This Couple Won't Leave $4 Billion Fortune for Their Children

  • Thread starter Thread starter PennyinCanada
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Fairwinds said:
I disagree. I don’t see point of working like a dog and not making sure my kids will start off at a huge advantage over other kids.
Click to expand...
I agree with this. I would want to make things easier and nicer for my kids. I think I would probably just put stipulations on the money, like only a certain amount can be used per year etc. so they can’t just blow through it all and I would add stipulations that any children they had would get a certain amount too so that my grandkids and their kids could enjoy the money too, and if they didn’t have kids then their kids portion would go to charity so they wouldn’t deliberately not have kids to keep all the money. LOL! . It’s a good idea in principle what the couple would like to do, but in reality it’s not that simple. I would not send my kids to public school if I had money like that because some public schools are the worst and would replace the attitude of entitlement with some worse kind of attitude that’s more destructive than a sense of entitlement. I would keep the money secret and not spoil them while they are growing up, I wouldn’t buy them expensive cars at 16yrs old and things like that, but I would have stipulations of how much they can use per year and they can only take more for something like medical care or to avoid being homeless etc. I would allow some for them to start their own business and things like that but not for them to just use to buy fancy cars every year and things like that.
 
styrgwillidar said:
Well, it’s their money, they can do whatever they want with it. Not my position to judge them one way or the other.

My Dad saw several awful fights over wills and bequests, things that tore families apart feuding over inheritances. He always told us, “I plan on spending my last dollar on my last day. You plan on getting along with your siblings after I’m gone.”
Click to expand...
That’s a good point!
 
This is kinda the same mentality that my parents in law have (they too have a lot of money).

I wouldn’t be surprised if they left nothing for my husband and brother in law. :mad:
 
I think this is a great lesson these parents are teaching their kids. I often pray that I’m able to teach my kids the same lesson someday. 😃
 
TheRealJuliane said:
Very difficult issue. I side more with the parents, would not want to create “trust fund brats” by leaving my kids a ton of money (not that we can!). There’s an old maxim, “From shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves in 3 generations.” It means the first generation starts out working for their money (shirtsleeves); the second gets left the money and spends it, leaving nothing to their own children, and the third generation is again in shirtsleeves. That 2nd generation can be a very bad place to be.

One thing that wealthy people can consider is making any inheritance contingent upon working. So however much the children make, match it 1 for 1. But to just gift them with millions? Nope.

:nope:
Click to expand...
Pay for 3/4 of their tuition fees (we tend to disregard stuff we get for free), pay 3/4 of the price of their first home (they’re left with a reasonable 1/4 house price mortgage). Match their salary 1 for 1 until they have children, at which point increase the ratio incrementally. When they retire at 60, surprise them with a couple of million bonus (now that they’ve established good spending habits and aren’t likely to go crazy). Reminds me of a story about an old man who had sold his asphalt pavement business (100-200 million$ deal) and rewarded each of his employees according to their times with him. Those who were, say, 40, were given 1 million dollars but the money was placed and could not be accessed before they retire (perhaps they could access the interests in the meantime, I don’t recall). I thought it was very generous and wise of him.
Fairwinds said:
money makes me very, very happy. its paying the medical insurance and the hospice care and lets me take this soon-to-be-over sabbatical without having to worry about my other financial responsibilities. **I’ve had tough (financial) times, and believe me, there’s **nothing ****good about them.
Click to expand...
So you don’t adhere to “What doesn’t kill you makes you stronger”? Friedrich would be so disappointed in you. 😉
 
styrgwillidar said:
Well, it’s their money, they can do whatever they want with it. Not my position to judge them one way or the other.

My Dad saw several awful fights over wills and bequests, things that tore families apart feuding over inheritances. He always told us, “I plan on spending my last dollar on my last day. You plan on getting along with your siblings after I’m gone.”
Click to expand...
This happens a lot. And woe betide the parents who leave their kids different amounts! Or put one sibling in charge of everyone else’s money! I had a friend whose family fought like cats and dogs after Granny died, over every stick of furniture and dish she had. It was horrible. Some of the stories she told made me want to cry. All over mammon. What a shame. To have families torn apart forever, just for the sake of stuff and money.

