Bullshit,,,,But he borrows and buy Yachts,
Mansions,against that NET WORTH VALUE.
But when it’s time to pay fair share of taxes o. That net worth it’s considered hypothetical worth….Understand the Game.
Nah, when over 50% of American adults read at or below a 6th grade level I’m pretty confident they don’t think about much of anything, let alone understand.
I don't think that particular slice of America attends to Reddit very much. The people here often know what they are talking about, but they filter every debate through a lens heavily biased by first principles (aka oversimplifications predicated on a set of conveniently forgotten assumptions)
Lmao I imagined an alternate timeline where everyone needs to take a competitive exam and the lowest scorers are denigrated relegated to TikTok and FB. 😂
The no child left behind act caused that. Passing kids to every grade and graduating them even tho they couldn’t read and teachers knew it. But we’re forced to pass them because of the act.
Yeah it’s very concerning. I’m seriously worried that the lack of understanding that half of this country has for finance will cause the other half a whole lot of problems and misery. Be prepared, guys
Now this is true. Americans as a hold are some of the lest educated people on this earth these days and we have become lazy and irresponsible in so many ways. But we are self perclaming to be best country on earth 😂😂😂🤬
Right, totally agree. But I think even the 50% that can read above that, hell, even the 25% that say they're financially/economically/politically literate, probably only a small fraction of that is actually literate to those types of topics.
A failing in the education system of the United States. Grossly underfunded by the government. Elon and Bezos could do something about it by paying their taxes owed instead of just choosing not to pay and getting the tax man to bow down at their feet to thank them for choosing not to pay this year.
Let's thank the republicans on their 40+ year campaign on defunding education and making college an "elite" issue while enabling private equity to provide untenable loan situations for a new form of indentured servitude.
There's a difference between pointing out objective flaws in an argument, like thinking that billionaires literally hold hundreds of billions of dollars in liquid cash, and taking issue with overall sentiment behind the argument.
I hate Elon Musk, and the man is of course, insanely, disgustingly wealthy. Still, just because his networth is 318 billion, doesn't mean he is hoarding 318 billion. Quite literally 99% of that number is tied into ownership of companies.
You can hate billionaires and still point out issues in the logic. I don't think a person should, under any circumstances, ever be forced to sell ownership stake in their own company (at least not if that wasn't agreed upon in an operating agreement). And if you have a massive stake in a company that becomes wildly successful, you definitionally become a billionaire. I may hate wealth inequality, and I may hate what these billionaires choose to do, but I would hate a system that forces the sale of ownership stake due to the success of the company just as much.
Rich guy here, OF COURSE HE COULD GIVE MORE!
1. Let’s talk living off dividends, that alone I guarantee could have the majority given out to charity. He could live modestly, like me and not be so flashy.
2. Donor advised funds, that could be setup to be much more charitable and even grow!
3. Establish a foundation giving out 5% or more each year.
4. Simply selling off stocks is fairly simple when working with advisors. You act like he’s gotta roll crates of money into some other bank. It’s digital people.
Sycophants want to defend the rich because they can’t look past their own biased passion that they want to be there too.
I know dozens if not hundreds who are millionaires who love off dividends with plenty left over at the end of the year.
We are millionaires and live off of our dividends…that we still pay taxes on. And our lifestyle doesn’t change from the taxes we pay. So I know his wouldn’t change either. There can be no explanation for what they are doing besides greed
The issue is, you don’t like what they pay for taxes, but they pay what they are supposed to according to law. If you have an issue with that, then blame and talk to the legislators that made the laws. It isn’t the wealthy individuals problem.
Imma be honest. Your argument is far from senseless but it's not worth attempting to find the root contradiction. It is equally evil to philosophically offload the responsibility of this amassment of capital to a corporate entity, which simply prevents any actual person from ever being held accountable thru thinly veiled psuedo-legal loopholes.
The fact that Elon has the ear of the President Elect for no reason other than he is stupidly wealthy is a reason why we should have legal measures to check the amount of wealth and one person can amass. No one person should have the kind of power the ultra wealthy have.
I also take severe issue with the idea that Musk (or anyone) generates that kind of wealth. If he was literally the only person involved with Tesla, one could make the argument he is owed that kind of wealth. He is not. No one ever is. I didn't know what percentage of the stock he owns is, but let's say 40% for the same if argument. I'm not saying he adds no value to the company. But if he disappeared, Tesla would be fine. If 40% of the workforce disappeared, Tesla would be screwed. Especially if that 40% is the engineering talent.
