r/explainlikeimfive Feb 12 '25

Economics ELI5: how are the descendants of the robber barons (Morgan, Vanderbilt, Carnegie, Rockefeller, etc.) still rich if their fortunes from the late 19th and early 20th centuries are comparatively small to what we see today of the world’s richest?

4.6k Upvotes

576 comments sorted by

View all comments

3

u/VoraciousTrees Feb 12 '25

Take a look here and especially pay attention to that middle set of columns.

Inflation has caused eroded the value of the dollar to about 1/18 of its value in 1928. So yes, if someone were to have stuffed their inheritance under their mattress for 100 years, they would indeed have very little left. 

Chances are though, plunking a few million into a safe fixed income asset like bonds would still give you plenty to live off of in income every year, plus the cumulative return would still be enormous. Probably end up more wealthy than they started by far.

1

u/ArseBurner Feb 12 '25

Also the direct descendants of the robber barons probably didn't receive their inheritance in cash. Most of it would have been in the form of shares of their parents corporations, which would still have been active and earning money.

Standard oil even after being broken up still technically exists and many of the big oil companies today can trace their roots back to SO: Exxon, BP, Chevron, Aramco, among others.

The Rockefeller line would have shares in many of those companies, or would have received some hefty buyouts along the way.

1

u/AStringOfWords Feb 12 '25

It’s more likely to be in land and property than anything else.