:nope:
 
TheRealJuliane said:
This happens a lot. And woe betide the parents who leave their kids different amounts! Or put one sibling in charge of everyone else’s money! I had a friend whose family fought like cats and dogs after Granny died, over every stick of furniture and dish she had. It was horrible. Some of the stories she told made me want to cry. All over mammon. What a shame. To have families torn apart forever, just for the sake of stuff and money.

:nope:
Click to expand...
That’s so true. 😦
 
This couple undoubtedly knows a lot more people who inherited even something well short of that kind of money than any of us are likely to, not to mention the social climate among those in their area who have been born to fantastic wealth…Houston must have a few, I’m thinking, and besides someone with that kind of money has to have met wealthy people from everywhere. It may be that they know the spiritual (or, if they are not religious, the psychosocial) dangers of inheriting a lot of money better than any of us do, and they are protecting their children from becoming the very people that their parents like the least.

I do not doubt that their children will be set in terms of their educations, and there will probably be trusts in place if they suffer an incapacitating accident, that kind of thing. If your parents take care of your education and the spectre of utter catastrophe, that’s a huge inheritance right there.
 
Fairwinds said:
I disagree. I don’t see point of working like a dog and not making sure my kids will start off at a huge advantage over other kids.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure why anyone would worry about having an advantage over other kids. It would be great for all kids to have good opportunities.

That being said I didn’t read it as the parents weren’t going to give them advantages growing up such as private schools, summer camps, educational trips to Africa, language immersion trips…

It sounded to me as though they just weren’t going to leave them cash.
 
EasterJoy said:
This couple undoubtedly knows a lot more people who inherited even something well short of that kind of money than any of us are likely to, not to mention the social climate among those in their area who have been born to fantastic wealth…Houston must have a few, I’m thinking, and besides someone with that kind of money has to have met wealthy people from everywhere. It may be that they know the spiritual (or, if they are not religious, the psychosocial) dangers of inheriting a lot of money better than any of us do, and they are protecting their children from becoming the very people that their parents like the least.

I do not doubt that their children will be set in terms of their educations, and there will probably be trusts in place if they suffer an incapacitating accident, that kind of thing. If your parents take care of your education and the spectre of utter catastrophe, that’s a huge inheritance right there.
Click to expand...
Actually this couple is “new money,” not old. They didn’t make their money slowly or inherit part of it - they got lucky, you might say. Old money people usually don’t have the same outlook about life and wealth that others do. They use money, but they aren’t as attached to it as someone who has never had it. They take it for granted in a way. Not necessarily in an arrogant way, usually old money has more class than to be arrogant.

Still, 4 billion is a lot of money for anyone to comprehend. I would be setting up foundations - especially funding a lot of pro-life efforts - that could achieve goals into the next several centuries. More and more, I think handing children a whole bunch of bucks when they don’t come from “old money,” would be too big a risk to take.
 
TheRealJuliane said:
Actually this couple is “new money,” not old. They didn’t make their money slowly or inherit part of it - they got lucky, you might say. Old money people usually don’t have the same outlook about life and wealth that others do. They use money, but they aren’t as attached to it as someone who has never had it. They take it for granted in a way. Not necessarily in an arrogant way, usually old money has more class than to be arrogant.

Still, 4 billion is a lot of money for anyone to comprehend. I would be setting up foundations - especially funding a lot of pro-life efforts - that could achieve goals into the next several centuries. More and more, I think handing children a whole bunch of bucks when they don’t come from “old money,” would be too big a risk to take.
Click to expand...
Old money has more class than to be arrogant? How long have the Hiltons had money in their family? This couple may just want to avoid to be the parents of the next trend-setter, with the entire country cursing them as parents of the woman responsible for all the toy dogs suddenly riding in oversized purses through grocery stores.

