Thats the whole point of the original comment. I can’t figure out WHAT his motivation is, when his entire career is him basically saying “DESTROY ME! I SHOULDN’T HAVE THIS MUCH MONEY! NOBODY SHOULD!”
…but whys HE saying that. Like I could understand if he made like 30k a year, and had a few thousand in savings. But he’s the image of who’s he’s trying to turn the torches on. Is it intentional? Does he not realize?
Meanwhile, people read the innitial comment I made, and are defending him by saying he’s not the problem.
Why’s he saying that? Because he believes in a better world rather than acting out of self interest. Plenty of high net worth and high income individuals advocate for higher taxation. I know I’d rather live in a world where the hungry are fed and the people are housed, rather than have an extra 10% of my income each year.
His motivation is pretty clear if you actually look at his political career. You may agree or disagree with him but the way you’re trying to tear into him just shows you don’t have a grasp of the actual problem he presents.
You can go read his tax returns yourself. His income most years is his salary, boosted several times by the release of his books after his popularity. This in total has netted him a few million. You can argue his books should have been published for free, but it’s not some shady stock manipulation.
This site is a good visualization. I’m not sure if it’s up to date but the top end has only gotten bigger. You’re arguing about something on the first screen scroll. By the end of the decade we’re likely to see our first TRILLIONAIRE…
Thats the whole point of the original comment. I can’t figure out WHAT his motivation is, when his entire career is him basically saying “DESTROY ME! I SHOULDN’T HAVE THIS MUCH MONEY! NOBODY SHOULD!”
…but whys HE saying that. Like I could understand if he made like 30k a year, and had a few thousand in savings. But he’s the image of who’s he’s trying to turn the torches on. Is it intentional? Does he not realize?
Meanwhile, people read the innitial comment I made, and are defending him by saying he’s not the problem.
Which completely misses the point.
Why’s he saying that? Because he believes in a better world rather than acting out of self interest. Plenty of high net worth and high income individuals advocate for higher taxation. I know I’d rather live in a world where the hungry are fed and the people are housed, rather than have an extra 10% of my income each year.
He’s not advocating for just taxing the rich though. He’s advocating for eliminating the rich. Which he’s part of.
Which would make for a better world. Which he believes in.
He’s not fucking rich! A few million dollars is not rich in the USA in 2025. How can you be this ignorant?
I’m never going to have a few million dollars, but just because I am lower class doesn’t mean it’s not possible without exploiting others!
His motivation is pretty clear if you actually look at his political career. You may agree or disagree with him but the way you’re trying to tear into him just shows you don’t have a grasp of the actual problem he presents.
You can go read his tax returns yourself. His income most years is his salary, boosted several times by the release of his books after his popularity. This in total has netted him a few million. You can argue his books should have been published for free, but it’s not some shady stock manipulation.
This site is a good visualization. I’m not sure if it’s up to date but the top end has only gotten bigger. You’re arguing about something on the first screen scroll. By the end of the decade we’re likely to see our first TRILLIONAIRE…