• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

U.S. rich say they will spend less if Obama wins re-election

D

dmcowen674

No Lifer
10-3-2012

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/rich-us-well-spend-less-155302525.html

Rich in US: We'll Spend Less If Obama Wins



The latest Mendelsohn Affluent Barometer showed that 43 percent of the $250,000-plus earners would spend more if Romney is elected.



Only 18 percent of them would spend more if President Barack Obama is re-elected.


Call it a threat or a promise.



But a new poll shows that people earning at least $250,000 a year will spend more money if Mitt Romney wins the election.
 
Top category of their spending: Vacations and travel.

So they will spread less of their money overseas? Sounds good to me.
 
Wait, I thought spending was bad for the economy. Or is that only middle class people earning a living wage and spending? Yeah that's the bad one. Let's lay off government workers and outsource manufacturing jobs because clearly spending by those people is useless. And give the rich more tax cuts because their spending stimulates the economy.
 
Who cares? The super-rich generally participate in a different economy than the rest of us . Their money is already largely sequestered from circulating in our plebian economy, so one way or another much of that downturn in spending doesn't really affect us. If anything, spending will simply vary based on how the economy does, rather than being simply intrinsic to which candidate wins.
 
I love how people hate on the $250 class... Most of the ones I know that makes that much has gotten off their lazy asses and made a living for themselves without mommy and daddy's help.
 
If the president and his fellow idiots told you that you were the root of all evil and that the way forward for the country was to take your money away and hand it to freeloaders, wouldn't you be more careful about how you spent your money? I know I would.

Makes complete sense.
 
They'll spend more under Romney because the already low tax rate (500K plus) earners will effectively get a tax break. Hence more money to spend. This is pure whining, does anyone think someone making more than 300k per year is tough enough/willing to take a standard of living decrease to make a point about an election. I say they'll talk about it but not act on it.
 
Last edited:
Fanatical Meat said:
This is pure whining, does anyone think someone making more than 300k per year is tough enough/willing to take a standard of living decrease to make a point about an election. I say they'll talk about it but not act on it.
Click to expand...

They're not saying they are doing it to make a point about an election, they are saying they will spend less because they are less certain about the direction things will go and how those who are successful will be punished under another 4 year obummer regime. It's pretty much the same reason businesses are sitting on trillions of dollars. Completely logical.

When there is more uncertainty, the best policy is to be cautious and save.
 
Fanatical Meat said:
They'll spend more because the already low tax rate (500K plus) earners will effectively get a tax break. Hence more money to spend. This is pure whining, does anyone think someone making more than 300k per year is tough enough/willing to take a standard of living decrease to make a point about an election. I say they'll talk about it but not act on it.
Click to expand...

This is the same as the idiots who threaten to move to Switzerland every year "if the Democrat" wins. Then, low and behold, when it comes to pass they never do. A-holes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top