I was staying in the home of a friend this week, and on a cushion were embroidered the words "I'm spending my children's inheritance".
Of course, this was only meant as a point of humour, but the thought got me thinking. A century ago many families would think in the context of generational wealth. One generation would leave an inheritance to the next generation. That generation would increase the inheritance, and hand it on to the next, and so on. Over three or four generations a family fortune was established. Consider the Rothchilds - or the Kennedy's.
Many third world countries are now thinking this way. One generation would break out of poverty - perhaps moving to America, or New Zealand and opening a fast food shop. They would know that it may be the next generation after them who would reap the benefits. Our recent Mayor, Peter Chin, is the son of parents who ran a fish and chip shop. But they paid for his education. They thought generationally.
So consider this; many westerners are now "spending their children's inheritance", thereby making them "start accumulating wealth over again". While many third world families are increasing wealth over generations. So in a generation or two's time, who will be rich, and who will be poor?
Something to do with a spirit of selfishness that prevails today?
ReplyDeleteJeff Law
I like your thinking. One of the financial frustrations of being a late twenties person in NZ is just that - not only an older generation that is not thinking about generational wealth - but a society. It seems to me that people in our age bracket are expected to pay for not only their own start up in life ie:education/home/health/marriage/family, but also for the retirement of older generations while at the same time trying to build an inheritance for our own children. From what I've seen a number of people in their late 20's early 30's are thinking about building something for their families and their childrens' future, possibly a little more like our grandparents generation?
ReplyDeleteZelle :)
I remember reading many years ago a diary excerpt written by a Dalmatian woman who had gone to NZ with her husband in the early 1900's to work on the gum fields in Northland. One of her comments has stayed with me to this day. She wrote that although she and her husband were living in a tent in almost abject poverty, their children would not have to live like that. The money they made on the gumfields would provide for the education and housing of the future generation; their children. And it did! When I first met one of the "children" he was the proud owner of a small dairy farm just south of Auckland!!
ReplyDeleteYou are absolutely right GL, we need to return to providing for the generation(s) to come!!
(1Ti 5:8) Moreover, anyone who does not provide for his own people, especially for his family, has disowned the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.
I believe that "family" refers not just to immediate family but to generational family as well.
Yoni Rishton