Now that he's elected, Obama thinks $75K salary makes you rich

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/106490/Stimulus-101-What%27s-in-the-Bills


The president proposed the so-called "Make Work Pay Credit" as part of an effort to spend at least 75% of the package in the first 18 months after its passage. Obama hopes that fast-spending provisions like tax cuts will quickly help low- and middle-income workers in need of spending money.

Middle-class tax cut: $145 billion. Tax cut amounting to $500 a year for individuals and $1,000 for couples. The full credit would be limited to those making $75,000 or less ($150,000 or less for workers filing joint returns).

So Messiah, what's my incentive to work hard again? Oh yeah, so the schmuck living with his parents working at McDonald's can have $500 for a new PS3.

[2centsworth]

I thought it was $250,000.

[FreeMason]

So Messiah, what's my incentive to work hard again? Oh yeah, so the schmuck living with his parents working at McDonald's can have $500 for a new PS3.

LMAO, nailed it :toast

[fyatuk]

So Messiah, what's my incentive to work hard again? Oh yeah, so the schmuck living with his parents working at McDonald's can have $500 for a new PS3.

That's the problem with a one size fits all bill. $75k is an appropriate number in some parts of the country where the cost of living is astronomical, but in other parts of the country is a flambouyant salary.

One of the many reasons I'm a state's rights supporter.

[SnakeBoy]

but in other parts of the country is a flambouyant salary.



$75k is not flambouyant anywhere in the country.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

That's the problem with a one size fits all bill. $75k is an appropriate number in some parts of the country where the cost of living is astronomical, but in other parts of the country is a flambouyant salary.

One of the many reasons I'm a state's rights supporter.

Maybe if you live in say rural Alabama, Mississippi, or the midwest corn states (KS, Nebraska, Oklahoma), but in most states calling $75K flamboyant is a huge reach.

Still, I like how it went down from $250K to $150K, and now he's elected the truth comes out.... $75K single or $150K married isn't rich, especially when you factor in either supporting yourself as a single person on $75K a year (that's before taxes, so deduct roughly 30% of that), or $150K married and likely with at least one child to support (clothes, food, eventually college).

This is a glowing example why people like myself were against Obama. Everything about his past said that he would play this card and shovel more money to buy votes, and now he's elected and not even two weeks into his administration the truth comes out.

[Blake]

this staunch republican thread = headache

[The Reckoning]

well, someone has to pay the bailout money. as long as the reserve isnt printing out more bills to cover the costs.

[ClingingMars]

well, someone has to pay the bailout money. as long as the reserve isnt printing out more bills to cover the costs.

+1

fuck the reserve.

[fyatuk]

Maybe if you live in say rural Alabama, Mississippi, or the midwest corn states (KS, Nebraska, Oklahoma), but in most states calling $75K flamboyant is a huge reach.

Depends on your standards. It's about 3x what I need to live quite comfortably here in SA, so I think it's pretty damn rich. My personal opinion.


Still, I like how it went down from $250K to $150K, and now he's elected the truth comes out....

Yeah, no way those numbers would going to hold up in the legislation.


This is a glowing example why people like myself were against Obama. Everything about his past said that he would play this card and shovel more money to buy votes, and now he's elected and not even two weeks into his administration the truth comes out.

No arguments here. I told everyone I knew there was enough information to trust Obama to actually hold to anything, and plenty of evidence that he wouldn't on many things.

[Winehole23]

In fairness to Obama, the bailout legislation is an ad hoc, emergency measure. It's just possible he'll be somewhere closer to his campaign promises whenever he takes on tax policy as such. For good or for ill, I doubt the present bill is his final word on the matter.

[George Gervin's Afro]

http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/106490/Stimulus-101-What%27s-in-the-Bills



So Messiah, what's my incentive to work hard again? Oh yeah, so the schmuck living with his parents working at McDonald's can have $500 for a new PS3.

So do we have you on record as stating that if your taxes go up you will give up trying to make a living?

Would you then go welfare? food stamps? If you stop making money how will you support yourself?

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

well, someone has to pay the bailout money. as long as the reserve isnt printing out more bills to cover the costs.

So you're okay with welfare and class warfare? Because that's what it is.


Depends on your standards. It's about 3x what I need to live quite comfortably here in SA, so I think it's pretty damn rich. My personal opinion.

Good for you. In Plano (where I live), the cost of living is higher than San Antonio. If you're comfortable with what you're making howabout you send me some of your money?


