I have been pondering over this since last year. Can someone enlighten me as to why Richie rich kids from JGLS or son/daughter of extremely rich parents work out of their asses in the law firms. Why tf they are interested in working round the clock if they have the money. All silver spoons brats, this is your chance to burst your bubble.

(Ps- I genuinely have respect for those richhh kisses)

Worked with a JGLS student at a litigation chamber in Bombay. Their rationale was related to imbibing a work ethic that is useful regardless of what they end up doing later, alongside a taste of how work life in Bombay actually is. So it's like an eye opener for them I assume. Said student intentionally commuted by a local, packed their own food and managed their affairs on their own. This is typically expected from most people but this kid was from a very wealthy background so they didn't have to labour like this, so I had my respect for them.

Total trust fund kid here (investment banker dad, IT professional mum)- hope you'll find this perspective useful:

Why would we work? Because we want to get even richer. Simples. And because those of us who do want to work understand that money is a finite resource that can run out.

Some of us, like me, who had (what are considered in India as) very high-class opportunities want to give our kids even better opportunities, but for that, we need to be richer even than we are now. For example, if I ever have a child who is a son, I would like him to go to school at Eton (assuming he can pass the admissions tests etc, of course, I'd never donate in exchange for admission), and would like any daughter of mine to go to an equivalent in terms of a good English boarding school. That kind of an education was never available for pocket change prices and is out of reach even for most British families earning in GBP, so obviously will be out of reach for the overwhelming majority of Indians. And yet, very conveniently, the current UK government has gone and slapped a VAT charge on fees for private schools like Eton, making the cost go from about £52000 a year to £63000 a year. (My dad claims he could have managed it, but that he didn't ever think about getting me to do that sort of thing because he "didn't want it drilled into [me] that [I am] a rich man's kid", but also because those kinds of prices are a bit of overkill for him, as it is for me practically at this stage - though I want to be in a position where it isn't, down the line.)

However, in the larger scheme of things, 52000 and 63000 isn't all that different - if you can manage 52000, you can manage 63000 (unless you're the sort of fool who is so impractical as to mess around with loans when the latter kind of number comes along or one of the lucky ones who can grab some of the limited partial funding that might be available from time to time). So to be in that position, you need to first get enough that you can spend £63000 a year without living on the street or even crying. Standard way to get to that? Work hard now (maybe even have a miserable career) and try for the most financially rewarding opportunities, so at least you can go to the grave in peace, knowing that the next generation is sorted, thanks to a combination of any generational wealth passed down to you + your own contribution. Unlike a lot of Gen Z people, I feel that if my dad could make such sacrifices for me, then why not do the same for the one who will come after me.

And if the next generation wants to work? Their business, though I would be disappointed if they, too, decided to compromise on career satisfaction as I have. If not? Well, they might throw away the money, ain't nothing I can do about that after a point, that's not my business either.

PS: I didn't go to Jindal. I don't agree with many LI readers on most things, but where I do agree with the majority viewpoint is that JGLS is a bad place to study law. Cohort sizes are totally off the charts, seemingly you can get there as long as you successfully finished primary school.

exactly. seems like bro yapped on and on to flex how "rich" he claims to be. like bro if you're eton level rich, why are you crying on legallyindia. dont be a loser, go do some grass-touching rich family stuff like traveling to your private island in private jets or playing golf with CEOs.

Well, in case you haven't noticed, it's very hard to get many of the things that lead to happiness for lots of people (a good home, perhaps multiple properties and other aspects of what the Americans speak of as their "dream" - that you will work hard and achieve sweet rewards) without money. Of course, you can be happy purely out of some sense of liking your job if you want, even if it doesn't pay properly, but that's a you thing. If you can find a well-paying job you like very much, that's obviously ideal. For far too many of us, it's a question of doing the career which is in some weird mid-point of being well remunerated, playing to our strengths and personal satisfaction, with personal satisfaction being the value compromised on in a number of cases where on the criteria of well paid, the job gets 10/10. If you let's say want to be an academic, as that plays to your strengths and satisfies you, then you need to, as the NLSIU VC has said, for many institutional contexts reconcile that the pay won't be anything close to magic circle levels. Or, if you want both academia and money, one way to get that might be to take the Dworkin route, work in a law firm for several years then go back to uni for further studies required for academic positions. In that way, you compromise your satisfaction for a few years, save up for later and then don't have to compromise! Remember, Raz did not read philosophy at university and instead chose to read law (as his London Times obituary quotes him as saying) because he felt the need to be financially responsible. Jonathan Sumption is another example of this trend. Former UK Supreme Court judge (the type of person LI readers will hate - just read his lecture which, I think, is called "Home Truths about Judicial Diversity"), gave up a history lectureship at Oxford in the 70s because even then, the rent couldn't be managed with it, and went to... well, being an UKSC judge, achieve rather a good deal of success at the English bar. So something has to give somewhere. That's it.

There is this private equity associate. The family is into ▮▮▮ ▮▮▮. Buys luxury watches. All cash. Still works in one of the most intense teams in the office. Some desire for validation it seems. Does not find social acceptance in circles in Delhi. Comes to office in a chauffeured luxury vehicle. Rather bizarre to have no sense of individual self worth

I work in tier 1 capital markets team and have been here for last 10 years or more. I come from a traditional business family and my parents are HNIs and my friends come from ultra rich families. We work for one or more of the following reasons:

We don’t want to join family business or family profession

We still want to make our parents proud

We were taught to work hard no matter what and we have seen our parents slog as well

We want to be respected by society and not be seen as brats

We have skills and want to see those skills being applied

We enjoy the grind and hustle especially since we have otherwise very comfortable lifestyles

Our families may be asset rich and not cash rich and we need liquidity

We need liquidity and want to protect our self respect by not using family money

Some of us keep ourselves busy till we get married (mostly women)

Some of us keep ourselves busy so we don’t have to get married (mostly men)

We are married and want our spouse to respect us

We want to taste the corporate culture

Someone in our family is a lawyer and we look up to that relative

We may have chosen this profession for the same reason as everyone else but without the need to struggle for contacts or money

We feel our family contacts will give us an edge

We can network better

Some of us are required to prove ourselves especially since we haven’t joined family business or profession

Some families don’t prefer to have all kids in businesses and having someone with stable jobs allows for better risk allocation