Lawson's poor kids
British celebrity chef Nigella Lawson told the U.K. magazine 'My Weekly' that she didn
What happened
British celebrity chef Nigella Lawson told the U.K. magazine My Weekly that she didn’t plan to leave her fortune to her children. She said it “ruins people” to have money if they haven’t earned it. "I argue with my husband Charles,” Lawson said, “because he believes that you should be able to leave money to your children. I think we'll have to agree to disagree." (MSN.com)
What the commentators said
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
So, Nigella thinks rich kids are jerks, said Stuart Heritage in the blog Hecklerspray. Fair enough, but isn’t it a bit odd for her to leave her own children penniless, when she’s married to a man, Charles Saatchi, who is worth a couple hundred million dollars, and is the daughter of an heiress and a former Chancellor of the Exchequer? “We’re just saying.”
Lawson isn’t the first celebrity to try to protect her children from the burden of enormous wealth, said a London Telegraph blog. The founder of Body Shop, Anita Roddick, announced in 2005 that she was giving her entire fortune away, and investor Warren Buffett is giving away billions, while leaving his children “enough so that they could feel that they could do anything, but not so much that they could do nothing."
It’s hard to strike that balance, said Finlo Rohrer in BBC News. “Rocketing house prices may have left one generation with a windfall, but the next needs more of a parental leg-up than ever.” Financial experts say that someone who receives a hefty inheritance is more likely than peers to start a business. Lawson has a point when she says there’s a philosophical case for not passing on money, but it’s possible to give kids “enough to get a start” without “giving them too much.”
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
-
Will California's EV mandate survive Trump, SCOTUS challenge?
Today's Big Question The Golden State's climate goal faces big obstacles
By Joel Mathis, The Week US Published
-
'Underneath the noise, however, there’s an existential crisis'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
By Justin Klawans, The Week US Published
-
2024: the year of distrust in science
In the Spotlight Science and politics do not seem to mix
By Devika Rao, The Week US Published