In fairness to Obama, the bailout legislation is an ad hoc, emergency measure. It's just possible he'll be somewhere closer to his campaign promises whenever he takes on tax policy as such. For good or for ill, I doubt the present bill is his final word on the matter.

Please, this legislation is first and foremost a Democratic lovefest for those that brokered their 2008 election runs. It's being done under the guise of economic stimulus, but look where all the money's going.


So do we have you on record as stating that if your taxes go up you will give up trying to make a living?

Would you then go welfare? food stamps? If you stop making money how will you support yourself?

Nah, I'm smarter than that. I'll renegotiate my compensation with my employer so I fall right at the cap and get some extra benefits, like an extra couple of weeks paid time off, stuff like that.

So do we have you on record as stating that you like class welfare and socialism (err, welfare, err 'tax rebates' for people paying no income tax)? Somewhere Karl Marx is smiling today.

It's disgusting what is happening to this country.

[balli]

Please, this legislation is first and foremost a Democratic lovefest for those that brokered their 2008 election runs. It's being done under the guise of economic stimulus, but look where all the money's going.
That's a retarded take.

I can't believe you'd bitch. The government/obama is straight going to give you free money. Free. You didn't earn it. Hundreds or maybe thousands of dollars. Free.

And you're pissed because those who make $75,000 or less get more than you do? GMAFB! Selfish motherfucking way of looking at it.

[DarkReign]

I can't believe you'd bitch. The government/obama is straight going to give you free money. Free. You didn't earn it. Hundreds or maybe thousands of dollars. Free.

Government does not give you anything for free. Theyre just giving back to you a miniscule amount of what they have already taken from you.

[The Reckoning]

So you're okay with welfare and class warfare? Because that's what it is.

i know it sucks, but how else are we going to pay for the bailout and our horrible debt without risking mass inflation? we need to pay our shit off and be fiscally conservative - meaning no more wars, and delaying stupid projects like highway 69 and fencing the border.

class warfare sucks, but making sure we don't all end up in the poor class is a more pertinent action.

[Spurminator]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/66/Income-curve-%2410k.png

* Household

[Spurminator]

Still, I like how it went down from $250K to $150K, and now he's elected the truth comes out.... $75K single or $150K married isn't rich, especially when you factor in either supporting yourself as a single person on $75K a year (that's before taxes, so deduct roughly 30% of that), or $150K married and likely with at least one child to support (clothes, food, eventually college).


You're putting words into his mouth. What does any of this have to do with who is "rich" or not? This is a part of the stimulus package, completely separate from the tax policy he outlined in his campaign.

[Winehole23]

Please, this legislation is first and foremost a Democratic lovefest for those that brokered their 2008 election runs. It's being done under the guise of economic stimulus, but look where all the money's going.Let's have a look:

http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/106490/Stimulus-101-What's-in-the-Bills

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/15/stimulus-pie-chart/



http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2009/01/15/business/economy/stimpackage.jpg

Sector by sector:

http://enr.construction.com/business_management/finance/2009/0116-StimulusBillBreakdown.asp

[Spurminator]

I mean, shit, talk about class warfare, now anyone making under $75K is a slacker living with his mom?

[SnakeBoy]

I can't believe you'd bitch. The government/obama is straight going to give you free money. Free. You didn't earn it. Hundreds or maybe thousands of dollars. Free.


Won't be giving me anything.

[ratm1221]

What the bajesus are you smoking? 150k is pretty damn good money and definitely enough that you wouldn't give a crap about 500 bucks. A family making 150k a year should easily be able to afford a 4k a month house payment and live very comfortably. I don't think people living in half million dollar houses give a crap, why do you?

[FreeMason]

That's a retarded take.

I can't believe you'd bitch. The government/obama is straight going to give you free money. Free. You didn't earn it. Hundreds or maybe thousands of dollars. Free.

And you're pissed because those who make $75,000 or less get more than you do? GMAFB! Selfish motherfucking way of looking at it.

Nothing is free!

lmao, you are not capable of looking at it from the principles angle AHF is. Mainly why you are a left classwarfare nuthugger. They are using you.

