has crossover with another article hacker news today link today to the atlantic, http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2072200
In that article you see lots of people who came from aspirational backgrounds. But how do you keep that? How do you raise a wealthy family in a way that passes on those values?
I upvoted you because you have hit on the core question: how do you stay hungry after that first x million, and how do you pass it on to the next generation?
Some family members have achieved relative wealth and I see this with their children who attend private schools ... I see nephews and nieces likely to pursue professions, but do not see the same competitive drive being passed along.
Look at the Rothschilds - they have figured out a way to take the initial 1700s wealth and keep it (we can assume mostly) together in a relatively cohesive lump for some 300 years.
A less "notorious" example would be the duPonts, easily trillionaires if you were to add up the wealth accumulated amongst this wealthy family.
Against that, someone worth $100 million who gives 90% of it away when he/she passes doesn't seem all that significant.
Not sniping, just expressing a contrary POV to consider...