On: Tech elites leaving San Francisco threaten Silicon Valley's supremacy

[chii]

> And they stand to gain far more than someone working for $20 an hour.

And a lawyer gets paid $200/hr. What are you comparing? I'm not talking about whether it's "fair" that someone can be earning so little when there exists billionairs. That's for the philosophers and social commentators to endless debate.

But someone working for $20/hr earns that money, with zero risk of not receiving it after services rendered. Someone investing money is not guaranteed a return.

> If a millionaire doesn't invest and make captial gains, what does he do with his money?

So you're saying that because said millionaire has "no choice", he would be forced to invest and thus, society could leech more off him?

[iso1631 → chii]

I'm asking that if the millionaire was taxed at the same rate then what would he do with his money instead of investing it?

Same principle with a lawyer being paid $200 an hour, or an actor on $2000 an hour.

Morally I'd say that the millionaire who is rent seeking should be taxed more than those working, but parity would be a start

You make investing seem like gambling. Seems that the IRS treat gambling as earned income, not unearned income.