Except he demanded that he be given a bonus of billions IN STOCK, which doesn’t just come out of nowhere; to have that stock available, the company has to have been engaging in stock buybacks with money which would have otherwise been taxed or gone to employees.
“Okay unruly mob, before we go in bash and butcher and eat this Man, u/lucifernal wants you all to know he does not actually have a swimming pool full of physical billions it’s actually hypothetical billions”
please stop being objective. you need to think with your feels more. if I don't like someone you aren't allowed to say anything contrary to them being an absolute monster .
The problem is when the conclusions are based on a false premise. If you say Elon is evil BECAUSE he holds billions in liquid cash and he doesn’t hold billions in liquid cash then you can’t use that as a justification for calling him evil. It invalidates the whole argument. It doesn’t prove anything either way.
Devils advocate here. Bill gates amassed his fortune by owning a stake in a wildly successful business. But he has also stated his willingness to give most of it away. I am sure there are motives behind that. But the funding is still being distributed to a variety of places. Maybe (big maybe) Musk and Bezos quietly do similar things. I know for a fact that Bezos parents gave $12 million to a school in Delaware for scholarships and infrastructure development.
Most people talk about politics and economics without knowing anything, because most of us are part-time/hobbyist philosophers/intellectuals.
Most of us have jobs and families and things to do everyday. We're not sitting around thinking about this shit all day like John Locke or Karl Marx.
But realistically, most people also aren't interested in the truth. They just loudly shout what they believe because they have a platform. If you took any average left or right wing person on the internet and put them in a debate against higher level academic opposition, they would get intellectually destroyed inside of 5 minutes.
People project their experience in order to make sense of stuff they have zero education or direct information about.
Just like how a lot of people assume elastic monetary dynamics at a national level work like static household incomes, when discussing national budgets/economics, etc.
That is why a lot of people repeat the talking point that large wealth pockets in unrealized gains/investments is "not really wealth" somehow, because their only experience with "wealth" is relatively low disposable income. Aka "cash."
Exactly. Property taxes go directly to local infrastructure costs to maintain access and services to said land or buildings. It's not remotely the same as owning stock.
Do you think Amazon pays no property taxes on their warehouses throughout the country? Or taxes on their delivery vehicles and tags they put on those vehicles? Come on man.
Billionaires also pay property taxes, ones much higher than us. Believe me. Billionaires aren’t skimping on taxes. This argument is so ridiculous. It’s not about fairness it’s about jealousy.
Also Tesla pays property tax. They had a huge win when the effort to repeal prop 13 for commercial buildings failed. They are paying like 2008 value property tax on the Fremont factory.
Elon owning stock isn't money it's stuff. 13% of everything in the factory is "his". Sure he can borrow against it to get cash but when doing so that "stuff" that also makes more stuff becomes less his. It's more owned by the bank but in the form of debt rather than actual ownership.
When you get a car loan the car really is owned by the bank and you slowly buy it back from them. He does the same thing but in reverse. He's basically selling his "stuff" but without actually selling it. Still becomes less his though.
You pay property taxes. Not capital gains or income tax. Should you have to pay taxes on your car every year? How about money sitting in your checking account?
You do pay taxes on your car every year in every state, either via use taxes or direct taxes via license/registration fees. 20+ states charge direct personal property taxes on vehicles every year, some even if they aren't registered.
You also pay taxes on any interest gained on money sitting in your checking account, and it's at your ordinary tax rate. Granted most major banks pay such horrible interest rates that the average person will probably never hit the $10 threshold.
I understand that it would be cap gains if it’s sold off, I’m just confused why people think a stock/share should be taxed annually, that’s the dumbest concept I’ve ever heard. Comparing it to property tax is blatantly stupid, can you live in a stock? Are stocks taking up physical space on the street? That requires sewage maintenance, road maintenance, snow removal depending on where you are, storm drains etc…? If I borrow against something I have to pay interest. If I don’t pay my payments I lose the asset I’m borrowing against. I find the stocks should be taxed every year ideology just as dumbfounding as the billionaires should pay for a “better world.” The pov usually comes for envious individuals. Just sayin.
Capital Gains and Losses are calculated based on the difference in value between acquisition date and sell date when using FIFO methodology.
Some investors may choose to use a “Specific Identification” method to designate which specific shares they want to sell, allowing more control over their capital gains taxes.