[The Reckoning]

Let's have a look:

http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/106490/Stimulus-101-What's-in-the-Bills

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/15/stimulus-pie-chart/



http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2009/01/15/business/economy/stimpackage.jpg

Sector by sector:

http://enr.construction.com/business_management/finance/2009/0116-StimulusBillBreakdown.asp


me no likey question marks

[Winehole23]

me no likey question marksyeah, that one's a stumper. $33 billion isn't a rounding error.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

i know it sucks, but how else are we going to pay for the bailout and our horrible debt without risking mass inflation? we need to pay our shit off and be fiscally conservative - meaning no more wars, and delaying stupid projects like highway 69 and fencing the border.

class warfare sucks, but making sure we don't all end up in the poor class is a more pertinent action.

How are we going to pay for our 'horrible debt' by adding another trillion dollars to the tab?

[ChumpDumper]

What an odd thread.

[LnGrrrR]

The question marks are the same ones the underpants gnomes use.

Step 1: Stimulus + tax cuts!
Step 2: ????
Step 3: Better economy!

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

That's a retarded take.

I can't believe you'd bitch. The government/obama is straight going to give you free money. Free. You didn't earn it. Hundreds or maybe thousands of dollars. Free.

And you're pissed because those who make $75,000 or less get more than you do? GMAFB! Selfish motherfucking way of looking at it.

Actually I'll be under the $75K cap this year, but in all likelihood would exceed it next year.

Still, it's a red herring and your take is what's wrong with the situation. We're not getting free money. They're giving everyone $500 (gee, how'd that stimulus check last spring work out as far as the economy goes?) that will have to be paid back on our future taxes, or our kids', or all of the above.

Robbing from tomorrow so you can try and keep your constituents happy about the shitty economy so you can stay in office making bank off all the lobbyists is bullshit, but that is what Congress is up to right now.

And it fucking blows.

[clambake]

having to share in your party's burden=bad.

[Winehole23]

How are we going to pay for our 'horrible debt' by adding another trillion dollars to the tab?Allegedly, it will save us from an even worse fate. The argument is that if government doesn't create the demand now, demand will perish chaotically in a deflationary spiral that will cost us even more in the long run.

I'm not sure I believe it either, but it's the wisdom of the village elders, and supposedly, it's the only round left in the chamber.

[Blake]

do I have to spend my $1000?

[Winehole23]

do I have to spend my $1000?Ingrate!

Why do you hate America!

(j/k)

The stimulus last year went overwhelmingly into savings and debt retirement. Whenever I get mine, that's what I'll do with it.

[Bender]

Tanstaafl

[balli]

Nothing is free!

lmao, you are not capable of looking at it from the principles angle AHF is. Mainly why you are a left classwarfare nuthugger. They are using you.

Please. I'm simply saying:


What does any of this have to do with who is "rich" or not? This is a part of the stimulus package, completely separate from the tax policy he outlined in his campaign.
And I'm more than capable of looking at the larger principle behind the stimulus. But it's happening, whether you or I like it or not.

And Aggie, A. tried to construe it as a broken campaign promise- when it's anything but and B. framed it as class warfare- when it's anything but.

So if you want to have a larger debate the stimulus and its long term implications, fine, but in the meantime don't act like this is a broken campaign pledge (at all) that's specifically targeting or injuring the wealthy.

[MiamiHeat]

People like Angie in this thread need a serious smack of reality to the face.

A huge percentage of americans do not even SNIFF 75k single or ESPECIALLY 150k married. The largest bracket of income tax comes from those who make under 35k a year. If you make 75k or more single or make 150k in a marriage, you need to count your blessings and be grateful.

[fyatuk]

Good for you. In Plano (where I live), the cost of living is higher than San Antonio. If you're comfortable with what you're making howabout you send me some of your money?


Hey, I said I live quite comfortably, not that I had any to spare. If I did, it'd go to cancer research & treatment charities, anyway.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

What the bajesus are you smoking? 150k is pretty damn good money and definitely enough that you wouldn't give a crap about 500 bucks. A family making 150k a year should easily be able to afford a 4k a month house payment and live very comfortably. I don't think people living in half million dollar houses give a crap, why do you?

Lop off 35% of that for taxes up front, you're down to under 100K. Send a kid to college and unless he's a minority you're looking another $20K a year to go to school. You're down to $80K. 4K a month house payment + property taxes and you're down to about $30K left for food, gas, clothes, bills, and putting towards retirement.

I must have missed where people pulling down $150K are living in half million dollar homes, outside of overinflated markets like Florida, Phoenix, Cali, and NYC...

