Connect with us

Business

Children of property-rich parents get offered the best jobs—and new research has revealed why

Published

on



It’s no secret that the children of wealthy families have an upper hand in success—money and connections have historically helped them break into Hollywood, and even the C-suite. Now, new research shows that U.K. parents who reaped the rewards of the country’s housing boom three decades ago set their kids up for success down the line.

Around the turn of the 21st century, the U.K. witnessed a dramatic surge in housing prices: the costs rose from four times peoples’ annual earnings in 1995, to eight times by 2010. Homeowners subsequently enjoyed a wealth windfall, and it resulted in their kids receiving more housing wealth and higher-paying jobs, according to recent research from the Institute for Fiscal Studies. Lower-income renters, on the other hand, were faced with new affordability challenges. 

“This property boom meant enormous wealth gains for some households but not others,” the report notes. “Our results show that housing wealth, independent of other factors such as parents’ skills, substantially affects inequality in the subsequent generation.”

To put the wealth divide into perspective, the study found that for every £100,000 ($133,800) of extra property the wealthy parents had, the children were £15,000 ($20,000) better off in household assets when they reached their late 20s. It catapulted the social mobility of rich kids—who had enough funds to move to high-paying jobs in London—while the children of renters were blocked from generational wealth opportunities. 

Likewise, in the U.S. higher house prices provide parents with additional funding to invest in their children, resulting in higher salaries than the children of renters.

Why the children of property-boom parents have an upperhand 

It didn’t matter what wealthy parents did for work, or what degrees they had—the study found the kids of rich homeowners benefited regardless. And a key reason why they were able to secure tens of thousands of dollars in wealth gains is because of location; those who benefitted most from the housing boom owned property in London, or were able to move to the capital city brimming with better job opportunities. 

“An important explanation for this finding is that the children of parents more exposed to the house price boom were more likely to own in London—the most expensive property market in the country,” the report explains. 

“This is partly explained by an increased tendency of people whose parents did relatively well out of the house price boom, but who grew up outside of London, to move to the capital.”

The children of parents who fared better in the housing boom were less likely to take on middle-paying jobs outside of the U.K.’s capital, the study found. Instead, they were inclined to funnel into higher-paying occupations in the city compared to their family renter counterparts. 

However, the benefits have not been equally distributed among the children of these housing-rich families. Their sons were the most likely to secure jobs at the top of the earnings distribution—meanwhile, there was “no significant effect” with the daughters. The study found that “wealth from parents may help male children in particular access better labour market opportunities.”

U.K.’s housing affordability and stagnating wages 

While rich kids are reaping wealth and career gains from their parents’ housing boom success, many in the U.K. have given up on buying a home with their abysmal salaries.

U.K. property offers the worst value for money in the developed world, according to a 2024 analysis from The Resolution Foundation. Not only are U.K. housing costs more expensive relative to general prices than in any OECD country, the study found, but homes in England are even more cramped than those in New York City. The average house price in the U.K. currently rests at about £270,000 ($361,100). And those who rent are also up against an affordability crisis: rent in England is set to skyrocket by 25% in the next four years, real estate group Hamptons International predicted in 2023.

“Britain’s housing crisis is decades in the making, with successive governments failing to build enough new homes and modernize our existing stock,” Adam Corlett, principal economist at the Resolution Foundation, told Bloomberg. “That now has to change.”

But as housing costs increase every year, U.K.’s workers aren’t seeing the same bumps in their annual salaries—especially young people at the bottom of the totem pole. The average salary for working-age U.K. graduates is 30% lower than it was 15 years ago, according to government data analyzed by Bloomberg

Gen Zers are only getting around two-thirds of the pay their millennial counterparts received at the same career stage, and it’s causing many to reconsider if they can even succeed in the U.K. One in four Britons between the ages of 18 and 30 said they might leave, with many pointing fingers at the lack of affordable housing and high cost of living, according to a 2025 study from the Adam Smith Institute.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Gavin Newsom started his career with billionaire funding, but he was raised by mother with 3 jobs

Published

on



Gavin Newsom’s political story has always been a study in contrasts: a young entrepreneur whose first big break came from a billionaire family friend, and a boy raised by a single mother juggling three jobs to keep the lights on. That tension now echoes in California’s bitter fight over a proposed wealth tax on billionaires’ assets, a debate that hits close to home for a governor who sits squarely between privilege and precarity.​ For now, in this instance, he thinks the billionaires tax is “bad economics” and has vowed to defeat it. A closer look at his career shows billionaires have always been central to his story.

