You are willfully ignoring my quantitative statement and logical conclusion. > people in Musk's category of wealth have been increasingly effective at consolid

You are willfully ignoring my quantitative statement and logical conclusion. > people in Musk's category of wealth have been increasingly effective at consolidating their wealth over the last 60 years This is an empirically observable fact. > His effective tax rate hovers around 5% This is a quantitative statement. I combine these two facts with a theorem - these realities do not emerge by accident. They are the byproduct of an intentional effort. Therefore: > It is not an accident that someone can accumulate wealth and find ways not evade taxation through measures not available to other people in society. No innuendo. Also - I explicitly refuse to inject innuendo into the argument, admitting that the "goodness" or "badness" of this sort of manipulation is difficult to prove. I think his 5% tax rate is a problem. You do not. Fine. But before we can even talk about solutions, we need to accept a baseline of reality.