[Blake]

Ingrate!

Why do you hate America!

(j/k)

The stimulus last year went overwhelmingly into savings and debt retirement. Whenever I get mine, that's what I'll do with it.

yeah, that's my round about economics question.....

if you put it in a bank, does that stimulate the economy?

[doobs]

Tanstaafl

I'm actually in the middle of reading that book.

[Winehole23]

yeah, that's my round about economics question.....

if you put it in a bank, does that stimulate the economy?If the banks aren't lending, no.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

People like Angie in this thread need a serious smack of reality to the face.

A huge percentage of americans do not even SNIFF 75k single or ESPECIALLY 150k married. The largest bracket of income tax comes from those who make under 35k a year. If you make 75k or more single or make 150k in a marriage, you need to count your blessings and be grateful.

I know what the aggregate incomes are. I also worked my ass off, starting out of college making under your 35K threshold. Now I'm being told by Obama, Pelosi, and Reid that because I've worked my ass off that they want to take $500 of my taxes and give to someone who doesn't pay any taxes any way. That's socialism/welfare/whatever you want to call it.

So now some of my income is going to give someone something for nothing, meanwhile I'm still on the hook for my student loans and car payments. That is bullshit.

[Blake]

Send a kid to college and unless he's a minority you're looking another $20K a year to go to school.

I don't think so. :lol

[Blake]

I know what the aggregate incomes are. I also worked my ass off, starting out of college making under your 35K threshold. Now I'm being told by Obama, Pelosi, and Reid that because I've worked my ass off that they want to take $500 of my taxes and give to someone who doesn't pay any taxes any way. That's socialism/welfare/whatever you want to call it.

huh.....I thought you had to file a tax return to get this stimulus check.....I wasn't aware that someone not paying taxes was going to get a check.


So now some of my income is going to give someone something for nothing, meanwhile I'm still on the hook for my student loans and car payments. That is bullshit.

you can write off some of that student loan interest and nobody told you to buy a new car.

[Spurminator]

Now I'm being told by Obama, Pelosi, and Reid that because I've worked my ass off that they want to take $500 of my taxes and give to someone who doesn't pay any taxes any way.

Link?

[Trainwreck2100]

Ingrate!

Why do you hate America!

(j/k)

The stimulus last year went overwhelmingly into savings and debt retirement. Whenever I get mine, that's what I'll do with it.

you know last year's stimulus is being taken out of this year's ITR right?

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Link?

Go read the bill. Even people who pay no income tax will receive the $500.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123310466514522309.html


"Never let a serious crisis go to waste. What I mean by that is it's an opportunity to do things you couldn't do before."

So said White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel in November,


There's $1 billion for Amtrak, the federal railroad that hasn't turned a profit in 40 years; $2 billion for child-care subsidies; $50 million for that great engine of job creation, the National Endowment for the Arts; $400 million for global-warming research and another $2.4 billion for carbon-capture demonstration projects. There's even $650 million on top of the billions already doled out to pay for digital TV conversion coupons.

In selling the plan, President Obama has said this bill will make "dramatic investments to revive our flagging economy." Well, you be the judge. Some $30 billion, or less than 5% of the spending in the bill, is for fixing bridges or other highway projects. There's another $40 billion for broadband and electric grid development, airports and clean water projects that are arguably worthwhile priorities.


Add the roughly $20 billion for business tax cuts, and by our estimate only $90 billion out of $825 billion, or about 12 cents of every $1, is for something that can plausibly be considered a growth stimulus.


Here's another lu-lu: Congress wants to spend $600 million more for the federal government to buy new cars. Uncle Sam already spends $3 billion a year on its fleet of 600,000 vehicles. Congress also wants to spend $7 billion for modernizing federal buildings and facilities. The Smithsonian is targeted to receive $150 million; we love the Smithsonian, too, but this is a job creator?

Another "stimulus" secret is that some $252 billion is for income-transfer payments -- that is, not investments that arguably help everyone, but cash or benefits to individuals for doing nothing at all. There's $81 billion for Medicaid, $36 billion for expanded unemployment benefits, $20 billion for food stamps, and $83 billion for the earned income credit for people who don't pay income tax.


As for the promise of accountability, some $54 billion will go to federal programs that the Office of Management and Budget or the Government Accountability Office have already criticized as "ineffective" or unable to pass basic financial audits.

