Why do libs talk about "income inequality" when billionaire don't have "income"
| cowgod | 02/07/26 | | cowgod | 02/07/26 | | ...,...,,.::..;,.,:,:,,..,::.,:,.,.:.:.,:. | 02/07/26 | | cowgod | 02/07/26 | | Madison Avenue Lemming Enslaved to Conformity | 02/07/26 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: February 7th, 2026 10:57 AM Author: cowgod
as in taxable income. Zuckerberg probably just pays himself $280k or something and lets the rest Compound.
if you hate boomers you should bitch about Net Worth inequality
"income inequality" is just a dog whistle they use to go after the middle class. a $600k HHI is the top 1% cutoff which is basically the irl middle class. it's just 2 Losers making 300k. individual top 1% is only 450k iirc. this varies by location and COL. YMMV.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5832094&forum_id=2,#49653348) |
Date: February 7th, 2026 11:17 AM
Author: ...,...,,.::..;,.,:,:,,..,::.,:,.,.:.:.,:.
The phrase "wealth inequality" is commonly used. Nobody ever said "TAXABLE income inequality".
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5832094&forum_id=2,#49653385) |
|
|