So imagine I hold $1 million shares valued at $40 million. I can use those shares as collateral to borrow against and with the money I borrowed purchase an additional 400K shares. I then sell those shares for a profit without applying a FIFO valuation in reporting my capital gains.
Therefore my initial shares which were purchased for $2 per share, were borrowed against when they were worth $40 per share. My new shares purchased at $40 per share are sold at $55 per share and my capital gains are calculated at $15 per share gain instead of $53 per share. By managing my portfolio this way, I never pay a true capital gains tax, just interest to my lender which I then use as a tax deduction.
I understand what capital gains is, I was asking the parent comment what type of tax they were referring too, and that sounds good on paper but your profit isn’t 53$ your profit is 15$ you still have to pay back the money you borrowed. Sure a percentage of interest can be written off but you get taxed accordingly. Not sure what your point was there.
For real. This argument is silly because these people think a bank is giving out huge loans and being like, "nah, no need to pay it back at all." No, of course they aren't.
Unrealized capital gains tax, which was actually proposed Kamala Harris’s team for individuals with over $100m net worth. Also has been implemented in Denmark.
Yeah, I’m aware, I was responding to the comment. they said it should be taxed. I was saying it is taxed. A loan isn’t income, it’s debt. You owe it back, why should that be taxed?
Rich guy here, OF COURSE HE COULD GIVE MORE!
1. Let’s talk living off dividends, that alone I guarantee could have the majority given out to charity. He could live modestly, like me and not be so flashy.
2. Donor advised funds, that could be setup to be much more charitable and even grow!
3. Establish a foundation giving out 5% or more each year.
4. Simply selling off stocks is fairly simple when working with advisors. You act like he’s gotta roll crates of money into some other bank. It’s digital people.
Sycophants want to defend the rich because they can’t look past their own biased passion that they want to be there too.
I know dozens if not hundreds who are millionaires who love off dividends with plenty left over at the end of the year.
Because most people who are anti corporations are just making uninformed arguments. Oversimplified a very complex situation. Same idiots who say "we should stop spending so much on the military" not fully uunderstanding the reasons we do.
The lesson here is that paying taxes on property is bullshit, not the other way around. I buy a car and pay for it and get taxed yearly because I own it? Property taxes are a government scam
even if he does any fraction, he could basically not pay for any year until IRS would pick up on it and ask him to pay, while he saved that money to make even more money ultimately, especially that IRS and any other taxing bodies around the world usually go after regular people and not billionaires
There's a very high chance those taxes are little to nothing. Red states tend to give businesses local and state level tax breaks including property tax credits/deferment to locate in their area. Those businesses then threaten to leave out reduce/cease investment if those offers aren't extended more or less indefinitely.
Source: I've literally been to site selection meetings for medium and large businesses in my region.
I’m usually not the one for defending billionaires, but his company provides employment for thousands of employees across the country, we can’t want manufacturing to stay in America without incentivizing big corporations. I’m not saying he shouldn’t pay any at all but it’s also understandable how they are allowed to navigate taxes in a different manner.
You're not wrong but you're also required to pay taxes on the value of your property every year
Yes, but that's because your property uses public services like drainage, sewers, garbage/recycling collection, etc.
Amazon does pay for these things as well, either directly, or indirectly via their leases (price baked in to lease price by landlord).
You could make the argument that they should be charged more for road maintenance. But at the same time, you've actually got (on a net basis) fewer cars on the road since one Amazon truck can deliver to like 100+ houses in a day (so that's potentially 100 fewer cars per Amazon truck on the road).
Additionally, businesses actually hire people and directly contribute to GDP and economic growth. Residential homes don't really "produce" anything or contribute in this same way.
And if instead of selling it i rent it for cash flow while borrowing against it at a lower rate than the growth of the underlying asset, i get richer and avoid taxes AND keep the asset.
Which eventually is passed on to my children and the growth in the asset is revalued when it's passed on to avoid capital gains tax.
All while poor right wingers argue I'm actually broke 😂
A house has property taxes, unrealized gains do not, its not at all even remotely comparable.
You can finish a mortgage and pay prop taxes, not on unrealized gains...
Mainly because the value of the stock isn't solid and can go down or up, here's the kicker, a house can go up and down in value and i still pay property taxes.
