

The Poorest Rich Kids in the World - wallflower
http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/the-poorest-rich-kids-in-the-world-20130812?print=true

======
s_q_b
Throughout my life, I've had a larger than average exposure to the children of
the very wealthy. What strikes me is that they seem afflicted with the same
existential angst that plagues us all from time to time. They wonder what
everything means, what the point of doing anything at all, much less something
great, truly _is_. In short, they are always in search of meaning, and never
find a final goal in which to place their faith.

The main difference is that for you or I, even if we slip into nihilism,
depression, or hedonism for temporary spells, reality always demands our
attention. Even mere millions last at most years if truly spent with the
abandon the "fuck it all" lifestyle requires. For the children of the very
wealthy, they can escape into these distractions for years, possibly forever.

Some of these children manage to claw their way free of the meaningless merry-
go-round of booze, drugs, sex, travel, and wild purchases. Anecdotally, the
things that seem to assist this process are, in no particular order: a family
mythology as found in families such as the Rockefellers, newly discovered
religious faith, restrictions upon their finances, a hobby or profession with
it's own addictive qualities (such as running, or programming), or a
significant other that provides a surrogate middle class mindset.

It's a bizarre situation, but wealth can kill just as surely as it can
protect. I don't have the answer here, but if you're fortunate enough to make
it big, spend some serious time thinking about how to protect your children
and your grandchildren from the downside of your success.

~~~
taeric
The majority of these stories that I am familiar with could have used the
"spend some serious time and _personal_ resources on your kids." Money and
outside resources seems a poor substitute for good parental relationships.

------
fatjokes
I really enjoy the quote from Warren Buffet, who felt the perfect amount to
leave children is "enough money so that they would feel they could do
anything, but not so much that they could do nothing."

------
rudedogg
Born Rich

The film was described as "a documentary on children of the insanely rich,
directed by one of their own, Johnson & Johnson Inc. heir Jamie Johnson." It
consists primarily of Johnson interviewing his friends and peers about the
experience of living life free of financial constraints. These interviews are
offset by Johnson's exploration of his own experience and family. By the end
of the film, Luke Weil became unhappy with his portrayal and sued
unsuccessfully.

[http://www.hulu.com/watch/174635](http://www.hulu.com/watch/174635)

~~~
yitchelle
Posting a youtube link for those not able to access the hulu link (ie you are
no in the US).

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xhuSxyHWRw](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xhuSxyHWRw)

------
hkmurakami
Andrew Carnegie write in his essay "wealth" that excessive inheritances can
only be a burden to the heirs. this story certainly demonstrates that.

~~~
wyager
No, this story demonstrates that an "excessive" inheritance is a burden to a
certain set of heirs. It tells us nothing about the effect of "excessive"
inheritances on other heirs.

Let's not take sample sizes of one and use them to justify assertions about
large groups, shall we?

~~~
RodericDay
this superficial cynicism really depresses me

I know so many kids toiling away thinking that "there's only the ladder", that
the idea that there's happiness outside of money is some sort of opiate to
weed out the less driven. ask people who went to prep schools man, ask rich
people themselves. money doesn't make people happy.

------
dkulchenko
People occasionally scoff at "money doesn't buy happiness", but it's an
incredibly true statement.

There are homeless people who are objectively happier (and often, healthier)
than some of the richest people in the world.

~~~
taeric
I feel this needs a ridiculously large _citation needed_. It is trotted out a
ton, but I can't help but hear the lyrics from Everclear's "I will buy you a
new life"

    
    
        I hate those people who love to tell you
        Money is the root of all that kills
        They have never been poor
        They have never had the joy of a welfare christmas

~~~
ijk
"When plotted against log income, life evaluation rises steadily. Emotional
well-being also rises with log income, but there is no further progress beyond
an annual income of∼$75,000. Low income exacerbates the emotional pain
associated with such misfortunes as divorce, ill health, and being alone. We
conclude that high income buys life satisfaction but not happiness, and that
low income is associated both with low life evaluation and low emotional well-
being."

Daniel Kahneman and Angus Deaton "High income improves evaluation of life but
not emotional well-being" PNAS 2010 107: 16489-16493.
[http://www.pnas.org/content/107/38/16489](http://www.pnas.org/content/107/38/16489)

~~~
theorique
Presumably this number is an average across many different geographical areas.
So I am curious about how this number was influenced by purchasing power and
other factors.

That is, $75K gets you and your family a _lot_ more space in a exurb or rural
area compared to an expensive city like NY or SF. Does this matter? Or does a
family spending most of their $75K income renting a 500 sf apartment in NY
experience the same level of happiness as an equivalent family in a remote
suburb with much more living space.

(Obviously, you could ask a similar question about other factors that change
dramatically with geography - e.g. public/private school quality, cost of
food, cost of leisure activities, access to culture, public services, etc)

~~~
wallflower
> Or does a family spending most of their $75K income renting a 500 sf
> apartment in NY experience the same level of happiness as an equivalent
> family in a remote suburb with much more living space.

