【Text, Pictures/Excerpted from the Shang and Zhou Dynasty publication "Why do we want more than we need? 》, author Bruce • Hood】
Properties are a relatively valuableEven if we die, we can still convey our own advantages. Most human societies have inherited love affairs, even if there are huge cultural differences between them. According to a study conducted by the Bank of Communications in 2013 of 16,000 people in 15 countries, 69% of visitors plan to be on the verge of their homes, with the highest proportion being India (86%) and Mexico (84%); while only 56% of American visitors and 57% of Canadian parents intend to leave their inheritance for their children. There are many reasons for this difference, including the developed countries having a better social security system, and another major reason is the difference in family awareness. Compared with other countries with collective socialism, the people of industrialized countries have more personalistic orientation and are more focused on short-term goals.
People's attitude towards inheritance will also change with changes in the economic environment. A 2011 research report on the UK's Integrity Insurance showed that about half of the UK's adults planned to keep their children; but by the first quarter of 2016, the figure was cut in half. "Spending the kids’ inheritance, written as SKIing, refers to the post-war baby trend generation that does not intend to leave money to children. This phenomenon shows that biology's prediction of human behavior is not always accurate.
As for the decline in inheritance numbers, a more compassionate explanation is that parents have already been exhausted to maintain their family. The trend of millennials who want to own assets is becoming more and more obvious. Parents and their parents play an important role in helping their young middle-aged members stay in a stable social stance, including giving large sums of money or loans to help pay debts, get married, and buy their first house. A report by Legal and General, a British financing company, showed that in 2017, the amount of money parents borrowed to their children was 6.7 billion BC, an increase of 30% compared with the previous year, thus elevating the parent bank to one of the top ten loan banks. Today, whether young people can get into the relationship between having a house and whether their parents have a house is more closely related than the previous generation. This means that the situation will only be more severe in the future, and the distance between "who has money" and "no money" will become bigger and bigger. Whether in their lifetime or after death, most people will leave their property to their children in some way.
Biology has also gained a lot of attention in this kind of good deed. Obviously, most parents will leave their property to their children, but there are some analysis of properties that show some surprising patterns. The beneficiaries of the inheritance are mainly blood relatives and spouses. The closer the blood relationship, the more labor they get. This is expected. But not every child can be together, and gender and family wealth are affected.
Psychologist Robert Trivers and mathematician Dan Willard proposed a unique model in the early 1970s that can predict inherited patterns based on environmental conditions. According to their assumptions, the son is more in love with him when life is good, and the daughter is more popular when the environment is not good. Wealthy families leave more money to their sons than their daughters, while wealthier families are just the opposite. The explanation for this is that when the large environment is not good, without national welfare support, the survival rate of offspring for wealthy men will be higher than those with poorer conditions. Wealthy men can attract more potential companions and are more capable of cultivating the next generation. Furthermore, the number of children that men can reproduce is higher than that of women, so wealthy parents will feel that they should invest in their sons to get more children. However, daughters who are dying have more chances of having children than sons, so for poor families, daughters are a more cost-effective investment.
Researchers randomly took a thousand Canadian copies of these predictions to examine. First, the analysis results show that 92% of the beneficiaries of the industry are all geniuses, and only 8% are people without blood ties. It is reasonable that the spouse is the most likely beneficiary. After all, couples have the same interests in many issues, especially the issue of property distribution to their children. The amount of property obtained by beneficiaries reflects the gene's correlation, of which about half of the property is reserved for direct blood, one tenth for Sunflower, and only one percent for the next generation.
Children get more births than their parents' brothers and sisters. As for the proportion of births obtained by their sons and daughters, it depends on the amount of births. Just like Trevors and Willard's assumption, the richest person who has the richest property left to his son twice as much as his daughter; but in a tighter environment, the situation is just the opposite. Of course, equal distribution of industry is the most common model, accounting for 82%. But after careful estimates, in fact, 7% of the people who stand up for their daughters will be more inclined toward their daughters, and 11% will be more inclined toward their sons; the people who stand up for their sons are richer than those who stand up for their equally divided sons, and the people who stand up for their equally divided sons are richer than those who stand up for their daughters. It is exactly the same as the assumption. This parental bias model will also show the value of gifts given to children now. A 2018 online shopping study showed that wealthier Chinese parents spend more money on their sons than their daughters; less wealthy parents are contrary; well-off families are more concerned about their daughters.
Although the spouse is most likely to be the beneficiary of the industry, it still depends on who will pass away first. A time back to the 1890 California hospital study showed that if the husband left first, most of them would leave their property to their wives.. But if the wife resigns first, she may leave her property directly to her daughter, regardless of her spouse. Similarly, this phenomenon also has a good biological explanation. When the husband is going to be silenced, the wife usually has passed the age of childbirth and is unlikely to have children. Therefore, it is natural for the husband to leave the property to the mother who keeps the property to the child. But if the wife passes away first, the husband can still form a family with other women. This is why mothers tend to leave their property to their children rather than potentially bad mothers.
It is not only parents who are experiencing children in a rainy day. Care for future generations may also be beneficial to other families. For example, mothers can completely confirm that their child is bleeding, but fathers may not be so sure. Even today, according to the 2010 social survey of the National Center for Public Opinion Research, the proportion of women who have sex is about 15%. In the past, the proportion of fathers with indeterminate identity must have been higher. In fact, some South American tribes still have a system of "partible paternity", and each child has several fathers. This system exists because they believe that pregnancy requires sperm accumulation in multiple men. However, it is a matter of affirmation for all society that the child comes from a mother who gives birth, so the grandmother can also confirm that her blood is continuing on the body of the child (unless the child is replaced when he is born), but the grandfather dare not be so sure, because he may not be the biological father of his daughter. Grandparents were simply unable to confirm their relationship with Sunny because their son might have worn green hats.
{twenty three} {twenty four} These varying degrees of biological correlation and the possibility of fraud can affect how generous the human being is. On average, grandparents invest more in the outer sans than grandparents, and grandparents also give more to the inner sans. For example, a recent study of American parents under the age of five in the United States asked questions about the generosity of their children's grandparents and grandparents, as well as helping to support their children. Since many of the ancestral characters in the study have remarriage status, we can also compare the attitudes of ancestral characters and ancestral characters. On average, the ancestor gave Sun Hun six hundred and eighty dollars a year, while the ancestor only took out nearly fifty-six dollars a year. The aunt and uncle also invest more in nephews than uncles and uncles. Although the chances of uncertainty in biological fathers are not high in current society, these different praises and behaviors show an evolutionary manifestation before the ancestors determine who Sun Yat’s biological father is.