> 49 million per year is basically poverty money. You'd think a quote like this, pulled out of context, would change its meaning once seen in context. It doesn

> 49 million per year is basically poverty money. You'd think a quote like this, pulled out of context, would change its meaning once seen in context. It doesn't. There's a vast difference between not being able to afford an absurd lifestyle of consumption and extravagance and being able to eat. Someone's who's salary is cut from $100M a year to $49M a year, no matter how insane their spending was, isn't going to suffer. If it's not clear: someone having to choose to buy a Ferrari instead of a Bugatti because of a pay cut is not the same as someone having to choose between shelter or food because of a pay cut.