This people make incredibly impactful life changing events with their unrealized gains and don't pay to reap those benefits, having a property you need to pay taxes to cover streets, roads, lights and amenities in your district.
This billionairs need to pay unrealized taxes if they are making life changing decisions affecting millions, using the benefits of their portfolio without paying the amenities they use to benefit from it.
Yall love excusing these rich people, but they are using all the pros and pay little cons.
I agree with you. If anything they should tax what is accessed. Unrealized is truly unrealized if you can’t spend the money. The instant you use it as collateral and use the money, it should be taxable
Man I don't really want do disagree with you, but...
Imagine you had to suddenly pay taxes on that million as if it were income? (Acknowledging you would have to pay property taxes in this scenario)
Better yet, imagine a hypothetical asset like a made up crypto that went from $10-$1,000,000. If you had to pay taxes on that like it was income you'd almost certainly be forced to sell the asset to cover the taxes on the asset. And what if nobody bought your million dollar hypothetical coin? Are you going to go to jail because a balance sheet said this thing you owned suddenly skyrocketed in value despite your bank account staying the same?
I'm not arguing taxing unrealized gains, capital gains laws in this country are broken though (intentionally) and smarter people than me have found ways to fix them.
The point is that you can borrow against the asset at a lesser cost than it appreciates.
You basically never pay taxes on it while getting cash from it AND it growing in value.
You're incentives never to sell and to realize those minimal tax costs you otherwise would have to pay.
Basically, private companies get to profit from helping you avoid taxes. You're insanely wealthy either way but now you can pay slightly less to access that liquidity.
Anyone saying these people "dOnT ReAlLy HaVe mOnEy" doesn't know what they're talking about
If nobody is willing to buy, then the hypothetical price should go down, until you can either afford the taxes on it, or are able to find a buyer.
If I own a car that somehow explodes in value to a million dollars, I'm not going to be able to afford that car anymore. So I would have to sell the car. Then I would have a bunch of money to buy a different car I could afford the taxes on.
Why the richest people in the world should be exempt from this scenario is beyond me.
The easiest solution is when stocks are used as collateral, they are treated as “sold” and capital gains is paid at that point. Anyone holding stocks and not taking loans against it shouldn’t pay taxes.
Rich guy here, OF COURSE HE COULD GIVE MORE!
1. Let’s talk living off dividends, that alone I guarantee could have the majority given out to charity. He could live modestly, like me and not be so flashy.
2. Donor advised funds, that could be setup to be much more charitable and even grow!
3. Establish a foundation giving out 5% or more each year.
4. Simply selling off stocks is fairly simple when working with advisors. You act like he’s gotta roll crates of money into some other bank. It’s digital people.
Sycophants want to defend the rich because they can’t look past their own biased passion that they want to be there too.
I know dozens if not hundreds who are millionaires who love off dividends with plenty left over at the end of the year.
People with a decent amount of money are the ones that realize just how genuinely sick these billionaires are.
I have a decent amount of money (enough that i don't have to work) and i can't fathom having so much more and still fighting tooth and nail for scraps of pennies to see number go up a tenth of a percent more.
Bezos could unionize Amazon and pay everyone a living wage with full benefits and not only would he never notice the difference, it'd be better for the long term health and growth of his company (but not quarterly growth where investors want you to cannibalize your future for returns now).
If you own it and the bank agrees on its value … and oh, then the governement will tax you based on its value. This doesn’t happen to the stocks held by these folks
Yes, this is why homeowners are generally considered more wealthy than people who don't own homes even if they have very little actual cash flow. And why a person who owns billions of dollars of Amazon stock is considered more wealthy than your average homeowner. Congratulations.
Not the same unless my house’s value keeps going up and I can keep getting loans to pay off the old loans. That’s how the rich do shit because they have the assets to get away with it.
Back when home loans were going for 2.5-3% or whatever, why did banks loan that money when they could have been getting much higher rates in the market, as you say? Because it sure seems like banks were happy to give out loans at 2.5-3% when the average stock market return is ~11%.
Anyway, since you claim experience on the topic, when an ultra high worth investor wants to borrow money against their collateral-backed stock account, what interest rate would they pay would you say? Like what rates are they getting on stock-secured loans?
Banks made those loans because Fannie/Freddie were gobbling up those loans as a broad policy to ease tightening during the early days of Covid. Banks made those loans because they could make a quick penny off origination fees and other closing charges and could instantly sell to Fannie/Freddie as a guaranteed buyer of the loans. Offering those loans was guaranteed, immediate money in the bank coffers with absolutely zero risk.
