I debated the Patagonia altruist marketing play with friends.
The consensus was that if you were the kids, you'd much rather have the post-tax cash in your bank account. :-)
The consensus was that if you were the kids, you'd much rather have the post-tax cash in your bank account. :-)
It seems incredibly presumptuous to assume you know how the minds of children of billionaires work and what they aspire to have.
This calls to mind a scene in the series "Succession" that I can't find now. The father and owner of the company is considering selling the company and cashing out, and his children, who have all been fighting for years to become his key successor, are up in arms about it, despite the fact that they would all become cash billionaires due to the shares in the company they already own. The gist is that having billions in cash effectively makes you a nobody compared to the person actually running a multi billion dollar company. As the leaders of a global media company, you're somebody important, compared to just some schmuck with a billion dollars. Then again, these characters are all have deep insecurity living in the shadow of their father, and he plays them all like a fiddle to keep them fighting each other for his approval.
> Up to a certain point, more money doesn't make your life materially better.
> It seems incredibly presumptuous to assume you know how the minds of children of billionaires work and what they aspire to have.
Then again, I'm far from a billionaire, so perhaps there exists a valley of money disillusionment that I'm currently in, and more money starts getting desirable again further up the wealth ladder.
Apparently, you misspoke because you're now limiting your view on the value of marginal dollars to your view (v. a general truth above).
And what is the PV of that board seat at the family controlled charity/business that wasn't affected by an inheritance tax?