In the early 1990s, Newsom’s career began not at a campaign office, but in a wine shop on San Francisco’s Fillmore Street called PlumpJack, a venture he launched with backing from the Getty fortune. Oil heir and composer Gordon Getty, a close family friend who once said he treated Newsom like a son—just as he had been treated similarly by Newsom’s father. In fact, to call Newsom’s father, William Alfred Newsom III, a lawyer for the Getty family would be an understatement. The future judge once hand-delivered $3 million to the Italian kidnappers of Getty’s grandson, in 1973, CalMatters reported, while noting deep ties also between the Newsom family and other San Francisco political royalty, the Browns and Pelosis.

That relationship went far beyond a single store. Getty invested in most of Newsom’s early businesses—wineries, restaurants, and hotels that steadily expanded the PlumpJack brand and turned the young entrepreneur into a multimillionaire long before he was sworn in as governor. Members of the Getty clan would later emerge as some of Newsom’s most reliable political donors, contributing hundreds of thousands of dollars to his campaigns.​ And yet Newsom’s story is not straightforwardly one of extreme wealth.

Raised by a mother with 3 jobs

After Newsom’s parents divorced when he was a toddler, he and his sister were largely raised by their mother, Tessa, a young single parent in San Francisco who, at times, worked three jobs—as a secretary, waitress, and paralegal—to support her children.​

Family members recall their mother sleeping in the dining room of a small flat and renting out a bedroom to another family to make rent, even as their father—a politically connected judge who once managed the Getty family trust—exposed the children to a very different world. Newsom has said his mother taught him everything he knows about grit and hard work, even as he navigated his own struggles with dyslexia and a school system that often left him behind.​

A wealth tax fight that cuts both ways

Those dual identities—billionaire-backed businessman and son of a hustling single mom—are colliding in California’s escalating fight over a proposed “billionaire tax.” The 2026 Billionaire Tax Act, championed by a powerful health care workers’ union, would impose a one‑time 5% levy on the assets of residents worth more than $1 billion, payable over several years and calculated on wealth held at the end of 2026.​

Supporters say the measure is aimed squarely at the kind of extreme fortunes that helped launch careers like Newsom’s, promising tens of billions for public services they argue have been starved by federal tax cuts and rising inequality. Union leaders frame it as a moral corrective: In a state where billionaires buy oceanfront compounds, working‑class Californians crowd into spare rooms like the one Newsom’s family once rented out.​

Newsom’s uneasy stance

Newsom has not embraced the proposal; he has become one of its most prominent critics. Calling the one‑time levy “really damaging,” “bad economics,” and a threat to California’s long‑term fiscal health, the governor argues a state‑level wealth tax could accelerate an exodus of billionaires and their businesses, eroding future income‑tax revenue that funds schools, health care, and social programs.​

He has said he is open to a national conversation about taxing wealth, but insists California alone cannot afford to experiment when it already relies heavily on volatile income taxes from the rich. Behind the scenes, he has lobbied union allies to abandon the initiative, warning the backlash from nervous investors—some already moving money and operations out of state—could outlast any short‑term cash infusion.​

For Newsom, the wealth‑tax battle is more than a clash of spreadsheets and slogans: It is a confrontation with his own origin story. The same billionaire class that seeded his first business and boosted his campaigns now stands in the crosshairs of a tax he says could hurt the state he governs, even as memories of a mother stringing together three paychecks shape his instincts about inequality and opportunity.​

For this story, Fortune journalists used generative AI as a research tool. An editor verified the accuracy of the information before publishing.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Oracle struggles to attract workers to Nashville ‘world HQ’—even with a 2-million-square-foot office

Published

on



Oracle is trying to convince reluctant tech workers to join its Nashville, Tenn. “world headquarters” with promises of a brand-new spacious office space and an in-house Nobu restaurant.

A few years after moving Oracle’s headquarters from Redwood City, Calif. to Austin, Texas, cofounder  Larry Ellison publicly declared Nashville its “world headquarters.”

“It’s the center of our future,” Ellison, the company’s chief technology officer and former CEO, said in 2024 of Nashville’s increased importance for Oracle.

The company committed $1.2 billion in capital investment over a decade and promised to add 8,500 jobs to the area. The same year, Tennessee state leaders gave the company a $65 million economic grant to “offset costs companies incur when expanding or locating a business” in the state. 

As part of Oracle’s development in the city, it tied itself to $175 million in infrastructure improvements such as park space along the east bank of the Cumberland River which runs through downtown Nashville, as well a pedestrian bridge that would link both sides of the river. The company can recoup its investment with reimbursements of 50% of its future property tax payments, the Tennessee Lookout reported.

The new office, which Oracle senior vice president of global real estate and facilities Don Watson previously said in a statement would “position Nashville as a hub of AI innovation,” will include 2 million square feet of office space as well as amenities like the upscale Nobu restaurant chain, which Ellison has included in his properties from Palo Alto, Calif. to Florida and the Hawaiian island of Lanai.

