> Enough is not for you to define. Or anyone.

You might look at history for how the "let them eat cake" approach goes.

> It's part of something called freedom.

Freedom is more complicated than you make it out to be.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_liberty

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_liberty

One of the early things toddlers have to learn, in fact, is that their personal freedoms may be in conflict from the very legitimate freedoms of others.

> "You might look at history for how the "let them eat cake" approach goes."

It went rather badly for the revolutionaries: the vast majority of the nobility escaped, most of those executed were commoners, Robespierre himself was guillotined (nice own goal there) as a result of political infighting, and the First Republic gave way in only 10 years to the reign of Napoleon as emperor.

Those who invoke the French Revolution of 1789 are self-identifying as future failures. For pity's sake, at least use a historical example that lasted longer.

The average person in my area makes like 250-350k between two professionals being a couple. They will have 25 peak earning years where they earn like 240k after taxes but only spend 100k so that extra 140k goes into IRA/401k, and other investments, plus discretionary spend. They have 1 million in those accounts within 10 years and 3 million by the time they are in their 50s. That 40k per year you keep citing at that point is less than 2%. None of these people will vote for higher taxes and they keep winning elections. This isn't France and you're not gonna do shit.