3 ms·
Completely agree. Sure a young person making $200k+ in the Bay Area is “rich” but it’s not even comparable to people who have inherited massive amounts of weal
by opportune 7y ago
Completely agree.
Sure a young person making $200k+ in the Bay Area is “rich” but it’s not even comparable to people who have inherited massive amounts of wealth or have become rich through ownership in a rapidly growing company (which also isn’t income, but capital gains). You can’t even afford a 2k sqft home in a nice (accessible, safe, decent schools) area on that income - doesn’t feel rich to me.
This kind of logic is what keeps the upper-middle class of the US paying high taxes but shields the truly rich, I mean filthy stinking ungodly rich, from paying their fair share. Because they don’t acquire their massive wealth via income, but through inheritance and capital gains
- chrisco255 7y agoWhich is why, in my opinion, a federal sales tax would be far better at capturing value from the wealthy (than an income tax) without penalizing people trying to earn and reinvest their earnings.
- lonelappde 7y agoSales tax is non-progressive.
- bradstewart 7y agoIt's progressive in the sense that rich people generally buy more (and more expensive) things.
- thatfrenchguy 7y ago> You can’t even afford a 2k sqft home in a nice (accessible, safe, decent schools) area I think a lot of people conflate "nice" with "one of the richest/best" in the Bay Area, conflating middle class with upper class. With 200k, you can afford around a million dollar home. There is a lot of places in the bay area where you can afford a house in that range.
- lonelappde 7y agoYou picked on nice but ignored accessible. Look at where employers are parking their offices, next to million dollar trailer park spots.
- JMTQp8lwXL 7y agoCapital gains are income (when realized). Specifically, they're unearned income, as opposed to earned income (W2 employment, 1099 contracting, etc). Unearned income also includes interest and dividend payments.