how you value money.
Incidentally, in relation to the popular topic of whether there is any truth in the belief that a person's fortune can last not more than three generations, I have noticed that the most basic form of investment ie. buying vacant land or those planted with crops like rubber or oil palm, compared with selling all and put the money in the bank or stocks and shares for convenience, could be one of the reasons for the fall in value over two or three generations. With exceptions, we are comparing the earlier generation of thrift and savings, and lots of patience with the later generations of indulgence in the luxuries of life, especially where despite the huge incomes, the spending exceeds income which invariably eats into capital.
The other factor is distribution. A rich man with 10 children would have his estate shared and divided by 10, for instance. If he died intestate, then a third goes to the widow and the rest divided equally by the 10 children. This fact alone is the cause of the diminishing importance of a great man's wealth. Even with a goose that lays the golden egg, the distribution would kill the goose and each would get a share of what are left of the golden eggs.
Of course, there are those descendants who are capable and ambitious and with new talents in new technologies and investment knowledge, or just know-who, which could increase a family's wealth well beyond the forefather.
No comments:
Post a Comment