I like the theme here. Active wealth is one that is both managed directly, but also one that is working for and within a given community - this social aspect of work and wealth being an active social enterprise is something that is highly obscured or even unseen when talking about aristocracy of yesteryear.
While probably meant to portray them in a bad light, one of the characters on Downtown Abbey (I happened to catch it on tv as it was left on absent-mindely) responded to someone complaining about a new footman being hired that it was their duty to the local area to provide work. Noblesse oblige was really the meaning behind the system, and even when portrayed as aloof or exploitative, it doesn't really stick for the reasons you outline.
Saw a trailer the other day for a movie about Milton Hershey that Angel Studios was putting out. Around Thanksgiving I think, but the trailer seemed to really lean into the duties one has towards your workers, their families, your community, etc. We'll see.
Excellent and insightful article. I have always bern interested in «passive» income streams. But as you rightfully have discovered, active stewardship indeed produce the right long term incentives. Ownership of land and local businesses is the right way to go. However the phenomena of family owned businesses where the first generation starts it, the second scales and builds it and the third one throws it all away is a common occurrence. That being said, there are lots of examples in Europe and Japan of several hundred year old family owned businesses, like Beretta. Great article!
I like the theme here. Active wealth is one that is both managed directly, but also one that is working for and within a given community - this social aspect of work and wealth being an active social enterprise is something that is highly obscured or even unseen when talking about aristocracy of yesteryear.
While probably meant to portray them in a bad light, one of the characters on Downtown Abbey (I happened to catch it on tv as it was left on absent-mindely) responded to someone complaining about a new footman being hired that it was their duty to the local area to provide work. Noblesse oblige was really the meaning behind the system, and even when portrayed as aloof or exploitative, it doesn't really stick for the reasons you outline.
Oh that was Lord Grantham, from what I remember, and it was meant to be a positive portrayal. Great example. We need more of that
Saw a trailer the other day for a movie about Milton Hershey that Angel Studios was putting out. Around Thanksgiving I think, but the trailer seemed to really lean into the duties one has towards your workers, their families, your community, etc. We'll see.
He is an interesting guy
Excellent and insightful article. I have always bern interested in «passive» income streams. But as you rightfully have discovered, active stewardship indeed produce the right long term incentives. Ownership of land and local businesses is the right way to go. However the phenomena of family owned businesses where the first generation starts it, the second scales and builds it and the third one throws it all away is a common occurrence. That being said, there are lots of examples in Europe and Japan of several hundred year old family owned businesses, like Beretta. Great article!
Thank you! Yes, this is always a risk, though I think it can be mitigated with the right family culture
Thanks for leaving this one open. You are spot on.