you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 4 months ago (6 children)

a decent size house and a car ≠ abject poverty

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    the rich

    abject poverty

    You realize that there are options in-between those, right?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    Yes i do and i totally agree with your point, just pointing at a flaw in your reasoning

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (3 children)

    Oh, I'm still not seeing it. Sorry.

    The top 1% are cancer on society. Quite literally. They consume resources and expand to the point where it kills the host.

    People in the top 20%, excluding the 1%, aren't like that. They're surely more comfortable. They surely have better opportunity. But their existence doesn't threaten the rest of us.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (2 children)

    The comment you replied to states "The rich will claim you’re driving them to abject poverty if you tax them into only having a million dollars."

    You say people with $1.000.000 still have to work, they are not "actual rich folk". But that's not relevant to the comment you reply to, since them "having to work all day" and them still being able to be "bankrupt by medical debt" still doesn't equal the abject poverty the rich claim they'll be driven to. In other words, it doesn't matter that people with one million are not in the same position as the people with ten million, because neither would be living in abject poverty; ergo my comment.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments