Quote from Mercor:
She's trying to live off of idle wealth.
It highlights the misconception of many that the wealthy assume no risk and just live off of interest.
It is the wealthy that provide most of the investment capitol for the economy to grow.
This is why taxing the wealthy is negative for the economy.
I think that raises an interesting point for those who fall into the 'affluent' category (defined as net worth 500K-1 million) or the poor rich category (1-$10 million).
When you look at replacing active income with passive income, someone who has had no problem earning $250K-$500K a year now realizes that to earn an equivalent income requires a significant nut. In other words, $10,000,000 is going to yield that same $500,000 income at a 5% rate.
However, rates aren't 5% right now. Its more like 2.5% in a (relatively) riskless CDARS, if you wanted to keep yourself liquid. So, you're only earning $250,000 on that $10,000,000. And after taxes, about $180,000. Allow yourself 50% (90K p.a.) for rent payments, and that's a 3BR in hoboken NJ on the waterfront. While its a comfortable existance, you're hardly 'kickin it'. Unless you draw into your capital. And that's the problem - needing to draw down your capital without income coming in to offset it is going to make anyone feel 'poor'.
I would expect the less-wealthy who don't draw down their capital to complain more about being 'poor' in the future. Its a psychological frame of mind.
