Why is this newsworthy? Children usually are the executors and main recipients of living wills and wills at death.<p>I think Warren’s 2006 pledge, to give away most of his fortunes is a lofty goal. There are plenty of good causes that need cash.
> My children, along with their father, have a common belief that dynastic wealth, though both legal and common in much of the world including the United States, is not desirable. Moreover, we have had many opportunities to observe that being rich does not make you either wise <i>or</i> evil. We also agree that capitalism – whatever its weaknesses, including the vast disparities in wealth and political influence that it delivers somewhat capriciously to its citizens – has worked wonders and continues to work wonders.<p>> The United States is exhibit A for that belief, and the four of us feel lucky that we beat very long odds when we were born in the U.S.
This submission title is editorialized.<p>The main title: "Today, Warren E. Buffett converted 1,600 A shares into 2,400,000 B shares in order to give these B shares to four family foundations: 1,500,000 shares to The Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation and 300,000 shares to each of The Sherwood Foundation, The Howard G. Buffett Foundation and NoVo Foundation."
Hmm... 2006, huh. I wonder what happened then for it to change. Well tax evasion has always been the main game with these foundations. But it's a strange statement from earlier about the disbursement of funds through the Gates Foundation. There are claims here against Dynastic wealth yet similarly to the Emerson Collective these claims seem hard to substantiate or just tax write off donations to his children. Though it is important to note that Buffet has given $50 billion of his own wealth to charitable causes.<p>Personally, I don't like to think of this as some conspiracy or oligarchic cause. In many ways it could be the billions his children are inheriting seems like a lot because it is. Though, mind you, they are in their 70s. Some are obese, the likelihood of living past a certain age is also hard to factor, but not impossible. Most people like to see their children at least live a good life, it's hard to blame them for it. But at what amount does this become questionable? These are all questions people ask and have asked over the decades.<p>This generation of billionaires have not been born into extreme levels of wealth. Though many have asked what would happen if this were to continue. In Korea generational wealth has existed through various families known as the Chaebols the word itself is a loan word for Japanese known as Zaibatsu. Extreme levels of income inequality in Korea and an economy controlled by a few powerful mega-corporations whose families made connections to one another through marriage.<p>Well, it's impossible to tell what the future holds for these children. But for the average Korean citizen they have become indentured servants. A broken social structure and a ladder that for many is impossible to climb. I guess it's enough with the anecdotes. And even if it got better should a family or a handful of families control an entire countries economy? I don't think so.<p>I do wonder though, can a family spend even a billion dollars in their lifetime? It seems unrealistic to think of that way. And why should any family even have control of such level of wealth. In their lifespan have they done anything to deserve this amount? It seems impossible to think of, much less inheriting it.<p>It can seem appealing to people to be a billionaire or to have an immense amount of wealth, but it's not. It's an isolating life and an even smaller social circle. Most of no friends and it can be almost impossible to build relationships with others even in these circles. But who knows maybe they've never experienced this before. But I've met with aging billionaires before and their children. Their life stories are just kind of depressing. For a lot of them their money is the only tangible thing they have and that's not really a healthy thing.