Faithless
03-16-2005, 08:33 AM
First-born children get better education: study (http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,12561871%255E29677,00.html)
OSLO: First-born children in Norway get better education and as adults are more successful in the job market than younger siblings, a Norwegian-US study showed.
First born now comes second in wealthy families (http://www.money.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2005/02/21/cbinh21.xml&menuId=242&sSheet=/money/2005/02/21/ixfrontbusiness.html)
The idea that the eldest son always inherits the bulk of a wealthy estate or family business is falling out of fashion, with many families dividing their assets more equally among siblings, a new study of Britain's rich has found.
Reuters * March 16, 2005
OSLO: First-born children in Norway get better education and as adults are more successful in the job market than younger siblings, a Norwegian-US study showed.
"It is the birth order and not necessarily the size of the family that is important," said economics professor Kjell Salvanes of the Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration. "It is better if you are the first born."
Salvanes and two colleagues from the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) based their study on census data of Norwegians born between 1912 and 1975.
The findings will be published in the Quarterly Journal of Economics, a Harvard publication, in May.
They found that younger siblings tend to get less schooling than their elders and then end up with lower pay on average and were more likely to be in part-time work, Salvanes said. The findings were likely to hold true in other countries, he said.
"In terms of educational attainment, if you are the fourth born instead of the first, you get almost one year less education, and that is quite a lot," Salvanes told Reuters.
And first-born children tend to weigh more at birth than their younger brothers and sisters, which is a good predictor for educational success, Salvanes said.
Children alone with two adults also tend to get more intellectual stimulation than children in large families who get less parental attention, he said.
First-born children seem to learn from teaching their younger siblings, contrary to the common notion that younger children benefit by learning from their elders, Salvanes said.
So does that mean big sisters really are smarter?
"Yes. It's hard to admit because I have older sisters," Salvanes said.
By Selina Mills (Filed: 21/02/2005)
The idea that the eldest son always inherits the bulk of a wealthy estate or family business is falling out of fashion, with many families dividing their assets more equally among siblings, a new study of Britain's rich has found.
The survey of both the old and new wealthy, released today by accountant Saffery Champness, found that the notion of the eldest son continuing the family line is still considered a "default option". But perpetuating the life of an estate and keeping control of a business have become the main goal rather than any deference to traditional concepts of primogeniture.
In interviews with 40 of Britain's wealthiest individuals, which were supported by a telephone poll of 1,000 affluent people, some said eldest sons were considered "less competent" than their siblings, or in cases of landed estates, not wanting to lead a country lifestyle.
Mike Beattie, chairman of Saffery Champness, said the rich were now more freethinking about planning how their heirs will handle wealth.
"People worry that great wealth will ruin a young life. They worry their children will lose the drive to make something of themselves, or marry the wrong people, and then have their wealth diluted, so they plan more carefully," he said. "Many of our clients, first generation or sixth generation money, want their children to enjoy money, but not be spoilt."
Michael Maslinski, who oversaw the study, said the research had picked up "significant changes" to the way inheritance is planned over the past 50 years and that there was now "more wealth than ever before to be passed on". The research also found that the majority of rich people believed that family members should no longer expect a job in the family company and few first-time entrepreneurs wanted to create a family dynasty.
But they also felt recipients of great wealth should be trained and prepared, and that if siblings did not receive as much as other members of the family they should have this decision fully explained. Many also found they were worried about "the sheer complexity, sensitivity and difficulty" of the decision-making process in managing their wealth.
One heir, who asked to remain anonymous, said the effort required to manage his wealth effectively was "immense". "I spend at least one day a week handling my assets," he said. "It sounds ridiculous and almost rude to complain, but I never knew how much time managing my own money would take. It's not something I think my children should do, unless they are ready for it."
Mr Beattie said he advised his clients that the most important aspect of inheritance is communication. "It's very hard to try to balance the interests of your children with the need to ensure your business or landed estate remains economically stable, professionally managed and relevant to the modern world," he said.
"But the need for transparency and communication for decisions is needed, so people don't feel unloved or unwanted. At the very least, leave a letter of explanation to be read after your death."