Change we can believe in. A trillion dollar's worth :tu

[MiamiHeat]

Hey, I voted for McCain. *shrugs*

[Blake]

If the banks aren't lending, no.

so the banks don't do much else with the money?

I figured they would turn and invest it somehow if they aren't lending it....

[ClingingMars]

Hey, I voted for McCain. *shrugs*

[ChumpDumper]

I know what the aggregate incomes are. I also worked my ass off, starting out of college making under your 35K threshold. Now I'm being told by Obama, Pelosi, and Reid that because I've worked my ass off that they want to take $500 of my taxes and give to someone who doesn't pay any taxes any way. That's socialism/welfare/whatever you want to call it.

So now some of my income is going to give someone something for nothing, meanwhile I'm still on the hook for my student loans and car payments. That is bullshit.I thought you said you would be receiving a check this time around.

[Winehole23]

Go read the bill. Even people who pay no income tax will receive the $500.People who pay no income tax pay SS taxes, FICA, state and sales taxes. Saying they pay no taxes, as you did earlier, is misleading.

It's reckoned that giving stimulus money back to those who stand in no immediate need of it doesn't stimulate, since the money usually gets saved. It's reckoned also more rational in this context to give it to low income earners because they are more likely to spend it. Does it work out that way? Not necessarily. But targeting stimulus this way does make some sense.

Is it inequitable? Sure, in that high earners do not receive an equal share of the loot.

Go ahead, keep crying about this. People too poor to pay income taxes will be helped. And it's not like you'll have to pay $500 more to make up for it. Boo hoo.

[balli]

Go ahead, keep crying about this. People too poor to pay income taxes will be helped. And it's not like you'll have to pay $500 more to make up for it. Boo hoo.
:clap

[Winehole23]

so the banks don't do much else with the money?

I figured they would turn and invest it somehow if they aren't lending it....Right now, the big banks are hunkering down like everyone else, saving their money for a rainy day or the opportunity to acquire failed competitors.

Also, with the USG assuming the responsibility for stimulating demand as well as propping up big finance, there isn't a whole lot of incentive for private money to get off the sidelines.

If, OTOH, you put your money in a credit union or a more conservative regional bank, your money may have a *marginally* beneficial effect.

[balli]

I thought you said you would be receiving a check this time around.

Seriously. Aggie, how do you not understand that your taxes are going to go down, and unless you get really rich, probably stay down under Obama?

Fuck man, your wealth isn't being transferred to anybody. In fact, the government and other, richer peoples' wealth is being transferred to you.

And basically you're just pissed that people less wealthy than you also get a piece of the pie? Very, very selfish.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

People who pay no income tax pay SS taxes, FICA, state and sales taxes. Saying they pay no taxes, as you did earlier, is misleading.

It's reckoned that giving stimulus money back to those who stand in no immediate need of it doesn't stimulate, since the money usually gets saved. It's reckoned also more rational in this context to give it to low income earners because they are more likely to spend it. Does it work out that way? Not necessarily. But targeting stimulus this way does make some sense.


The vast majority of last year's check went into people's savings accounts or to pay down debt. Some stimulus...


Go ahead, keep crying about this. People too poor to pay income taxes will be helped. And it's not like you'll have to pay $500 more to make up for it. Boo hoo.

Today? No. But a year or a couple of years from now, someone's going to have to pick up the tab for the $500 plus interest. Or the Fed can just print more money and then you and I can use five hundred dollar bills to wipe our asses with when the dollar becomes worthless.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Seriously. Aggie, how do you not understand that your taxes are going to go down, and unless you get really rich, probably stay down under Obama?

Fuck man, your wealth isn't being transferred to anybody. In fact, the government and other, richer peoples' wealth is being transferred to you.

And basically you're just pissed that people less wealthy than you also get a piece of the pie? Very, very selfish.

That's not it at all. We got into this economic mess because of people living beyond their means. And instead of people having their lifestyles reigned in by a recession as it should be, the government is borrowing more money (aka, living beyond its means) to give to people who borrowed too much money.

Where does it all end? I'm not being selfish. I care about about our country and I'd like for it to have some sort of reasonable future. Ah fuck it, just line up and get your monthly Obama rock the vote stimulus check, and don't come back here to bitch as inflation drives up the cost of consumable goods, you're paying $8 at the pump, and companies continue to lay off workers and raise the price of goods to pay for it all.

