>>10Most of their money [i]didn't come from anywhere[i], it doesn't exist, not physically, nor on a banking account, nowhere. What they have is
ownership of assets, which in turn have an estimated market price. This price can go up and down, hence rich people can
"lose money" by the tens of billions:
http://fortune.com/2015/12/22/carlos-slim-billionaire/The Mexican mogul lost a whopping $20 billion in wealth this year, Bloomberg reports, mostly due to a decrease in value of his shares in telecom company America Movil SAB.
See, he didn't lose his money because a hacker hacked his bank account or because he accidentally wrote some extra zeroes on a check. There was no "money", it's just that an asset he owns was depreciated. This asset is a company which means jobs. Like, there are John Does and Mary Janes working in that company and feeding their families etc and all because that rich guy is running their company well. That is how the 1% make money - by managing successful companies which create jobs and provide cheap and high-quality goods and services (if these companies' goods and services were shit, they wouldn't be worth so much). You want to tax the rich, you'll destroy companies which means less jobs, less competition, crappier and more expensive goods and all of that will hit the poorest 80%.