Have to be? Or tend to be. I think we often overlook that richer families tend to have a lot better parenting. It's not just about money. Good parenting is arguably more important than being wealthy.
> A huge amount of it simply comes from having parents that make you do homework, etc.
That's not something exclusive to rich people. I got a lot of encouragement as a kid from my parents to learn stuff and read books, without them being rich (grew up in Romania).
Money isn't the big factor in your argument, quality parenting is (which I agree is important).
There is always an excuse. The parents are professors, or upper middle class dentists, or your mom does charity for United Way and managed to become the leader of the charitable organization and managed to meet some exec from IBM. Given how diverse these professions are and that they basically describe a slightly upper middle class family, im gonna guess their children account for more than 1%.
> Many rich famlies don't believe in supporting their kids
What does that mean? No prep school, health care, high school, parenting, nannying, family trips to Europe? Are the kids just left on the street?
People I know who have done that stopped supporting kids after college, at least for awhile, or older generations left it to their kid to work their way through college - not a viable option these days. But the first 18 years have all the benefits of wealth.
And anyway, how many families are we talking about? Go to the local rich neighborhood and ask - my guess is you won't find more than maybe 1% or less.
> 86% billionaires of our generation didn’t have billionaire parents.
How many of them had hundred-millionaire parents? The way wealth has grown for the super rich over the past few decades is staggering. Children of wealthy parents attaining far greater wealth than their parents has been the norm in America for generations now, it's not some exceptional accomplishment.
> The children of the wealthy benefit from connections obtained while their parents are still alive. They receive a head start from birth.
what about the children of parents who has good genes? If a child is athletic/healthy/good-looking, because their parents had good genes (and the good luck for a good combination), do you also resent that the child has a head-start?
parents helping the children get ahead is natural, and should be encouraged imho.
> "having rich parents" is a personal condition... you cannot choose condition, universe does not work like that - and every second we discuss income inequality is a wasted second. Thus we end up with hard work option
Non-sequitor.
Having rich parents can't be chosen: true.
Having rich parents (almost) be the only factor for success can be chosen, through economic policy.
There is absolutely no reason to ignore income inequality. Other than if you're one of the (extremely) few benefiting from it.
> There was always food, 2 parents, a roof over my head, education. I had so much luck that when I made a whole bunch of mistakes (to the point that I was hiding in a corner speaking to a heroin addict), I could call up Mum and Dad and move home.
Interestingly, this is one of the biggest predictors for incoming:
> If the income factors all seem obvious, this next finding may be more surprising: Your parents' marriage and family stability might be the biggest determinant [of income] of all. Growing up in a single-parent household significantly hurts a child's chance of upward income mobility, the study finds.
So sure, I guess generosity is all the rage, but decent families is better in the long run.
> But, of course, it's not just a matter of dollars and cents. It's also a matter of letters and words. Affluent parents talk to their kids three more hours a week on average than poor parents, which is critical during a child's formative early years. That's why, as Stanford professor Sean Reardon explains, "rich students are increasingly entering kindergarten much better prepared to succeed in school than middle-class students," and they're staying that way.
I agree... that's why I work a traditional 9-5 instead of traveling the country with my wife and kids in an RV and working 15 hours per week remotely.
I view wealth not only as an exercise in creating income streams for myself when I retire, but as a means of ensuring that my descendants have the best possible chance at success.
Have to be? Or tend to be. I think we often overlook that richer families tend to have a lot better parenting. It's not just about money. Good parenting is arguably more important than being wealthy.
reply