Well-off devs like the guy who quit Amazon don't have $$$ issues, so he can afford to do that.
Others don't, and that doesn't make them bad.
That makes them care for their family first.
I wouldn't say they are grossly underpaid as much as I'd say executives (not necessarily all management) is grossly overpaid. The market has failed us.
People tell me to not look at someone else's plate to see how much more they have than I do but it doesn't make sense when so much wealth/power is concentrated at the top.
Btw, I don't make FAANG level salaries so I can't speak for them. I still believe there is a magic number like maybe 10, 50, or up to 100 which is a multiplier of the minimum wage above which the income tax must be 90%+
So for example, if the magic number is 50 and minimum wage is $15, then $15 * 50 * 2000 (a year), then income above 1.5M would be subject to the highest level bracket. I sincerely believe the magic number should be no greater than 100.
The fact that you refer to it as a magic number implies that this at best wishful thinking.
I agree. It is wishful thinking at the moment but it isn't entirely unreasonable. This is about individual income tax and not corporate income tax (which is a completely different thing altogether which I can't tax like individual income even in my make-believe world [0]).
I think individual income tax changes I propose are very reasonable. I'd say if you are wealthy, my proposal is very much preferable to a wealth tax.
[0] For example, according to https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/WMT/financials?ltr=1 the trailing twelve months, Walmart total revenue was ~523B, cost of revenue ~394B, and the most important bottom line, income before tax was only ~$20B. Ideally, we should be taxing revenue with no regard to expenses but there is no good way I can think of to do that other than drastically decreasing the tax rate to max out at about 2% so this is a different discussion altogether and likely not very fruitful.