5 ms·

Wage gains are not being treated the same as investment gains. It's not like Bezos is taking home an hourly rate. Everybody at the real top is doing quite, quit

Wage gains are not being treated the same as investment gains. It's not like Bezos is taking home an hourly rate. Everybody at the real top is doing quite, quite well. That's why the concentration of wealth into a very few hands at the top marches on, not because of "wages".

jonnycomputer 5y ago
There are the rich and then there are the really rich, and then there are the unbelievably rich. I'll happily call a family earning 500k/y on two salaries in a small town where a million dollar home is literally a mansion on a hill "rich". Because they are. They just aren't as rich as the Trumps or Bezoss of the world.
- bushbaba 5y ago
  It hit me when I saw a 3MM home in Tampa vs 3MM in Bay Area. I think many’s definition of money is skewed from living in hcol cities.
- KerrAvon 5y ago
  What do you intend to connote by saying someone is "rich," though? What does it signify? If the definition of "rich" is "independently wealthy," that family certainly doesn't meet it. They still have to work for a living. If it means you never have to worry about where the next meal is coming from or losing the roof over your head, sure, a lot of people are "rich." And maybe this is better than 90% of humanity does, but it's still not a reasonable first world standard for being "rich" IMHO.
  - jonnycomputer 5y ago
    What does not calling them rich signify?
  - jonnycomputer 5y ago
    Their modes of thought, their concerns and worries, their expectations, their assumptions of what is possible, their habits, their identities, all different.
    - gamechaynes 5y ago
      She said: 'I am loosing every time!' He answered: 'No, you are often winning, but when you lose you lose way too high.' (-;
  - pessimizer 5y ago
    > They still have to work for a living. No they don't. They could live in a median dwelling with a median income indefinitely on the interest of what they've saved over the past few years. If you're saying that they have to work for the living that they're accustomed to, so does Musk.
- sseagull 5y ago
  One of my favorite quotes on the topic: "Shaq is rich. The white man that signs his check, is wealthy." [Chris Rock]
georgyo 5y ago
Your touching on a much more complicated subject about reporting. If someone one owns a billion dollars of stock foobar, and foobar grows 10x, then that person is now worth 10B and "made" 9B. However they have not sold anything so while they can be reported as making 9B, they are none of it was directly cash and not taxed; at least not yet. However, while Bezos "only" has a salary/bonus of 1.5 million a year, it is very common for executives to have total comp packages in the 10s to hundreds of millions a year. These can easily be converted into hourly rate equivalents because there is only so many hours you can work a year.
- cwkoss 5y ago
  The billionaire stock owner in your example's economic power has increased by 10x regardless though. They can borrow against that money and those funds aren't taxed - so they can effectively spend it without taxation. They can cycle debt to avoid ever having to sell a single share for their entire life, at rates more favorable than any middle class person has access to. We can fix our tax code with legislation to address this loophole, our politicians just don't have the will to do this currently (largely because many of them amass fortunes through stocks and insider tips, IMO).
  - Stupulous 5y ago
    I assume they borrow against the after-tax value of the stock, because it will be taxed before being paid back(?) I don't know if that is significant, but I figure it's worth noting.
    - zeusk 5y ago
      No that’s not how it works. Infact, you can get a margin loan at 0.75% interest from ibkr if you hold more than 50k usd of stock for half of its value. Of course, if that value drops you’ll get margin called for more collateral
      - Stupulous 5y ago
        Half of its value is less than after-tax value, which is at least the initial investment + 63% of the gains.
yibg 5y ago
AMZN is down 10+% over the last year so not sure about that one.
- tfigment 5y ago
  His ex-wife is shovelling money to charities faster than anyone before and still made more than she gave out.
- freewilly1040 5y ago
  He's got elite financial engineers at his disposal, it's highly doubtful his fortune has declined in lockstep with the AMZN share price.

jonnycomputer 5y ago

There are the rich and then there are the really rich, and then there are the unbelievably rich. I'll happily call a family earning 500k/y on two salaries in a small town where a million dollar home is literally a mansion on a hill "rich". Because they are. They just aren't as rich as the Trumps or Bezoss of the world.

bushbaba 5y ago
It hit me when I saw a 3MM home in Tampa vs 3MM in Bay Area. I think many’s definition of money is skewed from living in hcol cities.
KerrAvon 5y ago
What do you intend to connote by saying someone is "rich," though? What does it signify? If the definition of "rich" is "independently wealthy," that family certainly doesn't meet it. They still have to work for a living. If it means you never have to worry about where the next meal is coming from or losing the roof over your head, sure, a lot of people are "rich." And maybe this is better than 90% of humanity does, but it's still not a reasonable first world standard for being "rich" IMHO.
- jonnycomputer 5y ago
  What does not calling them rich signify?
- jonnycomputer 5y ago
  Their modes of thought, their concerns and worries, their expectations, their assumptions of what is possible, their habits, their identities, all different.
  - gamechaynes 5y ago
    She said: 'I am loosing every time!' He answered: 'No, you are often winning, but when you lose you lose way too high.' (-;
- pessimizer 5y ago
  > They still have to work for a living. No they don't. They could live in a median dwelling with a median income indefinitely on the interest of what they've saved over the past few years. If you're saying that they have to work for the living that they're accustomed to, so does Musk.
sseagull 5y ago
One of my favorite quotes on the topic: "Shaq is rich. The white man that signs his check, is wealthy." [Chris Rock]

georgyo 5y ago

Your touching on a much more complicated subject about reporting. If someone one owns a billion dollars of stock foobar, and foobar grows 10x, then that person is now worth 10B and "made" 9B. However they have not sold anything so while they can be reported as making 9B, they are none of it was directly cash and not taxed; at least not yet. However, while Bezos "only" has a salary/bonus of 1.5 million a year, it is very common for executives to have total comp packages in the 10s to hundreds of millions a year. These can easily be converted into hourly rate equivalents because there is only so many hours you can work a year.

cwkoss 5y ago
The billionaire stock owner in your example's economic power has increased by 10x regardless though. They can borrow against that money and those funds aren't taxed - so they can effectively spend it without taxation. They can cycle debt to avoid ever having to sell a single share for their entire life, at rates more favorable than any middle class person has access to. We can fix our tax code with legislation to address this loophole, our politicians just don't have the will to do this currently (largely because many of them amass fortunes through stocks and insider tips, IMO).
- Stupulous 5y ago
  I assume they borrow against the after-tax value of the stock, because it will be taxed before being paid back(?) I don't know if that is significant, but I figure it's worth noting.
  - zeusk 5y ago
    No that’s not how it works. Infact, you can get a margin loan at 0.75% interest from ibkr if you hold more than 50k usd of stock for half of its value. Of course, if that value drops you’ll get margin called for more collateral
    - Stupulous 5y ago
      Half of its value is less than after-tax value, which is at least the initial investment + 63% of the gains.

yibg 5y ago

AMZN is down 10+% over the last year so not sure about that one.

tfigment 5y ago
His ex-wife is shovelling money to charities faster than anyone before and still made more than she gave out.
freewilly1040 5y ago
He's got elite financial engineers at his disposal, it's highly doubtful his fortune has declined in lockstep with the AMZN share price.