I don't think you deserve to be downvoted, but consider the implications of this worldview: no one would rationally invest in any business venture that they might not live to see come to fruition, and that higher wealth to invest correlates with being older.
This is simply not true under any standard definition of "rationally." You are assuming a loss function that values only growing the wealth of your family, whereas many other people have different loss functions that lead to different rational behavior.
I never said families, nor did the OP: just that being able to make decisions, protected by law, as to who receives your assets after you die is a desirable thing for long-term productivity. Name 1 other "loss function" that would scale society-wide. Even the charitable impulse requires that there be well established businesses at which the recipients can spend and benefit from the money, businesses which take a lot of time to build without seeing a return on investment.
The other implication would be that people genuinely interested in a cause would invest money in such beyond lifetime business ventures. That could fix some of the perverse incentives with such ventures.