Seriously, though they’ve got to have seen some other families who have 2nd generation or 3rd generation or nth generation super-wealth to deal with, and they may not like what they see. As nearly as I can tell, 4 billion lands a single person on the Forbes Top 100 Wealthiest Americans. That isn’t the 1%, that’s more like the 0.0001%.

Besides, maybe when they had nothing, they dreamed of making a difference in this world if they ever became wealthy, instead of just giving their children and grandchildren a life among the super-rich. I say more power to them.
 
EasterJoy said:
Old money has more class than to be arrogant? How long have the Hiltons had money in their family? This couple may just want to avoid to be the parents of the next trend-setter, with the entire country cursing them as parents of the woman responsible for all the toy dogs suddenly riding in oversized purses through grocery stores.

Seriously, though they’ve got to have seen some other families who have 2nd generation or 3rd generation or nth generation super-wealth to deal with, and they may not like what they see. As nearly as I can tell, 4 billion lands a single person on the Forbes Top 100 Wealthiest Americans. That isn’t the 1%, that’s more like the 0.0001%.

Besides, maybe when they had nothing, they dreamed of making a difference in this world if they ever became wealthy, instead of just giving their children and grandchildren a life among the super-rich. I say more power to them.
Click to expand...
Please don’t point to Paris Hilton as an example of “old money.” She would be a ditz even if she was poor, so the money just puts her in the public eye where she’d have no audience without it.

We agree on the couple’s decision not to leave all of their money to their children. Their sudden money puts them into another category completely. I do not believe people like that have been around any other monied families, however. From their POV, it probably feels a bit unreal, frankly. And can you even imagine the taxes???
 
TheRealJuliane said:
Please don’t point to Paris Hilton as an example of “old money.” She would be a ditz even if she was poor, so the money just puts her in the public eye where she’d have no audience without it.

We agree on the couple’s decision not to leave all of their money to their children. Their sudden money puts them into another category completely. I do not believe people like that have been around any other monied families, however. From their POV, it probably feels a bit unreal, frankly. And can you even imagine the taxes???
Click to expand...
No, I’m not saying that Paris Hilton ought to be the poster child for the rich, nor for blondes, nor for owners of small dogs, nor for American women. I do think that it is close to impossible to be in the business the husband is in without having any social interaction with other very wealthy people. Few people lay down 4 B and then send their kid to a public school. It is very possible to meet a certain number of people with huge trusts that they didn’t earn and to conclude that this is more temptation than the average person ought to have on their shoulders.
 
IF my DH and I were able to have a true legacy to leave- we’ll see how the businesses keep doing!- we are in agreement the kids don’t get any until they were 40 or so, if we leave them anything. They need to learn a work ethic, and the value of a dollar. How to live on one’s means, etc.

Where we live, the public school is better than the private shrug

I don’t think there is anything wrong with doing what they want with the money- it’s THEIR money, and the children are not entitled to it just because they are their children.
 
I also believe that it is theirs to do with as they wish. My parents are not rich by any means, but they are comfortable. I really have no idea what their net worth is and to be quite honest, I don’t care. When I call my mom on her birthday or anniversary (or my step-dad) I usually ask if they’re going out to spend my inheritance. I don’t think any parent is under an obligation to leave their children anything. It makes me so sad to see parents live a miserly life and not enjoy their retirement because they want to have something to leave their kids.

My thought is enjoy life. Do what you always wanted to do but couldn’t because you were rearing children and had to work. If there’s anything left, great; but if not, I don’t depend on there being an inheritance to take care of my life.

I do realize that the OP is referring to an article in which there is immense wealth, but the sentiment is the same regardless of the wealth ration.
 
I come from a wealthy family. The deal is that the kids get matching or doubling (or more) compensation for anything they earn themselves. Certain “morally good” endeavors which are not paid well by society are rewarded. So, being a nurse or a volunteer “earns” more than being a dermatologist. Seems to be a good solution to the problem. Personally, I prefer not to be materialistic. My work easily supports my needs, so I donate my trust income to charities. I am very grateful for the choices that I have in life.
 
Uh, please send one billion dollars to me at:

Ed
Box 1
Anywhere USA

I’m not greedy 🙂

Ed
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top