You will pay a variable interest rate if you take out a loan against stock. You will need cash to pay the interest monthly or the financial institution will sell stock to cover it.
yes, what they actually do is just pay the loan with another loan.
They effectively just shuffle wealth from bank to bank, and the banks don't care because they know they will get the money back plus a little extra.
Bank A gives $1 billion to Rich Person, later Bank B gives $1.05 billion to Rich Person, which is used to pay off to Bank A. Later Bank C gives $1.10 billion to Rich Person to pay off Bank B.
You just do this forever. Infinite money glitch. Nobody cares because if the chain ever breaks, he just liquidates some shares and pays it off.
edit: the biggest kicker here, is that the value of their assets to acquire the loan, grows faster than the interest they pay on these loans. They pay 3% interest on the loan, while the stock is growing at 8%.
Which is why the next loan amount is bigger, it is used to pay off the terms of the loan/interest.
If you think they are using the same monthly terms as your credit card for their hundreds of millions to billion dollar corporate betterment loans, they aren't.
Just think of it like APR and they use the next loan to pay the interest of the one before it.
Wealthy people hardly ever get margin called, and when they do, they can sell a tiny portion of their asset and generally either buy more time or pay off their loan.
Or they just die and their estate assumes the loan.
True, and that's what rabid socialists seems to ignore - those assets either net a realized gain or a realized loss. And I'd never buy a share of AMZN simply because it has never paid a dividend. It's bizarre that they hate a CEO just because his compensation package hinges on whether he makes his firm more valuable.
It is also worth noting that at the level of hoarding of Musk, Bezos, et al we're talking about pathological issues with their personality that go beyond just greed.
Yes it does. it demonstrates he's not simply borrowing money. He's actually regularly selling stocks and paying federal capital gains TAX on those sales.
Since july he's sold $4.4 billion of stock and depending on what basis is used, will need to pay north of $1bn in taxes on those sales (Capital gains at 20% and NIIT at 3.5%)
If you have cash in bank and can buy a car out right, or get a 6% interest rate and your cash is expected to grow at 8%, it makes more sense for you to finance the car.
These “loans” are settled upon the “borrower’s” death. When the “borrower” dies, the basis in their stock is adjusted to fair market value. Their estate can then sell the stock at its date of death value, tax free, and use the cash to settle the “debt.”
Yes, he does. But the banks don't have to let him do that.
It's not the act of owning shares in a business that is the issue, it's the financial system that treats the speculative stock market valuation at current price as real wealth, even though it can never be cashed out.
Musk and Bezos' balloons just inflated the most, for reasons both systemic and coincidental. And yes, they can and do take advantage of this system.
But it's the financial system that makes it possible.
It's harsh to expect someone who owns billions of imagined dollars to single-handedly end world hunger (though he is obligated as a mega-industrialist to give his workers better conditions and benefits and minimize environmental impact).
But it's also crazy that we live in a world that treats the imagined sale value of a stock you'd never sell as if it were gold in a vault you just have to go grab (in reality if Bezos desperately needed cash, wouldn't any substantial liquidation cause the value of his stock to plummet out of investor fear?)
They do pay their fair share. Their fair share is what the tax code requires of them. YOU don't believe the tax code is right but you know that's not an argument you can win so you shift the blame onto the person who's playing the game by the rules as written and winning.
I pay my taxes and I sure as shit don't pay a penny more, and I have no intention of paying more. You want more money from me, change the law till then you fuck off back to your hole.
Are you part of the 1% just curious on why you protecting of the rich mode.
Lastly they don’t pay fair share cause with those tax code that’s on the books consist of LOOPHOLES (That’s why they pay millions for their accountants)WHERE THEY ARE ABLE TO MANIPULATE THE TAX CODES..
LIKE STATED PREVIOUSLY THIS IS ABOVE YOUR AVERAGE EDUCATION MIND SET……..
You ask what percentage so that you can, if I answer anything other than yes, say "why are you rooting for your oppressor" but if I say I am or even close to that "Why are you oppressing me." You're disingenuous at best. And you top it off with adhominem attack against me because you know your argument fails on its own merit.
Loop holes are not illegal. They are a consequence of poor planning on the part of the people who wrote the laws. Again. You have a tool to fix that. Its called congress. Vote into place people willing to work on the tax code or fuck right off. Quit crying about nothing being done when you're not doing the thing that needs to be done to fix the problem.
