You know what is foolish is to assume I “failed to become a member of the investor class “. I think if you reread my post there was not any derogatory language about investors or executives. My argument was simply current tax code favors wealth and capital over labor. And as far as all the recent tax cuts being only temporary and can be changed at any time is hypothetical. I’m talking about the way the law reads right now. That’s reality not conjecture
What is foolish is to claim that I said something I didn't say. I did not "assume" anything. If you re-read what I said - "So just because you may have failed to become a member of the "investor class" yourself..." - you can see the words "you may have". Using that phrase "may have" indicates only a possibility not a certainty and definitely not an assumption. Also I never claimed you used derogatory language. I said "You speak of the "investor class" as though that's some terrible group". That's hardly an accusation of using derogatory language. If you're going to respond to my comments at least characterize them accurately OK?