Well, if you were poor, made something for yourself, and then had kids, then your kids had a non-poor home, care, clothes, things, toys, education, and so on, between 0 and 18 (or 22), no?

So, your kids didn't have it the same as you who grew up poor at all, even if you don't leave them an inheritance...

Not everybody even wants to have kids. shrug

Also, the only companies who put intergenerational wealth building into their advertising material are the expensive watch manufacturers.

If you don't have kids, and are rationally altruistic, it can be argued that you can create more expected pleasure by willing your fortune to charity than spending it on yourself, or earning just the minimum.

> Also, the only companies who put intergenerational wealth building into their advertising material are the expensive watch manufacturers.

Of course, because companies have a vested interest in consumers spending more rather than less. But there are reasons to do something other than "some company advertised that I should do this". Every family that built up generational wealth has had (by definition) at least one generation who earned more than they spent.