The truly rich who have billions definitely still spend money in their economy in other ways I described (fleshed out more in edits as well) but yes they might not all buy the ultra expensive things like mega yachts specifically. They aren’t just sitting at home in a condo alone though.
The hire fancy decorators to decorate it, they buy fancy couches, they most definitely don’t clean it themselves and probably rarely cook for themselves etc.
We can take everyones most hated billionare of the moment Musk - He’s spent hundreds of millions on election stuff alone. I doubt others spend that much, but they will spend millions on things like that. That money does end up in the pockets of things like radio stations, television stations, people going door to door, helps keep people in those areas employed etc. Not for a great cause in this case, and he of course likely paid 0 taxes on it since it’s borrowed money, but its still money being spent that circulates in the economy.
I’m not saying don’t tax them. I’m saying the person who said they provide very little to the economy is wrong, because the economy is more than taxes.
Is Elon spending $150 million to support Paxton good? Absolutely not. But to say $150 million will have no impact in the Texas economy is also just putting on blinders, even if it is for a bad cause.
Money spent on a bad cause is bad ya, but it’s still money in the economy. My initial reply was around OP’s comment of “wealthy people actually bring very little into an economy,”
The truly rich who have billions definitely still spend money in their economy in other ways I described (fleshed out more in edits as well) but yes they might not all buy the ultra expensive things like mega yachts specifically. They aren’t just sitting at home in a condo alone though.
The hire fancy decorators to decorate it, they buy fancy couches, they most definitely don’t clean it themselves and probably rarely cook for themselves etc.
We can take everyones most hated billionare of the moment Musk - He’s spent hundreds of millions on election stuff alone. I doubt others spend that much, but they will spend millions on things like that. That money does end up in the pockets of things like radio stations, television stations, people going door to door, helps keep people in those areas employed etc. Not for a great cause in this case, and he of course likely paid 0 taxes on it since it’s borrowed money, but its still money being spent that circulates in the economy.
that’s just trickle down but shittier
just tax them, if they leave, take their shit in country and ban their buisness working there
if you want to participate in the benefits pay your fucking share of the cost
I’m not saying don’t tax them. I’m saying the person who said they provide very little to the economy is wrong, because the economy is more than taxes.
liter trickle down economics, we have years of study on this
they get more in subsidies and cost more in externalities than they bring in
tax them heavy or eat them
Notice how my post wasn’t about their actual businesses, but just if they were living their own personal lives?
ok and?
i’m talking about the individual as a whole
they distort markets in their personal lives too
this shit isn’t positive, go look at what Elon is doing outside his business as we speak, so like i said, externalities
Is Elon spending $150 million to support Paxton good? Absolutely not. But to say $150 million will have no impact in the Texas economy is also just putting on blinders, even if it is for a bad cause.
that makes it worse, that isnt some positive lmao
Money spent on a bad cause is bad ya, but it’s still money in the economy. My initial reply was around OP’s comment of “wealthy people actually bring very little into an economy,”