There’s an enormous difference between millionaires and billionaires, and any piece that mentions them in the same context should automatically be disqualified as pro-hyperwealth propaganda. A billionaire could give up 5% or 10% or 90% of their wealth and see zero material difference in any aspect of their life - they’d still be unimaginably wealthy by any standard. It’s just keeping score at that stage.
The people leaving California because of the proposed billionaires’ tax - which will never happen btw - are selfish whiny crybabies who should be ostracized from public life. Good riddance to them.
There’s an enormous difference between millionaires and billionaires, and any piece that mentions them in the same context should automatically be disqualified as pro-hyperwealth propaganda. A billionaire could give up 5% or 10% or 90% of their wealth and see zero material difference in any aspect of their life - they’d still be unimaginably wealthy by any standard. It’s just keeping score at that stage.
The people leaving California because of the proposed billionaires’ tax - which will never happen btw - are selfish whiny crybabies who should be ostracized from public life. Good riddance to them.
Humans have a hard time with zeroes, as there's not really an evolutionary driver for that.
In the natural world, if whatever it is has exponents, odds are you're not going to be able to do anything about it.
This article's use of "millionaire" means million dollar income, which is just a stupid way to use the word.