Pretty sure Min told me it says the same thing in Piketty's book.

you should definitely look to marry up, but you should also not poo-poo a successful career in order to add to that inherited wealth. you prolly would need to work your way up to some prominence in a career in order to get access to the upper echelon of dynastic wealth, anyway. kinda like marrying the boss' daughter.

"In the nineteenth century, the lifetime resources available to the wealthiest 1 percent of heirs (that is, the individuals inheriting the top 1 percent of legacies in their generation) were 25-30 times greater than the resources of the lower class. In other words, a person who could obtain such an inheritance, either from parents or via a spouse, could afford to pay a staff of 25-30 domestic servants throughout his life. At the same time, the resources afforded by the top 1 percent of earned incomes (in jobs such as judge, prosecutor, or attorney, as in Vautrin's* lecture) were about ten times the resources of the lower class. This was not negligible, but it was clearly a much lower standard of living, especially since, as Vautrin observed, such jobs were not easy to obtain. It was not enough to do brilliantly in school. Often one had to plot and scheme for many long years with no guarantee of success. Under such conditions, if the opportunity to lay hands on an inheritance in the top centile presented itself, it was surely better not to pass it up. At the very least, it was worth a moment's reflection.
...
The choice was almost as clear for the baby boom cohorts: a Rastignac* born in 1940-1950 had every reason to aim for a job in the top centile (which afforded resources 10-12 times greater than the lower class standard) and to ignore the Vautrins of the day (since the top centile of inheritances brought in just 6-7 times the lower class standard). For all these generations, success through work was more profitable and not just more moral.
...
For the cohorts born in the 1970s, and even more for those born later, things are quite different. In particular, life choices have become more complex: the inherited wealth of the top centile counts for about as much as the employment of the top centile (or even slightly more: 12-13 times the lower class standard of living for inheritance versus 10-11 times for earned income). Note, however, that the structure of inequality and of the top centile today is also quite different from what it was in the nineteenth century, because inherited wealth is significantly less concentrated today than in the past. Today's cohorts face a unique set of inequalities and social structures, which are in a sense somewhere between the world cynically described by Vautrin (in which inheritance predominated over labor) and the enchanted world of the postwar decades (in which labor predominated over inheritance). According to our findings, the top centile of the social hierarchy in France today are likely to derive their income about equally from inherited wealth and their own labor."

-- Thomas Piketty, Capital in the Twenty-First Century

*Vautrin and Rastignac are characters in de Balzac's novel Le Pere Goriot