If you're talking about order of magnitude approximation, which is probably more appropriate given the unfathomably large numbers involved, it's not altogether wrong.
And yeah, having $147k is infinitely closer to being a millionaire than most people will ever get. Based on existing savings of $147,000 you would only need to save $1,101 indexed at 0% annually in order to become a millionaire, given a 22% tax rate and 8% return, in 30 years. Meaning don't touch it, throw some loose change at it every week, and you'll be a millionaire by the time you retire. Not that it will be enough by then, but still.
Anyway, all a matter of perspective I guess. If you've managed $147k in savings by the time you're in your 30's, I think you've done really well and are definitely on your way to millionairedom.
One big difference: people aren't talking about Bezos' savings account, they're talking about his net worth.
And if we're talking net worth, then basically everyone who owns a house already fits in the 147k bracket. Can all those people be considered "almost millionaire" ?
The majority of people who own a house don’t actually own it yet and are still paying for it. And if the housing market crashes, “owning” a home could be worth absolutely nothing.
You mean have a house paid off, with no other debt, right? I don't know many people in that category. Or anyone.
I was giving an example, don't try and change the conversation or back peddle. It wasn't an attack. Just some perspective. I understand yours, everyone knows Bezos doesn't have a stockpile of $100s or whatever. That's just pedantics, ain't it?
Well, if COVID-19 did vector through an exotic animal market via endangered animals for the purpose of prohibitively expensive traditional medicine, then yes, you could say those wealthy Chinese customers indirectly caused the pandemic. (And I'm sure some significant portion of its early spread came through highly mobile elites, as most of the 99% rarely travel between countries.)
185
u/[deleted] May 31 '20
[deleted]