Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
thecrashingisles

£2.5M In Assets Means You're Not Rich

Recommended Posts

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-26014868

South Africa's former President Nelson Mandela left an estate provisionally valued at 46m rand ($4.13m; £2.53m), the executors of his will have said.

Nelson Mandela's bank account certainly did not match his stature in the world.

For all the respect he enjoyed around the globe, he was not a rich man.

Edited by thecrashingisles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Replace "for all the respect he enjoyed around the world" with "compared to most other heads of state", and Nkosi's comment is an uncontroversial one. But as phrased, yes, it does read like the usual BBC living in its own world syndrome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In fairness, they are right.

Felix Dennis makes this point in his book that a couple of million in the bank of easily realisable assets puts you in the lesser rich category. My guess is that Mandela was probably in the comfortable wealthy (the next level down) category. The difference is, that I suspect, his cash went a lot further in South Africa than it would in the UK.

The vast majority of us, however, fail to make it even into the comfortable poor - so yes, he seems relatively rich.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure he would have fetched more on the lecture circuit than Tony Bliar, and a few lectures would have allowed him to double his net wealth. However, Nelson Mandela had more class than that. Mandela wanted to improve the world, Bliar only wanted money and power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All this means is that Nelson Mandela wasn't corrupt or greedy like most of the elite classes!

Actually, all it means is that the BBC is being highly selective in their reporting. Mandela set up several trusts outside of his will to support members of his family (not that the BBC would ever tell you that). The value of those trusts has not been revealed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All this means is that he had sense to ensure that assets were moved around and transferred along time before his death. The residual estate is just what he couldn't be bothered to move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I read about people with a lot of money pretending that it is really not so much, it reminds me of a conversation I had as a young man while on the overland route to India, circa 1970. In Herat, I met a fellow traveler coming back after several months in the sub continent, and asked him what it was like. The conversation turned to money, and costs.

After a while, he said, " if India has taught me one thing, it isn't that the poor are able to do so much with so little, but rather that we westerners do so little with so much"

Not rich with two and a half million? Go tell it to a rickshaw driver.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://

www.moneysavingexpert.com/family/inheritance-tax-planning-iht

For sure plenty of people in the BBC will be "penniless" when it comes to the crunch.

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All this means is that Nelson Mandela wasn't corrupt or greedy like most of the elite classes!

I've not read anything that would counter that. The money he left, even including stuff in trusts outside his will assuming they exist, doesn't seem out of whack with someone who sold an enormous number of books along with film rights and who, I would assume, would have been paid serious money for speaking engagements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, all it means is that the BBC is being highly selective in their reporting. Mandela set up several trusts outside of his will to support members of his family (not that the BBC would ever tell you that). The value of those trusts has not been revealed.

Haha, yes, that may well be true. Still, I live in hope of a better world!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   206 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.