This has nothing to do with helping America in the long run. It's about the assholes in D.C. right now handing out money to try to ensure they stay in office, future consequences for this country be damned.

[Winehole23]

Today? No. But a year or a couple of years from now, someone's going to have to pick up the tab for the $500 plus interest. Or the Fed can just print more money and then you and I can use five hundred dollar bills to wipe our asses with when the dollar becomes worthless.I agree. But this comment would be better lodged here:


http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=115457

[balli]

But a year or a couple of years from now, someone's going to have to pick up the tab for the $500 plus interest.
Would that be any different if the stimulus money were going someplace else? No.

If you hate the stimulus in general, fine, let's hear your proposal. Seriously. How do you suggest we go about fixing the economy if not through a pretty moderate combo of top down/bottom up Keynesian economics? I'd like to hear your alternative plan.

And if it's just to let us slide into a major, major depression in the name of toughening us up and reducing our quality of life? Hey, get real. As good as it would be for us in a material sense, America's (left or right) not going for that.

Stick to the reality of the situation, not the impossibly radical solution.

[Oh, Gee!!]

resident repubs complaining about tax cuts. classic

[shelshor]

I thought it was $250,000.

Obama's amount was very fluid and varied greatly during the cam-pain

[balli]

Obama's amount was very fluid and varied greatly during the cam-pain

Not that this stimulant's brackets have anything to do whatsoever with the tax policy he layed out in the campaign.

[doobs]

resident repubs complaining about tax cuts. classic

It used to be that I never saw a tax cut I didn't like. Obama and the Democrats have managed to change that.

You know why? Pretty soon, more than half of the voting public will not be paying taxes because of the Making Work Pay tax credit. Many of those people will actually be making money from the government, every year. These people will have no incentive to vote in fiscally responsible representatives. These tax eaters will spend us into oblivion.

Don't you see how this is fundamentally bad for our democracy? (Hint: two wolves and one sheep voting on what's for dinner.)

[Winehole23]

It used to be that I never saw a tax cut I didn't like. Obama and the Democrats have managed to change that.

You know why? Pretty soon, more than half of the voting public will not be paying taxes because of the Making Work Pay tax credit. Many of those people will actually be making money from the government, every year. These people will have no incentive to vote in fiscally responsible representatives. These tax eaters will spend us into oblivion.Pretending like Obama's modest middle class tax credit is a threat comparable to socialized risk for megabanks, deficit spending and entitlements is just silly.

These tax eaters don't even exist yet, and already we've been spent into oblivion.

Also, you might want to check your reasoning. Not everybody is homo economicus. Motives for voting include might include more than just the bottom line. Values voters, hello?

Or are you suggesting that tax breaks extinguish patriotism, morality and rational self-interest?

Your argument sounds like economic determinism. I hope it is not.

[Creepn]

Know how to fix the economy?

Create more commercialized holidays like the way valentine's day is. Make it into a tradition and people will go out and buy. Hell you can just name one of them "Save the economy day!".

[spurster]

:) at AHF complaining that he isn't getting more money to add to the deficit. Perhaps that's true conservative values nowadays.

[boutons_]

the median income for a family of 4 is about $50K. Ask those families at or below $50K if they would feel "rich" with another $2K/month?

[PuttPutt]

The government is going to do what it wants to do. No matter what political party is involved.

All I know is that under this proposal I'm getting $1000. My wife is unemployed (takes care of our 2 yearold & have another one on the way), & I make less than $75K. We live good by the money I make, but we are not rich by any means.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

I'm coming around on this plan. I think the handouts, err, welfare, err 'tax rebates' are a great idea. It worked out well for Rome, after all...

[balli]

I'm coming around on this plan. I think the handouts, err, welfare, err 'tax rebates' are a great idea. It worked out well for Rome, after all...



If you hate the stimulus in general, fine, let's hear your proposal. Seriously. How do you suggest we go about fixing the economy if not through a pretty moderate combo of top down/bottom up Keynesian economics? I'd like to hear your alternative plan.

And if it's just to let us slide into a major, major depression in the name of toughening us up and reducing our quality of life? Hey, get real.

[fyatuk]

resident repubs complaining about tax cuts. classic

Uhh, not tax cuts, refundable tax credits. It's one thing to give everybody back some of their own money, it's another thing to give someone everything they paid to FICA PLUS $500.

Tax cuts = fiscal conservatism.
Refundable tax credits = wealth redistribution.

