Please define rich (with a poll)

[StageLeft]

A working professional will make between 85 and 150K a year. Combined white collar professionals means 190-300k. It's still not rich. That's here, in a pretty low cost of living area.

I call middle class an auto manufacturing job which brings make 70-80k with overtime. Dual income brings that to 140-160k.

Just so you know, poverty line is 25k. That's why I was laughing at your incredibly low numbers.

Oh not this again, spidey. Brutha please. You do this EVERY TIME there is a thread about money. The average blue collar worker isn't making $12M/quarter and white collar workers flying to work in gulfstreams. I'd say most of the white collar professionals I know (including ones established in their careers) do not make $85k. I know that getting to $85k is not terribly difficult in a lot of fields but it's not reality. Many are making much, much less than 85k and most middle class auto manufacturers are making more like half what you're talking about, on average.

 

[BlahBlahYouToo]

Well first of all I don't agree that those who make 250K a year are rich, IMO that should be a Million a year and I believe they should be paying a higher rate as they can afford it without it being a burden of their life.

disagree. while it's nice if they did so on their own, there is no reason they SHOULD.
just because they can afford to is not a reason.

 

[Red Dawn]

disagree. while it's nice if they did so on their own, there is no reason they SHOULD.
just because they can afford to is not a reason.

Reason enough for me. Seems they did just fine before the Bush cuts.

 

[Bowfinger]

I guess I have to go get another job as apparently, I'm lazy AND greedy now, lol. Oh well, my views are as they are. I've worked as hard as anyone on this forum. If that makes me lazy and greedy because I want to keep my money, than so be it.


But, I do agree that capital earnings should be taxed at the same rate as labor.

You can take some consolation in knowing that most of the people here who screech the loudest about the lazy, greedy bums stealing from the rich are themselves still in school, sponging off Mommy and Daddy. One can only hope their perspective will broaden a bit once they're actually out in the working world, making their own way through life.

 

[Bowfinger]

disagree. while it's nice if they did so on their own, there is no reason they SHOULD.
just because they can afford to is not a reason.

No, the reason they should pay more is because they get so much greater benefit from America. Box seats cost more than the outfield bleachers.

 

[Fear No Evil]

Reason enough for me. Seems they did just fine before the Bush cuts.

Lets put spending back at ~2001 levels as well then. Maybe all Government workers can have their salaries moved back to that level as well. After all, we got along just fine then.

 

[Fear No Evil]

No, the reason they should pay more is because they get so much greater benefit from America. Box seats cost more than the outfield bleachers.

They already do pay more.

 

[Bowfinger]

They already do pay more.

On the average as a percentage of income, the wealthy actually pay less in taxes than the middle class and especially the upper middle class. As a percentage of wealth, they pay even less thanks to the extreme concentration of wealth over the last 30 years.

 

[PrinceofWands]

lol!

You're laughing because you're an idiot. He's 100% correct. Wealth is about percentiles, and those making 6 figures are above the 94th percentile. There is absolutely NO logical argument that the top 6% of earners are not the upper class. It cannot be made.

 

[PrinceofWands]

A working professional will make between 85 and 150K a year. Combined white collar professionals means 190-300k. It's still not rich. That's here, in a pretty low cost of living area.

I call middle class an auto manufacturing job which brings make 70-80k with overtime. Dual income brings that to 140-160k.

Just so you know, poverty line is 25k. That's why I was laughing at your incredibly low numbers.

So, by your numbers, the top 3% of income earners (by household numbers) are middle class.


ROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFL


I think you need a dictionary with a bolded entry for 'middle'.

 

[her209]

Democrat: Someone who is rich is someone who makes more money than I do. Let's tax them.
Republican: Someone who is rich is someone who makes more money than I do. Don't tax me.

Did I get that right?

 

[Red Dawn]

Lets put spending back at ~2001 levels as well then. Maybe all Government workers can have their salaries moved back to that level as well. After all, we got along just fine then.

The difference is those workers would be adversley affected where as the Rich won't.

 

[werepossum]

Income or wealth?

I could make $500,000 a year but have $50,000 net worth... conversely I could make $75,000 a year but have $500,000 in net worth.

Should we tax somebody by the money that they make, or by the money that they have?

Excellent point. I prefer to tax people on what they spend, as this country was set up to do, rather than on what they earn OR on what they have.

I tried this once, never really got a straight answer (Which says a lot about the people that bitch and moan about "the rich").

IMO, rich is living within your means. If you are spending more than you make, then you are always poor. I can easily see someone making a million a year and not being able to hack it.

That's kind of profound. On the other hand someone earning a million a year would surely look rich, and enjoy the kind of lifestyle one associates with the rich, even if going broke. This is true even in Manhattan or LA, so I don't think they should be called poor. Just . . . Stupid.

