• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

15 Tycoons Who Won't Leave Their Fortunes to Their Kids

It seems like kind of a dick move if you ask me. Some of these guys could easily afford to leave their children millions of dollars at the very least and still have ludicrous amounts of money left over to give to charity.
 
Last edited:
It seems like kind of a dick move if you ask me. Some of these guys could easily afford to leave their children millions of dollars at the very least and still have ludicrous amounts of money left over to give to charity.

Well, that's one of the big downsides to having a lot of money, for some people. It turns them into assholes. (or maybe they were already assholes, which is what facilitated their ability to make money). Of course, it could be that the kids are assholes too, but still, to disinherit them is a move which denotes either a really cold human, or a completely dysfunctional family dynamic at play.
 
It seems like kind of a dick move if you ask me. Some of these guys could easily afford to leave their children millions of dollars at the very least and still have ludicrous amounts of money left over to give to charity.

It is their money to do with as they desire. I do know of a local mufti-millionaire who gave each of his 4 kids a million dollars when he sold out the plant that his father and he had built but the kids felt was beneath them to work in and learn its operations to take it over. He told them that was all he would ever give them so to spend it wisely. Within a year, 3 of the 4 were broke. The 4th had just put it all in the bank because she wasn't sure how to invest it. When he died, the 4th got the rest.
 
It is their money to do with as they desire. I do know of a local mufti-millionaire who gave each of his 4 kids a million dollars when he sold out the plant that his father and he had built but the kids felt was beneath them to work in and learn its operations to take it over. He told them that was all he would ever give them so to spend it wisely. Within a year, 3 of the 4 were broke. The 4th had just put it all in the bank because she wasn't sure how to invest it. When he died, the 4th got the rest.

Ironic, isn't it, that the guy who didn't share all his wealth with his children evenly benefitted from his father giving him his share of the business he and his son built. He obviously didn't learn any lessons from his dad.
 
It is their money to do with as they desire. I do know of a local mufti-millionaire who gave each of his 4 kids a million dollars when he sold out the plant that his father and he had built but the kids felt was beneath them to work in and learn its operations to take it over. He told them that was all he would ever give them so to spend it wisely. Within a year, 3 of the 4 were broke. The 4th had just put it all in the bank because she wasn't sure how to invest it. When he died, the 4th got the rest.

It is theirs to do with whatever they wish. That being said, in the case of the man you mentioned, he was using his money as a control over his children, which certainly seems to be common. What his children learned from his "lesson", is that they are only worth (to him) whether or not they are smart. What a horrible legacy to leave to someone whom you supposedly love.
 
It is theirs to do with whatever they wish. That being said, in the case of the man you mentioned, he was using his money as a control over his children, which certainly seems to be common. What his children learned from his "lesson", is that they are only worth (to him) whether or not they are smart. What a horrible legacy to leave to someone whom you supposedly love.

But at the same time you want to make sure you don't love them too much. If you really do love your children you will do your best to make sure you are doing the best for them, and that doesn't necessarily mean setting them up for life. If you do leave everything to them, you may not be doing them any favors. Kind of like the parent who is more of a friend to their kids than a parent.
 
Ironic, isn't it, that the guy who didn't share all his wealth with his children evenly benefitted from his father giving him his share of the business he and his son built. He obviously didn't learn any lessons from his dad.

Perhaps, or perhaps it was because he sold the business instead of passing it on because none of his kids had any interest in the business whatsoever, so the only reason he had all that money in the first place was because he wanted to make sure the business continued and the employees had jobs. I sort of knew one of his sons. I was told that all the boys felt that it was beneath them and were embarrassed by their dad who actually worked along side his workers in their plant until his body gave out. Of the one I did know, that seems about right. He was definitely a piece of work. Last I heard, he was doing rehab for cocaine addiction.
 
But at the same time you want to make sure you don't love them too much. If you really do love your children you will do your best to make sure you are doing the best for them, and that doesn't necessarily mean setting them up for life. If you do leave everything to them, you may not be doing them any favors. Kind of like the parent who is more of a friend to their kids than a parent.

I agree with you, and I don't mean to imply that loving them means that you support them financially. What I am saying is that people use their money to control their children, and that treating them this way tells the child that your love has conditions placed on it.
 
Weather they acknowledge it or not, it shows they all have a fundamental
knowledge of Human nature.
People don't appreciate gifts like something they earn.
I suspect all of them paid for all of the education their children wanted,
and none are starting out with college debt.
 
It is theirs to do with whatever they wish. That being said, in the case of the man you mentioned, he was using his money as a control over his children, which certainly seems to be common. What his children learned from his "lesson", is that they are only worth (to him) whether or not they are smart. What a horrible legacy to leave to someone whom you supposedly love.

......or he left it to the one who showed the most responsibility with the hope that they would have it to help out the ones who were the most irresponsible with it. Never know what goes on in the mind of a crazy old rich guy. :shrug:
 
Perhaps, or perhaps it was because he sold the business instead of passing it on because none of his kids had any interest in the business whatsoever, so the only reason he had all that money in the first place was because he wanted to make sure the business continued and the employees had jobs. I sort of knew one of his sons. I was told that all the boys felt that it was beneath them and were embarrassed by their dad who actually worked along side his workers in their plant until his body gave out. Of the one I did know, that seems about right. He was definitely a piece of work. Last I heard, he was doing rehab for cocaine addiction.

