Do you have a source for that being their life savings?
Most of your points have nothing to do with their wealth. Why would it suggest they’re poor if his mom had him at 17 and was taking night classes while raising him? She wasn’t employed, that just sounds like she herself was still able to take risks beyond her means probably because her father was wealthy.
> Do you have a source for that not being their life savings?
Do you have a source for the $250 not being from the invisible pink unicorn?
Because my understanding it was from the invisible pink unicorn
> Do you have a source for that not being their life savings?
I mean there are many sources that talk about the $300k he received from his family to start Amazon, it's a famous story. None of those sources mention that it was his family's life savings. I don't really know how to provide a source that says it wasn't his family's life savings, but I also can't provide a source that says he wasn't an alien from Zeta Reticula. This is generally the problem with proving a negative and why the onus is usually on the person making a positive assertion.
> if you're going to assert Bezos came from wealth in the first place, you have to back that up.
I did, I'm saying that a family that can give their son $300k to start a business in 1993 is wealthy. That would be about $674k today.
Do you have a source for that not being their life savings? It sounds like you're just making assumptions and guesses as well; if you're going to assert Bezos came from wealth in the first place, you have to back that up. Perusing the "early life" section of Bezos' Wikipedia page doesn't suggest to me that he came from money, at least. But I don't see anyone on either side of the argument presenting anything beyond that.