​Oracle has reportedly offered some existing cloud employees based in other cities tens of thousands of dollars in incentives to move to Nashville, Bloomberg reported. 

Oracle did not immediately respond to Fortune’s request for comment.

Yet, dangling rich incentives and a future amenity-laden office has only gotten the company so far. Only about 800 workers are assigned to offices in Nashville, Bloomberg reported, citing documents, compared to more than 5,000 in Kansas City, Mo., the base for health records company Cerner which it acquired in 2021. Another 5,000 employees are based in Redwood City and Austin, collectively. The company logged a net gain of just seven employees in Nashville for 2025, the Nashville Business Journal reported.

Employees have reportedly been reluctant to move to Nashville because of a potential ceiling on their future salaries due to the city being categorized in a lower geographic pay band than California, according to Bloomberg. Oracle aims to create 8,500 jobs in Nashville by 2031, with an average annual salary of  about $110,000, according to a press release by the Nashville mayor’s office from 2021. 

“Oracle will bring a record number of high-paying jobs to Nashville and they will pay upfront all the city’s infrastructure costs. This is a huge win for our city,” then-Nashville mayor John Cooper said in the statement. 

When reached for comment, the Nashville mayor’s office referred Fortune to the Nashville East Bank Development Authority, which was created in 2024 to “encourage and promote the prompt and orderly development of the East Bank,” where Oracle’s new office will be built.

“We remain eager to do whatever we can to facilitate the construction of the new campus that has been publicly announced, and we believe that Nashville will only continue to grow as a center for advanced technology and related industries in the years ahead,” said a spokesperson for the Nashville East Bank Development Authority.

Still, workers are wary of committing to a headquarters that exists largely on paper. The company’s Austin location is still listed as the address on its filings with the SEC, and a list of “United States Field Offices” on Oracle’s website still lists Austin as its “world headquarters.”



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Worried about AI taking your job? New Anthropic research shows it’s not that simple

Published

on



Welcome to Eye on AI, with AI reporter Sharon Goldman. In this edition…New Anthropic research on AI and jobs…Leadership drama at Mira Murati’s Thinking Machines…Another blockbuster quarter for TSMC…Google Gemini introduces Personal Intelligence.

It’s probably the number one question people ask me when they hear I cover AI: “Will AI take my job?” That question is often followed by, “How about your job?”

Sigh. Well, so far, I’m still here. And new research from Anthropic suggests the fate of our jobs is more complicated than a simple story of humans being replaced by AI agents and robots.

In the latest installment of its Economic Index, Anthropic rolled out a new way of measuring how people actually use its chatbot Claude—what kinds of tasks they give it, how much autonomy they grant it, and how often it succeeds. The goal is to get a clearer, data-driven picture of whether AI is really making people faster at work, what sorts of tasks AI supports best and how it might actually change the nature of people’s occupations and professions.

I spoke yesterday to Anthropic economist Peter McCrory about the ongoing research, which he said the company kicked off in earnest a year ago in recognition of the fact that AI is a general purpose technology that will affect every job in some way–certainly every sector of the economy. 

AI reshapes jobs differently depending on the role

But the results are not always straightforward–at least for now. For example, the research found that AI is reshaping jobs differently depending on the role. A radiologist or therapist may find that AI can elevate their skills by taking on some of the most time-intensive tasks, allowing them to spend more time talking with patients and clients. But people in other jobs may find themselves being deskilled, or that their jobs become simpler without allowing them to devote more time to some obvious higher-level task. This could happen for jobs such as data entry workers, IT specialists and travel agents. 

In addition, human collaboration and oversight remain essential, particularly for complex work. So AI appears to increase productivity for highly-skilled professionals, rather than replacing those roles. 

McCrory said that he is hopeful that other researchers can take Anthropic’s insights to better understand the uneven implications of AI on the labor market. However, one thing is easily understood: Adoption is happening quickly – in fact, AI is spreading across the US faster than any major technology in the past century, he said. 

“In our last report that we put out in September, we documented that disproportionate use is concentrated in a small number of states,” he explained. “In this report, we see evidence that low-usage states are catching up pretty quickly.” 

Anthropic’s Claude is growing in the number of tasks it can cover

And there is no doubt that AI is getting more powerful: The research found that Anthropic’s Claude is growing in the number of tasks it can cover, with 44% of jobs now able to use AI in at least a quarter of its tasks, up from 36% in the last report. 

I couldn’t help but note that the latest research was completed before Anthropic’s latest model, Opus 4.5, debuted – and also prior to the release of Claude’s Cowork application, a general-purpose AI agent that can manipulate, read, and analyze files on a user’s computer, which just came out this week. 

