saw some good Takes on this from @eigenrobot and @kendrictonn
my take: to even phrase the question this way is to make a mistake, in two ways:
1) "rich" is about stocks, not flows. Rich is a WEALTH level, not an income level.
2) if you work [ bc you need to ] you're not richhttps://twitter.com/medved_bjj/status/1412542117457580038 …
-
-
5/ I believe it...and yet, this is absolutely insane At some point, I'm going to write a book: Uncle Morlock's Advice to Young Men. And I'm gonna say "DON'T DO THIS
"https://twitter.com/jake8randomnums/status/1412822986768281609 …Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I'd set my personal threshold at maybe half that, but I agree with your framing. It's about a level of wealth that provides financial independence.
-
half that would be GREAT I'm not defining what I think is good enough, I'm talking about objective RICH
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.