[MannyIsGod]

The fact of the matter is that the people most likely to spend right now are the people at the bottom. Everyone else will get any extra cash and sit on it.

AHF simply looks for methods to support his views instead of looking at things objectively. There's never a "why is this happening" question behind his posts merely faux outrage. The fake outrage posts get old. There are logical reasons behind what is happening, and you don't have to agree ith them to at least come at things with an open mind instead of these bullshit "I can't believe hat is going on" posts.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

The fact of the matter is that the people most likely to spend right now are the people at the bottom. Everyone else will get any extra cash and sit on it.

AHF simply looks for methods to support his views instead of looking at things objectively. There's never a "why is this happening" question behind his posts merely faux outrage. The fake outrage posts get old. There are logical reasons behind what is happening, and you don't have to agree ith them to at least come at things with an open mind instead of these bullshit "I can't believe hat is going on" posts.

Spare me the drama Manny. You did a lot of the same shit during the Bush years, and now you want to get righteous? BUllshit.

It's not fake outrage. We're selling out our future so that politicians can stay on the good side of their constituents, meanwhile taxpayers are having trillions of dollars of their wealth transferred to the elite.

And of course you're happy to call out anyone with a problem with it because you're down on your knees for Obama with your mouth full.

[ClingingMars]

Spare me the drama Manny. You did a lot of the same shit during the Bush years, and now you want to get righteous? BUllshit.

It's not fake outrage. We're selling out our future so that politicians can stay on the good side of their constituents, meanwhile taxpayers are having trillions of dollars of their wealth transferred to the elite.

And of course you're happy to call out anyone with a problem with it because you're down on your knees for Obama with your mouth full.

+1

redistribution of the wealth != tax cuts.

[clambake]

freshmen :lol

[ClingingMars]

freshmen :lol

useless post :lol

[DarrinS]

If this is true, this definitely sucks.

A single income household making 75,000 a year is pretty much the definition of middle class. Aren't these the people that Obama was going to give tax breaks to?


I guess I'm Donald Mothafuckin Trump now. Thanks, Mr. Obama.

[MannyIsGod]

Spare me the drama Manny. You did a lot of the same shit during the Bush years, and now you want to get righteous? BUllshit.

It's not fake outrage. We're selling out our future so that politicians can stay on the good side of their constituents, meanwhile taxpayers are having trillions of dollars of their wealth transferred to the elite.

And of course you're happy to call out anyone with a problem with it because you're down on your knees for Obama with your mouth full.


Spare you the drama? LOL your post is nothing but drama and faux outrage. Provide me some links of where I did the same please.

And :lol @ down on my knees. I think Obama fucked up on this bill simply because its not big enough and because he tried everything to make the GOP happy and got all of zero votes for it.

The good news is now that we see the GOP has taken to playing politics the Democrats in the Senate are far more likely to actually increase the scope of the bill and simply forget the GOP.

Have away with your faux outrage at every microscopic point you can find while ignoring the bigger picture.

[MannyIsGod]

And I seriously doubt 75k+ is the definition of middle class. Whats the percentage of incomes above that? I'd imagine pretty god damn small.

[Winehole23]

A single income household making 75,000 a year is pretty much the definition of middle class. Aren't these the people that Obama was going to give tax breaks to?This legislation is an ad hoc measure to stimulate the economy. Pretending it's Obama's last word on tax reform is captious. You can't expect the man to keep all his campaign promises in the first major legislation he signs.

We got gotcha failure.


Disclosure: I didn't vote for Obama, I'm not a big fan, and I don't think his stimulus will work any better than the last one. But pointing to January of 2009, and noting ominously that campaign promises haven't been kept, is just silly.

Keep your peckers in your pockets, boys. The screwing you're giving Obama is a little premature.

[MannyIsGod]

Oh, and as much as people want to rail against "redistribution of wealth" you better realize how unequally that wealth is distributed in this country and how that affects the health of our economic situation. Sure, keep railing against it so that we have the top 1% holding such a disproportionate amount of our wealth. They sure do appreciate it.

[Jekka]

I know what the aggregate incomes are. I also worked my ass off, starting out of college making under your 35K threshold. Now I'm being told by Obama, Pelosi, and Reid that because I've worked my ass off that they want to take $500 of my taxes and give to someone who doesn't pay any taxes any way. That's socialism/welfare/whatever you want to call it.

