4 ms·

Yet most workers I know advocate for better quality of life for everyone. I don’t see capitalists doing that. End of the day - these “highly” paid workers are…

Yet most workers I know advocate for better quality of life for everyone. I don’t see capitalists doing that. End of the day - these “highly” paid workers are… workers. They’re not capitalists like their CEOs are.

refurb 5y ago
Capitalist = capital owners = equity. Amazing when tech "workers" making $500K+ per year group themselves in with the "little guy". Someone else being richer doesn't mean you're not rich.
- all_factz 5y ago
  If you have to work to live, you’re a worker, sorry. 500k a year is a lot but in many places it’s not enough that you can stop working. So yeah, if people who make 500k a year know what’s good for them, they should totally align themselves with “regular” workers. 500k is a lot closer to 50k than it is to 5 million.
- bradlys 5y ago
  Again - do we really want to put billionaires in the same group as people earning a few hundred K a year? People turn their RSUs into cash to be used. Their RSUs are taxed as income not as capital gains. That alone should give you an idea of the difference between these people. But whatever man - you’re like this on Reddit and on here all the time. You’re extremely stubborn and refuse to move on in life. Have fun with that attitude.
  - refurb 5y ago
    I'm sorry if challenging your ideas is seen as being "extremely stubborn". I mean, if your ideas don't hold up, you should change them, not attack the people who pressure test them. But regardless, silicon valley workers get equity as well that is taxed as capital gains - some times that makes up a very large proportion of their income. This is doubly true with equity from start-ups that might entirely be taxed at long-term capital gains. But the point stands - what's the cut off. Sure, the guy making $40k is different than the billionaire. What about the guy making $500k? $1M? $5M? Now we're in CEO territory. Are CEOs "workers"? The argument just doesn't hold water.
    - all_factz 5y ago
      There’s a qualitative difference between having a couple thousand RSUs and having a voting stake in a company. Tech workers are well off, but they’re nowhere near as well off as C-level execs and even less well off than major shareholders in the companies they work at. It’s the difference between being upper middle class and rich.
      - refurb 5y ago
        All stockholders have a "voting stake" in a company. C-level execs may get a lot more shares, but their voting power is tiny compared to the institutional investors. Board of Directors have voting power, but often token salaries. But you said it's the difference between "upper middle class" and rich? So I ask again, what's the cut off?
        all_factz 5y ago
        In 2019, SF Gate found a household income of around 200k a year was still “middle class” (https://www.sfgate.com/expensive-san-francisco/amp/SF-household-income-192k-middle-class-median-13637536.php https://www.sfgate.com/expensive-san-francisco/amp/SF-househ...). I’d wager that’s a fair bit higher now. Even among those making over 200k, there’s a qualitative difference between needing to work and being able to live off passive income. To say someone making 500k a year has more in common with someone who has immense generational wealth just misses the point. The political incentives are different. I’m obviously aware that all shareholders have a voting stake - but most of their stakes are so small as to be negligible.
    - bradlys 5y ago
      No, you’re just arrogant. You sound like a boomer through and through. You have extremely weak arguments and constantly try to choose tiny things to create a wedge issue. Your argumentation is ineffective and trollish. You don’t win any arguments - you just troll online. I get it - you have nothing better to do with your life. It’s why I see you all over posting all the time. You’re like an old man yelling into the wind. And like that man - soon to be dust in it.
  - softwarebeware 5y ago
    > People turn their RSUs into cash to be used. Their RSUs are taxed as income not as capital gains. This is technically inaccurate. RSUs are taxed as "ordinary income" on the date they vest. _AND_ they are also subject to capital gains taxes when they are sold.

refurb 5y ago

Capitalist = capital owners = equity. Amazing when tech "workers" making $500K+ per year group themselves in with the "little guy". Someone else being richer doesn't mean you're not rich.

all_factz 5y ago
If you have to work to live, you’re a worker, sorry. 500k a year is a lot but in many places it’s not enough that you can stop working. So yeah, if people who make 500k a year know what’s good for them, they should totally align themselves with “regular” workers. 500k is a lot closer to 50k than it is to 5 million.
bradlys 5y ago
Again - do we really want to put billionaires in the same group as people earning a few hundred K a year? People turn their RSUs into cash to be used. Their RSUs are taxed as income not as capital gains. That alone should give you an idea of the difference between these people. But whatever man - you’re like this on Reddit and on here all the time. You’re extremely stubborn and refuse to move on in life. Have fun with that attitude.
- refurb 5y ago
  I'm sorry if challenging your ideas is seen as being "extremely stubborn". I mean, if your ideas don't hold up, you should change them, not attack the people who pressure test them. But regardless, silicon valley workers get equity as well that is taxed as capital gains - some times that makes up a very large proportion of their income. This is doubly true with equity from start-ups that might entirely be taxed at long-term capital gains. But the point stands - what's the cut off. Sure, the guy making $40k is different than the billionaire. What about the guy making $500k? $1M? $5M? Now we're in CEO territory. Are CEOs "workers"? The argument just doesn't hold water.
  - all_factz 5y ago
    There’s a qualitative difference between having a couple thousand RSUs and having a voting stake in a company. Tech workers are well off, but they’re nowhere near as well off as C-level execs and even less well off than major shareholders in the companies they work at. It’s the difference between being upper middle class and rich.
    - refurb 5y ago
      All stockholders have a "voting stake" in a company. C-level execs may get a lot more shares, but their voting power is tiny compared to the institutional investors. Board of Directors have voting power, but often token salaries. But you said it's the difference between "upper middle class" and rich? So I ask again, what's the cut off?
      - all_factz 5y ago
        In 2019, SF Gate found a household income of around 200k a year was still “middle class” (https://www.sfgate.com/expensive-san-francisco/amp/SF-household-income-192k-middle-class-median-13637536.php https://www.sfgate.com/expensive-san-francisco/amp/SF-househ...). I’d wager that’s a fair bit higher now. Even among those making over 200k, there’s a qualitative difference between needing to work and being able to live off passive income. To say someone making 500k a year has more in common with someone who has immense generational wealth just misses the point. The political incentives are different. I’m obviously aware that all shareholders have a voting stake - but most of their stakes are so small as to be negligible.
  - bradlys 5y ago
    No, you’re just arrogant. You sound like a boomer through and through. You have extremely weak arguments and constantly try to choose tiny things to create a wedge issue. Your argumentation is ineffective and trollish. You don’t win any arguments - you just troll online. I get it - you have nothing better to do with your life. It’s why I see you all over posting all the time. You’re like an old man yelling into the wind. And like that man - soon to be dust in it.
- softwarebeware 5y ago
  > People turn their RSUs into cash to be used. Their RSUs are taxed as income not as capital gains. This is technically inaccurate. RSUs are taxed as "ordinary income" on the date they vest. _AND_ they are also subject to capital gains taxes when they are sold.