“it just illustrates the broad-based applicability of this technology, and the fact that Claude is increasingly able to not just give you information, but take actions on your behalf, under your discretion and delegation,” McCrory said. “I think you might see a rise in the importance of delegation skills–there’s evidence from the academic literature that suggests that people get more value out of large language models when they have better managerial skills.” That’s also been his own experience, he added: “I find myself delegating increasingly sophisticated tasks to Claude that I might have otherwise given to a research assistant if I had one.”

When I told McCrory that I had written in last week’s Eye on AI about software developers excited about using Claude Code but depressed over reducing their role to that of a manager, he nodded sympathetically and suggested I check out other Anthropic research, developed by its societal impacts team. 

“I think the big takeaway here is that we don’t know what’s on the horizon,” he said. When I pointed out how much most of us dislike uncertainty, he emphasized that he hoped the report and the data would help researchers see the future a bit more clearly. “We’re committed to open sourcing this data,” he said, so economists and policymakers can better understand the potential is of what’s coming and how we all prepare for it. 

With that, here’s more AI news.

Sharon Goldman
sharon.goldman@fortune.com
@sharongoldman

FORTUNE ON AI

AI ‘godfather’ Yoshua Bengio says he’s found a fix for AI’s biggest risks and become more optimistic by ‘a big margin’ on humanity’s future – by Sharon Goldman

Trump triggers retail investors to dump the Magnificent Seven – by Jim Edwards

Teachers decry AI as brain-rotting junk food for kids: ‘Students can’t reason. They can’t think. They can’t solve problems’ – by Eva Roytburg

What Apple’s AI deal with Google means for the two tech giants, and for $500 billion ‘upstart’ OpenAI by Jeremy Kahn and Beatrice Nolan

 

AI IN THE NEWS

Leadership drama at Mira Murati’s Thinking Machines. In a surprising leadership shake-up, two co-founders of Mira Murati’s AI startup Thinking Machines Lab — Barret Zoph and Luke Metz — announced they’re leaving the fledgling company to rejoin OpenAI, just months after departing the organization to help start the venture. According to Wired, another former OpenAI researcher, Sam Schoenholz, is also returning to OpenAI as part of the move. The departures were confirmed in an internal memo from OpenAI’s applications chief, Fidji Simo, who said the return “has been in the works for several weeks.” The turn of events represents a significant blow to Thinking Machines Lab, which had only recently raised a large seed round and recruited top talent, and underscores the intense competition for elite AI researchers in the industry.

Another blockbuster quarter for TSMC. According to CNBC and others, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, the world’s largest semiconductor fabricator, reported a 35% jump in profit and record revenue as demand for AI chips continues to surge. The company beat expectations on both revenue and net income, with its high-performance computing business—driven by AI and data center chips—now accounting for 55% of sales. Advanced chips of 7 nanometers or smaller made up more than three-quarters of wafer revenue, underscoring how central cutting-edge AI processors have become to TSMC’s business. 

Google Gemini introduces Personal Intelligence. In a new blog post written by Google VP Josh Woodward, the company announced the US beta launch of “Personal Intelligence” in its Gemini app–which lets users opt in to securely connect their Gmail, Photos, Search, YouTube and other Google apps to Gemini. The idea is to make the assistant more proactive and useful—combining information across emails, photos, and searches to answer questions or offer recommendations specific to your life—while keeping privacy control in the user’s hands (the feature is off by default and users choose what to connect). Personal Intelligence is initially available in the U.S. to paid subscribers, with plans to expand over time, and signals Google’s push to differentiate its consumer AI by leveraging its wider ecosystem to power more personalized AI interactions.

EYE ON AI NUMBERS

48% 

That’s how many single adults reported using AI to help draft break-up messages or boundary-setting texts, according to new research from chat assistant use.ai. 

As a result, there’s less need to “ghost” dating partners now that users can rely on AI to navigate emotionally charged conversations. Among those who used AI tools to let their dates down gently, 62% described the resulting conversations as more structured, and 39% noted fewer follow-up conflicts. 

According to the survey of 4,812 single adults across five English-language markets, the trend extends beyond dating: 27% rehearse sensitive in-person conversations with AI, while 20% use it to manage boundaries in non-romantic relationships. 

AI CALENDAR

Jan. 19-23: World Economic Forum, Davos, Switzerland.

Jan. 20-27: AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Singapore.

Feb. 10-11: AI Action Summit, New Delhi, India.

March 2-5: Mobile World Congress, Barcelona, Spain.

March 16-19: Nvidia GTC, San Jose, Calif.

April 6-9: HumanX, San Francisco. 



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.