First - to clarify - I was referring originally to the fact the "grandfather" gave his part of the business he and his son, the "father", built together to the his son. His son, the "father" in your story, didn't do the same for his children - that is the irony and the lesson not learned that I was referring to.

Secondly, says a lot to me about the parenting skills of the "father" that both he and you seem to have such poor opinions of how they turned out, at least the males whom he was a role model for. There are lots of people successful in business who aren't very successful in their personal lives - this appears to be one of them.
 
For people who are self-made I understand the sentiment.

For people who inherited their businesses... even if they still had to work hard to keep them going... I am less sympathetic.

As a general concept, though, I firmly believe that that which is earned is valued more than that which is given.
 
I agree with you, and I don't mean to imply that loving them means that you support them financially. What I am saying is that people use their money to control their children, and that treating them this way tells the child that your love has conditions placed on it.
Some people do indeed do that, absolutely.
 
First - to clarify - I was referring originally to the fact the "grandfather" gave his part of the business he and his son, the "father", built together to the his son. His son, the "father" in your story, didn't do the same for his children - that is the irony and the lesson not learned that I was referring to.

Secondly, says a lot to me about the parenting skills of the "father" that both he and you seem to have such poor opinions of how they turned out, at least the males whom he was a role model for. There are lots of people successful in business who aren't very successful in their personal lives - this appears to be one of them.
If the (grand)father and father literally did build/start the business together, I don't think that's the same as someone who inherits the whole business from their father. The father still had to work to make it successful. He only gained the other half when the (grand)father died.
 
Some people do indeed do that, absolutely.

In my line of work, I see it on a regular basis. We will have an older patient who is an insufferable prick to everyone around him, including nursing staff, but he/she is surrounded by family members who put up with their crap, and bow and scrape to them. It tells me that the patient has money, and uses it to wield control over his family. It's actually a pretty pathetic scene to watch.
 
It seems like kind of a dick move if you ask me. Some of these guys could easily afford to leave their children millions of dollars at the very least and still have ludicrous amounts of money left over to give to charity.

They could. Perhaps the choice was made because they didn't want their kids to be useless trust fund babies. As a father I would expect more for my kids too.
 
Silly/Stupid to waste the money that way, but it is theirs to give away. I'd be less interested if they said they're going to spend it on themselves before they go, but to give money away to the government, or to charities that have no real value (or often values) is just an utter waste so far as I'm concerned.
 
It seems like kind of a dick move if you ask me. Some of these guys could easily afford to leave their children millions of dollars at the very least and still have ludicrous amounts of money left over to give to charity.

Most of them sound like they are leaving there kids something, just not all or even half of it. If I was worth a billion dollars and only left my kid 5 million and gave the rest to charity, and my kid thought that I was being unfair to him, then he didn't deserve that 5 million.

Besides, if your dad is Bill Gates, or Warren Buffet, you should be able to make tons of money on your own. You have insane connections, you have parents that would probably be more than willing to invest in your education and any business venture you might want to attempt etc.

I agree with alot of these guys. If your child never has to work a day in there lives, then you really haven't done your job as a parent.
 
Most of them sound like they are leaving there kids something, just not all or even half of it. If I was worth a billion dollars and only left my kid 5 million and gave the rest to charity, and my kid thought that I was being unfair to him, then he didn't deserve that 5 million.

I'll say this... If I were your child and I found out that's what your will said....

1. You would likely never see me again
2. You would definitely never see any grandchild of yours
3. At the moment that you became unable to care for yourself you'd be going to the crappiest, most rundown and incompetent retirement home I could find.
 
To me it's like the story of the Little Red Hen. The hen was industrious, she intended to make a cake. She planted the grain and other items, she harvested the fixings, she mixed the ingredients and cooked them, then decorated the cake and set the table. At each phase she asked the other farm animals to help, and in every case they all refused. However, when the cake was done and sitting on the table they all wanted to eat some. The Little Red Hen said no, she was capable of doing that all by herself too.

A parent want's to take care of their children, but a parent should not spoil them by doing so. You house, feed, clothe and guide them, but you don't want to stifle their individual growth either. I can see a multi-millionaire paying for the children's upkeep and education, and even putting a little away for them to help them start out in life. But that's all they need!

Let them go out and build their own lives. What? You'd prefer they end up like a Paris Hilton, a filthy rich wastrel with hired managers to keep them that way? LOL ;) Now, if any of the children show interest and aptitude for the family business, that's different...they are working toward their own success.

Otherwise a wealthy person should do what's best for the nation or society that allowed him to gather his wealth, reinvest it in ways that allow that nation to grow.
 
Last edited:
Giving money to your kids...



Pros:

Helps them out
Gives them head start
Shows you care



Cons:

th
 
Back
Top Bottom