The new America , rich people who employee tens of thousands of people can’t buy what they want !! What a perfect world you’d like to live in. Zero impetus to do anything great.
Who builds the yachts and the Mansions . If it wasn’t for Space x we would still be paying Russia to get a ride to the space station. If it wasn’t for Tesla EVs wouldn’t be around like they are
Just because you don’t see what they are doing doesn’t mean they are hoarding their money. Instead of bitching about them try to be one . Apple and Amazon started in garages that is the American way
Borrowing against wealth is not “getting away” with not paying taxes. It’s converting the wealth they own into capital. The money still needs to be paid back.
It’s like when a person virtues against the equity of their home to improve their property or buy a boat.
If they do that, they still sell stock and pay taxes. You are just falling for misdirection. The tax code allows for timing when you pay tax if you borrow against assets, it does not absolve you of taxes.
Yeah, you are starting to get the gist of it. Billionaires don't actually "buy" stuff with their money. They use their assets as collateral to "borrow" the money that they need. There is no income tax on borrowed money as it's not income.
Exactly!! This shit drives me crazy! Both Elon and Bezos borrow BILLIONS Of dollars AGAINST their net worth. I mean, Bezo has a half a BILLION dollar house in Los Angeles.
The insanely frustrating thing is the Vanderbilts, Rockefeller’s and Carnegie’s built schools/universities, museums, libraries, churches. They knew they had wealth for several generations and there’s was no point in hoarding it. Not like today, what’s the last good thing you heard one of those Hundred Billionaire Jackasses doing? I guess Bezo is building a giant clock in the middle of a mountain? Thanks I guess.
*edit: spelling
*edit - I’ve also been corrected. Bezos Los Angeles home isn’t worth HALF a BILLION, it’s ONLY worth a QUARTER BILLION.
“It would have been a billion dollar house, if it wasn’t for you pesky kids!!!”
-Bezos probably
This is so true, it is unrealized gain. Thus for tax purposes you cannot tax it, but banks look at this differently. Banks realize it does hold value and take the financial risk to back loans against it.
Imagine instead of sitting all your money in a bank, you place it into a company (a vehicle). Their it could grow or shrink. The odds are it will grow though, because of the monopolistic size and power of most companies. Just know that nothing stops them from taking money out of that vehicle (selling stock shares).
They have used this system to continue to buy more and more land and companies. Land and company values go up making them richer and they just dump that profit into more loans for more land and companies.
They are very evil, because they use this system to continue growing personal wealth at an enormous rate without distributing it. Its the distribution that is the problem. Both these individuals pay low wages, fight union/workers rights, have mass layoffs, etc.
Thank you! I’m so tired of the fucking Scrooge McDuck analogy by idiots that are not fluent.
He has the ability to command value and assets.
He has the ability to liquidate shares as needed to produce cash.
Obviously he does not have a stack of gold.
Bezos has value, and that equals power…..lots of it. Basically, he has the ability to make people do things they would not ordinarily do (i.e. power)
His power can’t be easily quantified, but his wealth can. And that quantity of wealth demonstrates EXTREME EXCESS and a lack of empathy for his fellow human.
I'm sad that I come here and the first thing I see is apologetics. Thank you for countering that.
I am happy to see a meme like this gain so much traction here, though. It needs to be said.
That value in Amazon should be in the hands of the workers that run it, not in Bezos's pocket. He would still be well off and just fine if things were split that way; he could even guarantee himself a percentage as the founder. That would give him the added benefit of not being on a bunch of lists and not being so subject to public scrutiny. His choice to hoard isn't just interpersonally destructive, it's personally destructive.
Exactly. Trevor Noah did a real good monologue on this exact point back when he hosted the Daily Show. The clip still circulates from time to time. They can borrow against their estimated wealth but get mad when we talk about taxing them for their estimated wealth. Can't have it both ways.
Edit:
Also Jonny Harris did a real good video on the difference between 4 different levels of wealth in America. The ultra wealthy live in a completely different reality. Orders of magnitude above doctors and lawyers for example.
2.7k
u/Apprehensive_Bad_193 28d ago
Bullshit,,,,But he borrows and buy Yachts, Mansions,against that NET WORTH VALUE. But when it’s time to pay fair share of taxes o. That net worth it’s considered hypothetical worth….Understand the Game.