The Wall Street Journal said in 2013 the tax increase hurt families, this is the ...

[bozack]

what is their readership like, all 7 figure folks....talk about ridiculous...single parent 260K or family with 4 kids making 650K is pretty high income....its like the paper where I live listing all the million + housing as affordable.

 

[bozack]

Being the victim of a 1% to 1.5% tax increase is not a victim. That kind of increase is not going to hurt any of those families unless they are morons who spend every dime they have and live month to month on their income.

I'd bet ya every one of those hypothetical families does between the private schools, country clubs, two vacations, luxury cars...but those are all necessities

 

[brianmanahan]

Yeah, I tend not to read their articles as most of them tend to be garbage.

WSJ is better than the political junk articles you usually post

money runs the world

 

[brianmanahan]

these incomes are decent, but honestly not that much more than average on bogleheads and /r/FI and other forums

even ATOT's minimum wage level is considered to be about 100$k

 

[Victorian Gray]

Yeah. I saw that and tried it. The link says I must sign in to see it. I don't have an account, or whatever, there. I don't subscribe to the WSJ.

If you guys have an account and say it's legit that's good enough for me. If so, that graphic etc. is dumb as h3ll. Talk about "First World Problems".......

Fern

I just clicked the link and didn't have to sign in.

 

[zinfamous]

Why isn't Yelp Girl in that infographic?

 

[ivwshane]

WSJ is better than the political junk articles you usually post

money runs the world

Of course! As we see by the excellent article in this very thread! /s

You mad bro?

 

[boomerang]

no shit, why do they look so downtrodden?

Because at their education level, they are well aware of the horrendous amounts of waste and fraud that the government not only refuses to deal with but in some cases condones. They know that too much of the taxes they pay is being wasted.

Here's but one example.

Watchdog Finds Billions in Possible Fraudulent Obamacare Payments

 

[boomerang]

I'd bet ya every one of those hypothetical families does between the private schools, country clubs, two vacations, luxury cars...but those are all necessities

Private schools are. The nation can only absorb so many ivwshane's.

 

[sm625]

The people who pushed through those tax increases are the same people who also jacked up their investment income by 20-200% by deficit spending $1 trillion a year and then selling that debt to the federal reserve which jacked up bond prices and bolstered investment income across the board. In actuality, those tax increases are not nearly enough to cover what they've stolen in this racket. All the average person got was the honor of paying $3 for a dozen eggs.

 

[disappoint]

Why isn't Yelp Girl in that infographic?

Do you really want the WSJ's ink budget skyrocketing by 0.1% just to include some pleb. mouth breather? What kind of monster are you?

 

[soulcougher73]

LOL Single mother with kids at 260k. Maybe try 50k..even that might be pushing it to be honest for the majority of americans.

 

[JockoJohnson]

I figured it out. The cartoon image is showing that they aren't happy because they still aren't paying their fair share. Look at the retired couple...they are still sad and aren't paying any more in taxes. The other families are only paying 1.5% more when they know they could do much more.

 

[Homerboy]

This isn't from 2016... I recall this picture from 2013. Trying to Google it...

Or did they re-purpose that picture in 2016?

Edit: Yeah picture is from 2013
http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2013/01/16/wsj_fiscal_cliff_infographic.html

 

[JockoJohnson]

This isn't from 2016... I recall this picture from 2013. Trying to Google it...

Or did they re-purpose that picture in 2016?

Edit: Yeah picture is from 2013
http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2013/01/16/wsj_fiscal_cliff_infographic.html

Yup. Someone else has pointed this out already. It's an old article and apparently the ridicule for it was missed back then. Still fun to look at what some perceive the middle class to be.

 

[Homerboy]

Yup. Someone else has pointed this out already. It's an old article and apparently the ridicule for it was missed back then. Still fun to look at what some perceive the middle class to be.

That's the thing, I'm pretty sure it WAS ridiculed back then.
Certainly other sites picked up on it, and I probably would not have ever seen it if not in the Anandtech forums somewhere...

 

[Phokus]

LMAO, someone did a hilarious parody of the WSJ infographic that i posted in the OP:

http://i.imgur.com/11Ley.gif

 

[MajinCry]

"Oh no now I only need 87 wallets instead of 88 to carry today's spending money what is the world coming to?"

Talk about out of touch. These lads should live in Pine Ridge for a year, without access to their bank account.

 

[Strk]

"Oh no now I only need 87 wallets instead of 88 to carry today's spending money what is the world coming to?"

Talk about out of touch. These lads should live in Pine Ridge for a year, without access to their bank account.

Oh you plebeians and your need for wallets!

 

[Moonbeam]

A known fact about people who hate themselves is that they also loath self pity. Thats because they live in a state of self pity and hate any competition, especially from others who for all intents and purposes appear to actually be better off then they are. It comes from, Mommy, Mommy, look at me. Do you remember dying for attention?

 

[shady28]

The WSJ targets its readership, which has a much higher income that the norm.

That doesn't mean the tax increases didn't hurt more ordinary families.

Median income families are being hit by a combination of higher taxes, and negative real wage growth.

This is really obvious to anyone paying attention who has moderate critical thinking skills.

Rarely will you see it put forth bluntly in the mainstream media, but it occasionally occurs.



https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ised-middle-class-taxes-and-lost-an-election/

In 2013, most Americans had a good bit less money, after adjusting for taxes, than the year before. That's because in 2013, a huge tax increase affecting ordinary workers took effect, raising the employee payroll tax from 4.2 percent to 6.2 percent. A worker earning $50,000 a year saw disposable income decline by $1,000.

It was the first time the payroll tax had increased since 1990, and previous payroll tax hikes had been smaller.

The fact remains that incomes for most Americans aren’t growing very fast and haven’t been for years. Median inflation-adjusted income last year was still $2,100 lower than when President Obama took office in 2009 — and $3,600 lower than when President George W. Bush took office in 2001.

 

[TheSlamma]

Those numbers must be in pesos or maybe yen.

 

[Jhhnn]

The WSJ targets its readership, which has a much higher income that the norm.

That doesn't mean the tax increases didn't hurt more ordinary families.

Median income families are being hit by a combination of higher taxes, and negative real wage growth.

This is really obvious to anyone paying attention who has moderate critical thinking skills.

Rarely will you see it put forth bluntly in the mainstream media, but it occasionally occurs.



https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ised-middle-class-taxes-and-lost-an-election/

Gawd. Payroll taxes were temporarily reduced in the wake of the Ownership Society collapse.

The rest? Thanks, Job Creators!

 

[brianmanahan]

Oh you plebeians and your need for wallets!

 

[brianmanahan]

those people should have mega backdoor roth'd their money, then they wouldn't be worrying so much about taxes

i'm throwing 30$k more into a roth IRA per year over the normal 5.5$k limit because of a legal loophole, never to be taxed again

gotta load up that account in case they finally do close the loophole