Excerpt: America’s top 1% enjoy a fifth of the economy’s income and pay nearly a third of its federal taxes. Many politicians think they should cough up much more. Zohran Mamdani, New York’s mayor, wants a new 2% city levy on incomes over $1m. Virginia, Rhode Island and Washington state are weighing up similar measures; Californians are likely this year to vote on a “one time” 5% levy on billionaires’ wealth. In Europe, too, there is a similar clamour to target the wealthy. France has seen a popular campaign for a wealth tax. And with Sir Keir Starmer weakened or doomed as prime minister, the left wing of Britain’s Labour Party may implement one of its own. The “Robin Hood” state, which takes from the rich to give to the poor, has obvious appeal. Governments across the developed world are strapped for cash. Budgets are burdened by legacy debts, ageing populations and the need to spend more on defence. But few politicians will countenance raising broad-based taxes at a time when voters, scarred by the high inflation of the early 2020s, are worried about affordability. Booming stockmarkets, meanwhile, have reinforced the idea that inequality is too high. And it always sounds good to say someone else will foot the bill.
…


Who is playing me? (Other than you with this ridiculous conversation.)
Ok, so your math and reasoning needs as much work as your reading comprehension. I can recommend a tutor if you like.
Buy and rent two $300k houses for an income of $100k a year? Where can you buy $300k houses that rent for $4166.66 a month after expenses?
More importantly, why was a homeowner with a modest urban home valued around $1mil an evil bougie, but an egregiously extortionate landlord with 3 homes valued at $1mil virtuous?
I thought about blocking you, but now I’m too curious to see where this trainwreck of yours is going.
Oh my bad, you can’t read.
It all makes sense now.
So ironic you’re telling me my reading comprehension needs work, lol.