Post #3746224
2026-07-11 19:56 UTC
@tim@union.place
Why only billionaires? The threshold seems to me to be quite arbitrary. Why not millionaires? It would be more practical as it would reach more people and social changes would be better visible.
Replies (1)
-
@tim@union.place 2026-07-11 19:58
@theZosia@mastodon.com.pl absolutely fair point! If I were to actually put a number on it, I think the least controversial one I'd pick would be $100 million. This is where you (plural you in general, not you specifically) may well call me hypocritical, and that's fair, but the bottom line is that my home, alone, puts my "wealth" at over $1 million (and I again acknowledge my privilege there!). I can see a path in which I need $10 million to live comfortably after retirement, the way things are going.