There has been some research done around how some people who live in cities
(especially those who can be paid a relatively high livable wage) are those
who want the local optimum of their available choices (maximizers). [1,2]

This tends to make them possibly less happy than those who have less choices.
For instance, if you live in London or NYC, there are hundreds of options for
nightlife and entertainment - and you might want to be somewhere else even if
you are at club X (fear of missing out).

But the reality is:

"Happiness is complicated. Wherever you live." [3]

[1]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Paradox_of_Choice:_Why_More...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Paradox_of_Choice:_Why_More_Is_Less)

[2] [http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/2012/02/14/the-real-value-
of-d...](http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/2012/02/14/the-real-value-of-
diversity/)

[3] [http://www.theatlanticcities.com/arts-and-
lifestyle/2011/10/...](http://www.theatlanticcities.com/arts-and-
lifestyle/2011/10/urban-rural-happiness-debate/290/)

~~~
theorique
Good points.

Urban dwellers - especially high-income ones who _chose_ to live there (as
opposed to people who were simply born into working class NYC or SF and
stayed) - often have idealistic, maximizer notions of "taking advantage of
_everything_ the city has to offer". Which is impossible and absurd in even a
medium sized city, let alone NYC, London, SF.

------
bilalq
The article is a lot more readable if you remove print=true from the query
string. If you want to avoid the paginated mess, setting font-family to
Georgia and width to 60% makes it pretty easy on the eyes as well.

------
known
"The only way to succeed is to make people hate you." \--Josef von Sternberg

------
temphn

      The twins' father, Walker Inman, 57, lumbered from the 
      mansion, his tattooed sleeves visible under a black T-
      shirt, drinking his morning rum ... He'd been full of 
      dangerous mischief since he was a child. As a 13-year-old 
      orphan in 1965 taken in by his aunt Doris Duke, Walker – 
      then called "Skipper" – had romped around her lavish 
      14,000-square-foot Hawaiian estate without regard for 
      property or propriety
    

That single word "orphan" is the most important part of this article. The
reason this piece is so bizarre is that the sorts of traits that allow you to
build great fortunes in business[1] are anti-correlated with those that result
in becoming a tattooed, drunk, abusive, morbidly obese, criminally-inclined
drug addict. Put another way, the kind of guy who would build up a fortune
like that would be unlikely to have a biological son like this. In America
we're supposed to pretend that DNA doesn't matter, and that you can only pass
down looks/height and not brains/behavior, but reality doesn't work like that
[2,3,4]. Babies put up for adoption at birth in particular tend to
disproportionately be children of parents with low impulse control and mental
disorders, and at least some of that appears to be due to the genetics of the
parents above and beyond the orphanage conditions [5]. Sounds harsh, but good
to know if you're considering adopting.

[1] Celebrities and athletes are of course excluded from this sentence. They
don't become wealthy through scaling businesses/managing people, and as such
have a much higher incidence of behavioral issues. Many NBA and NFL athletes
are bankrupt after a few years out of the league, in fact.

[2]
[http://www.yale.edu/scan/GT_2004_NRN.pdf](http://www.yale.edu/scan/GT_2004_NRN.pdf)

[3] [http://www.amazon.com/The-Blank-Slate-Modern-
Denial/dp/01420...](http://www.amazon.com/The-Blank-Slate-Modern-
Denial/dp/0142003344)

[4]
[http://www.zo.utexas.edu/courses/kalthoff/bio346/PDF/PowerPo...](http://www.zo.utexas.edu/courses/kalthoff/bio346/PDF/PowerPoints/15Pres.pdf)

[5]
[http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1737667,00.ht...](http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1737667,00.html)

    
    
      The Minnesota psychologist and her colleagues found that 
      disparity could be due as often to innate factors such as 
      perinatal care or his birth parents' genes. "The 
      deleterious effects may quite possibly have come before the 
      adoption ever took place," Keyes, the study's lead 
      researcher, says.

~~~
azernik
Did you read any of the bits in between your ellipses?

    
    
      ...stinking rich from three trust funds: one from his
      father, Walker Inman Sr., heir to an Atlanta cotton
      fortune and stepson to American Tobacco Company founder
      "Buck" Duke; one from his mother, Georgia Fagan; the third
      from his grandmother, Buck's widow Nanaline Duke, who left
      the bulk of her $45 million estate to her little grandson.
    

The money involved was made by people with the same genes as Walter Inman, Jr.

~~~
wavefunction
And his father also died from "consumption" or "getting too fucked up too
often" disease.

I've had some exposure to the "very wealthy" and they're just as fucked up at
a rate as someone you might find in the trailer park tradition. It's often a
factor of luck.

~~~
Amadou
Consumption is a synonym for tuberculosis, nothing else.