OSLO: First-born children in Norway get better education and as adults are more successful in the job market than younger siblings, a Norwegian-US study showed.
First born now comes second in wealthy families (http://www.money.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2005/02/21/cbinh21.xml&menuId=242&sSheet=/money/2005/02/21/ixfrontbusiness.html)
The idea that the eldest son always inherits the bulk of a wealthy estate or family business is falling out of fashion, with many families dividing their assets more equally among siblings, a new study of Britain's rich has found.
Reuters * March 16, 2005
OSLO: First-born children in Norway get better education and as adults are more successful in the job market than younger siblings, a Norwegian-US study showed.
"It is the birth order and not necessarily the size of the family that is important," said economics professor Kjell Salvanes of the Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration. "It is better if you are the first born."
Salvanes and two colleagues from the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) based their study on census data of Norwegians born between 1912 and 1975.
The findings will be published in the Quarterly Journal of Economics, a Harvard publication, in May.
They found that younger siblings tend to get less schooling than their elders and then end up with lower pay on average and were more likely to be in part-time work, Salvanes said. The findings were likely to hold true in other countries, he said.
"In terms of educational attainment, if you are the fourth born instead of the first, you get almost one year less education, and that is quite a lot," Salvanes told Reuters.
And first-born children tend to weigh more at birth than their younger brothers and sisters, which is a good predictor for educational success, Salvanes said.
Children alone with two adults also tend to get more intellectual stimulation than children in large families who get less parental attention, he said.
First-born children seem to learn from teaching their younger siblings, contrary to the common notion that younger children benefit by learning from their elders, Salvanes said.
So does that mean big sisters really are smarter?
"Yes. It's hard to admit because I have older sisters," Salvanes said.
By Selina Mills (Filed: 21/02/2005)
The idea that the eldest son always inherits the bulk of a wealthy estate or family business is falling out of fashion, with many families dividing their assets more equally among siblings, a new study of Britain's rich has found.
The survey of both the old and new wealthy, released today by accountant Saffery Champness, found that the notion of the eldest son continuing the family line is still considered a "default option". But perpetuating the life of an estate and keeping control of a business have become the main goal rather than any deference to traditional concepts of primogeniture.
In interviews with 40 of Britain's wealthiest individuals, which were supported by a telephone poll of 1,000 affluent people, some said eldest sons were considered "less competent" than their siblings, or in cases of landed estates, not wanting to lead a country lifestyle.
Mike Beattie, chairman of Saffery Champness, said the rich were now more freethinking about planning how their heirs will handle wealth.
"People worry that great wealth will ruin a young life. They worry their children will lose the drive to make something of themselves, or marry the wrong people, and then have their wealth diluted, so they plan more carefully," he said. "Many of our clients, first generation or sixth generation money, want their children to enjoy money, but not be spoilt."
Michael Maslinski, who oversaw the study, said the research had picked up "significant changes" to the way inheritance is planned over the past 50 years and that there was now "more wealth than ever before to be passed on". The research also found that the majority of rich people believed that family members should no longer expect a job in the family company and few first-time entrepreneurs wanted to create a family dynasty.
But they also felt recipients of great wealth should be trained and prepared, and that if siblings did not receive as much as other members of the family they should have this decision fully explained. Many also found they were worried about "the sheer complexity, sensitivity and difficulty" of the decision-making process in managing their wealth.
One heir, who asked to remain anonymous, said the effort required to manage his wealth effectively was "immense". "I spend at least one day a week handling my assets," he said. "It sounds ridiculous and almost rude to complain, but I never knew how much time managing my own money would take. It's not something I think my children should do, unless they are ready for it."
Mr Beattie said he advised his clients that the most important aspect of inheritance is communication. "It's very hard to try to balance the interests of your children with the need to ensure your business or landed estate remains economically stable, professionally managed and relevant to the modern world," he said.
"But the need for transparency and communication for decisions is needed, so people don't feel unloved or unwanted. At the very least, leave a letter of explanation to be read after your death."