Personally I think rich is being able to maintain an upper class lifestyle - essentially able to buy whatever they want (short of countries and huge real estate purchases) at will, without worrying unduly about the cost, without having to work, so the level of the top bracket is immaterial. I also agree with nonlnear that the top bracket should start quite low. The more people who can vote themselves more bennies without paying more (or any!) of the additional taxes, the more quickly our great nation will collapse under the weight of our own greed, self-centeredness, and sense of entitlement. The sense of entitlement among the poor is much less damaging than that among the middle class simply because by definition the middle class comprises the bulk of us and because the poor generally expect less of others' money before they feel like they have received their due. Put more simply, someone earning $12K annually will likely be very grateful for a $500 benefit, whereas someone earning $50K annually will more likely consider a $500 benefit as not big enough to solve any of their problems.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

A working professional will make between 85 and 150K a year. Combined white collar professionals means 190-300k. It's still not rich. That's here, in a pretty low cost of living area.

You're way off with those numbers. I work with programmers, lawyers, accountants, etc. that are professional and don't make in the range you quote above. If you are talking about their total compensation package (retirement perks, healthcare perks, etc), many do, but I am assuming you mean gross pay.

Additionally, I live in roughly the same area of the country as you and two working adults making anywhere over $100K can live extremely well especially if they don't have kids. Rich? No, but upper middle class for sure unless you are completely clueless with the money.

 

[Fear No Evil]

The difference is those workers would be adversley affected where as the Rich won't.

Should we not prosecute people who steal from the rich then? It doesn't adversely effect them. Whats the $ amount that we can steal from Donald Trump before it 'adversely' effects him?

 

[Fear No Evil]

You're way off with those numbers. I work with programmers, lawyers, accountants, etc. that are professional and don't make in the range you quote above. If you are talking about their total compensation package (retirement perks, healthcare perks, etc), many do, but I am assuming you mean gross pay.

Additionally, I live in roughly the same area of the country as you and two working adults making anywhere over $100K can live extremely well especially if they don't have kids. Rich? No, but upper middle class for sure unless you are completely clueless with the money.

You have 4 gaming consoles listed in your signature. Clearly you need to pay more in taxes.

 

[Balt]

I selected $500,000.

I'm sure people making $250,000 can live very comfortably almost anywhere in the country, but should they be in the same tax bracket as Goldman Sachs-type CEOs who get annual multi-million dollar bonuses? I don't believe so.

 

[ericlp]

we all live with in our means. tho I would classify someone making 250K a year rich. But that's just me.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I figure the rich are those who make more than the group a given politician is addressing at the moment. Since we were asked for a number I picked a million.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

You have 4 gaming consoles listed in your signature. Clearly you need to pay more in taxes.

Shhhhh, Obama might hear you and ask Pelosi to invent a "video game console tax" for people like me.

 

[madeuce]

Engineer: You called me lazy BEFORE I made some of those comments, lol

I used my Republican Jedi mind trick to foretell you were going to make them... :whiste:

I guess I have to go get another job as apparently, I'm lazy AND greedy now, lol. Oh well, my views are as they are. I've worked as hard as anyone on this forum. If that makes me lazy and greedy because I want to keep my money, than so be it.


But, I do agree that capital earnings should be taxed at the same rate as labor.

A lot of people work hard. I just get sickened by the amount of people that don't and the fact that they are getting by on free lunches on someone else's dime.

The hard working family that's making the sacrifices should not have to make even more sacrifices to support the family that decides to sit back because they are OK letting others support them.

 

[Steeplerot]

I put 100k, but seeing as 50k is average I think twice as much as average is considerably above "rich". Granted the whole scope changes depending on how much debt people are running with.

(Of course this is P&N where everyone is unemployed and hang out posting all day yet make 500k+) -Yes, I know.

 

[JD50]

I put 100k, but seeing as 50k is average I think twice as much as average is considerably above "rich". Granted the whole scope changes depending on how much debt people are running with.

(Of course this is P&N where everyone is unemployed and hang out posting all day yet make 500k+) -Yes, I know.

Average income has nothing to do with who's rich and who's in the middle class. 100k is nowhere near rich, especially in the more popular areas of the country.

 

[Steeplerot]

Average income has nothing to do with who's rich and who's in the middle class. 100k is nowhere near rich, especially in the more popular areas of the country.

I live in the most expensive city in the USA and 100k is a lot. Only person I can think of who makes even close is a programmer 20+ years in his job. You guys are in a fantasy world.

To me he is filthy rich, he has a brand new black Porsche, flies all over the world and has "that" much money where he can write everything off unlike the rest of us. So yes, when you have enough where you can pretty much not have to pay for stuff because you "have" money, your rich.

He is not a bad guy at all, but you can tell really, it is not a bank account thing, it is what money does to a person that makes him "rich". People change when it happens.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I live in the most expensive city in the USA and 100k is a lot. Only person I can think of who makes even close is a programmer 20+ years in his job. You guys are in a fantasy world.

To me he is filthy rich, he has a brand new black Porsche, flies all over the world and has "that" much money where he can write everything off unlike the rest of us. So yes, when you have enough where you can pretty much not have to pay for stuff because you "have" money, your rich.

He is not a bad guy at all, but you can tell really, it is not a bank account thing, it is what money does to a person that makes him "rich". People change when it happens.

I make more than 100K, live in a $175K home, have two kids and drive a 2005 Impala. I could never afford to live as you describe. If he's really living that way he's making a hell of a lot more than you think or he lives off of credit.