I’m interested in how long money stays in rich families-take the Rockefellers-Old JD Rockefeller had such a vast fortune it could never be dissipated. But lesser folk can and do lose their fortunes. Take the Sears family-they are middle class now-the money is gone.
The usual situation is that the following generations lose interest in working hard-so they lose their drive…and eventually, their fortune.
Come on. You don’t seriously believe this, do you?
Alright, tell me something that has not been thought of yet.
Just kidding. That did not come across right - I was trying to say that major innovations these days seem to not come from a person, but from companies. When was the last time a major invention was attributed to a person? The wealthy families of old made their fortunes by being a lumber baron, by the railroads, publishing, captains of industry, being in the right place at the right time with the right factory. Seems most of those big-time opportunities are gone.
Of course there will always be innovation and invention, but will the people responsible be able to reap the rewards in the same caliber as before? Excluding flash in the pan stuff like Facebook.
Nope. The reward will being a member of the board of directors because your buddy the CEO hired you, and/or being the CEO of another company with him on the board of directors. It makes running a company into the ground and stripping its assets for yourself much more practical, when you know you have friends who will immediate re-hire you into a similar position despite the fact that you just destroyed a company. That’s a major reason high level corporate officials get away with doing so much damage to their own corporations for their own profit; they know each other, and are part of essentially a semi-closed managerial caste that looks out for itself at the expense of everyone else.
They may come from a person, but the company that owns the rights to his/her discovery takes virtually all of the profits.
It’s complex and yet very simple. Absent massive inherited wealth or stumbling on a very good idea, the way to become wealthy or at least upper middle class is as follows:
-
Get a good education. It opens doors both from a contacts perspective and getting over the qualification threshold.
-
Work well with others. You simply have to be able to network and collaborate. Not just in your job but in your life. If you’re someone that people like to be with then you will tend to do well. If not, it helps if you have a very specialized skill sets.
-
Work hard. Never stop, always be on look out for opportunity for yourself and your network.
-
Save and be frugal. You don’t need a new car or a new suit. Save, save, save and save again.
-
Be Humble. You didn’t make it all on your own. You worked hard but you got some breaks. Never forget that even when you are at the top.
-
Appreciate your family. They gave you the foundation and security you needed.
My view. I’m an immigrant who came over with 500 bucks but with a supportive family back home. I was given many opportunities by god people who had faith in me. I let several down but I kept going and did my best. I try to learn from my many mistakes.
I would be considered wealthy by most butnim relatively young so I’m not rich yet!
I am on several boards and it doesn’t really work like that. However, see my points 2 and 3 above. Try and incorporate them into your own life and you’ll be surprised what happens.
And Microsoft is there by sheer sleaze, apparently, while Steve Jobs is a brilliant venture capitalist…
I’m waiting for a mad genius in basement lab somewhere to lick this geoengineering thing, and start selling rainclouds and gasoline from a spigot in his front yard. Give it time!
I’d like to follow up on this point. But first, can you give me an example of something you consider a “major invention”?
I would disagree with the OPs classification of various fortunes and how they were made, as they appear to make subjective / personal preference distinctions for several of them.
However I can think immediately of at least two people who became billionaires just by essentially managing someone else’s company.
Eric Schmidt was not one of the original founders of Google or one of the people involved at all in its creation or the technology underlying the search engine. Brin and Paige hired him because they thought he’d be good at managing their company, and would essentially serve as a sort of tie-breaking vote between the two of them when they couldn’t agree. They rewarded him handsomely with ownership positions in Google which have made Schmidt a billionaire (not as rich as Brin and Paige, though.)
Likewise, Steve Ballmer was hired after a few dozen employees already worked at Microsoft and is not considered a founder (that’s Bill Gates and Paul Allen.)
As a general rule, most CEOs seem to be able to run their companies without destroying them.
What’s the point? I am sure for every “Pentium was invented by Intel”, and “Windows was invented by Microsoft”, someone can dig up who actually had the idea in the beginning. Scant few of them realized fortunes from their inventions - they may have done alright, but their company certainly made more than they did. Inventing today usually means developing something under the umbrella of a corporation that has resources you need to bring your idea to reality, and to market.
You’re right. What’s the point?
Since your omniscience and precognition allows you to know the contents of my future posts before they are written and rebut them proactively, what would be the point of an actual discussion?
Why the snark? This is IMHO - I provided my opinion not once, but two times. You are welcome to disagree, but you have contributed, let’s see… nothing so far. I did not know I was supposed to cut-up other people’s meat in IMHO - I will do better next time. If you have an opinion, let’s have it.
Savings and inheritance. Count generations: you, at a certain income bracket, sets aside a reasonable amount every payday during your working life. Your children and their children will then continue to shepherd that wealth until your live descendants already have an income or net worth considered top bracket.
I went the the Berkshire Hathaway annual meeting last year (B shares are now cheap thanks to the split) and its like a Bruce Springsteen concert if Bruce were an 81 year old billionaire and his band was the 85 year old guy he made all his money with - and of course, Springsteen fans were interested in money and not music.
And that’s their formula. Buffet and Munger almost never take significant risk
Honestly, both of them have personality up the yango, but it comes from being crotchety old men. I doubt anyone under the age of 75 could pull off Charlie Munger’s charisma…
What they had was smarts, hard work, frugality, and PATIENCE.
Depends on the idea. Some inventing is done by a bunch of engineers getting together, starting a company and raising some funds.
Other inventions are created by some guys in the R&D group with access to all the resources at a major corporations.
Was Mammon one of them? 
Here’s the thing. Most people will never be “rich” because they simply don’t have the talent. Here’s a couple of known paths to getting rich:
Trader at a Wall Street investment bank - Take out some student loans. Go to Wharton business school. Submit an application to Goldman Sachs or Deutsch Bank as an assistant trader. Work your ass off for a few years until you become a trader.
Become a successful lawyer - Similar career path. Go to a top law school. Graduate in the top 5% of your class. Get a job at an AmLaw 100 law firm. Work your ass off until you make partner in 5-10 years.
Invent a hot web site - Learn C++, Java, .Net, Hadoop or whatever the heck the kids are doing these days. Move out to San Jose, CA and convince some VCs to fund your company. Build some killer web app and exit with a couple million.
Become a professional athlete - Practice, practice, practice.
Become a C-level executive. - Join a company and bust your ass for 30 years, gradually working your way to middle management, then executive level positions, then finally CEO, CFO or whatever.
What the F is wrong with you people?
This was a simple, polite request for clarification of terminology in the interest of furthering the discussion. That’s so any discussion that follows is based a common understanding.
This reply:
Would have been fine if it just said “I consider the Pentium and Windows to be major inventions.” Then we could have engaged in discussion on the point of whether “major inventions” are produced solely by corporations. Instead, the reply is based on your mistaken conjecture about where my discussion would have headed.
Like I said. You’re right. What’s the point?