So now some of my income is going to give someone something for nothing, meanwhile I'm still on the hook for my student loans and car payments. That is bullshit.

Don't think of that $500 as going towards someone that didn't do anything - think of it as going towards all of those people that did service with programs like AmeriCorps, who made $800/mo for a year and then got taxed on the "education award" and ended up OWING taxes because that scholarship is considered "taxable income".

[DarrinS]

And I seriously doubt 75k+ is the definition of middle class. Whats the percentage of incomes above that? I'd imagine pretty god damn small.


Well, engineering students graduating in 1994 started at around 40k, and I would assume that number is around 60k these days. So 75K was probably a kick ass salary 15-20 years ago, but is really not a big deal in 2009.


It is not uncommon for your typical professional, i.e. accountant, engineer, etc. to make more than $75K these days. I would put this group of people into the middle class category. The people making 150K or greater are probably execs or very good pharm sales reps. At 200K-250K, you're probably looking at senior execs, VP's, and CEO's of very small companies.


Manny, I hope you don't think the average home in SA costs 90K. That was 20 years ago.

[DarrinS]

Disclosure: I didn't vote for Obama, I'm not a big fan

Keep your peckers in your pockets, boys. The screwing you're giving Obama is a little premature.



I did, even though I wasn't a big fan.


This is really no different than Bush Sr's "read my lips" promise, but you'll never hear that out of the mouths of libs.

[Winehole23]

This is really no different than Bush Sr's "read my lips" promise, but you'll never hear that out of the mouths of libs.So, if the President does not fulfill campaign promises in his first ten days in office, then he is a hypocrite and a liar for the rest of his term?

Is that about the size of it?

[Blake]

Well, engineering students graduating in 1994 started at around 40k, and I would assume that number is around 60k these days. So 75K was probably a kick ass salary 15-20 years ago, but is really not a big deal in 2009.


It is not uncommon for your typical professional, i.e. accountant, engineer, etc. to make more than $75K these days. I would put this group of people into the middle class category. The people making 150K or greater are probably execs or very good pharm sales reps. At 200K-250K, you're probably looking at senior execs, VP's, and CEO's of very small companies.


Manny, I hope you don't think the average home in SA costs 90K. That was 20 years ago.


no, my sister in law is a VP with GE corporate lending in dallas and she makes just over $100k with bonuses.

someone on a $75k salary can afford a $200k house if they work it right.

$150k household income is easily somewhere above middle class.

That said, I'm not sure what defines middle class any more. Obviously everyone has their own opinion of what comfortable means.

[ClingingMars]

Oh, and as much as people want to rail against "redistribution of wealth" you better realize how unequally that wealth is distributed in this country and how that affects the health of our economic situation. Sure, keep railing against it so that we have the top 1% holding such a disproportionate amount of our wealth. They sure do appreciate it.

socialism :toast Let the worker class rise again!

[DarkReign]

socialism :toast Let the worker class rise again!

That isnt socialism, as much as you can pretend it is.

What we are currently working toward (and may even be in) is an oligarchy.

Wherein, a small percentage of people in this country own all of its wealth (or close to).

Is that what you want? Do you really think for one fucking second youre going to be a part of that group?! :lmao

Yeeeeah. You and me both, blueblood.

[fyatuk]

Well, engineering students graduating in 1994 started at around 40k, and I would assume that number is around 60k these days. So 75K was probably a kick ass salary 15-20 years ago, but is really not a big deal in 2009.


It is not uncommon for your typical professional, i.e. accountant, engineer, etc. to make more than $75K these days. I would put this group of people into the middle class category. The people making 150K or greater are probably execs or very good pharm sales reps. At 200K-250K, you're probably looking at senior execs, VP's, and CEO's of very small companies.


Median household income in 2007 was about $50k, so $75k single ($150k couple) is still WELL above the majority of the country. At least 60% of households make less than $60k per year.

Obviously even a COUPLE making 75k is at the very least near the upper end of what you'd have to consider middle class.


Manny, I hope you don't think the average home in SA costs 90K. That was 20 years ago.

Heh, mine is still only valued at 68k :D

[Homeland Security]

Is that what you want? Do you really think for one fucking second youre going to be a part of that group?! :lmao

Yeeeeah. You and me both, blueblood.
Some of the little people like this Mars fellow are enlightened enough to understand that people like me deserve to control all the wealth. America has gone on long enough with actually believing that this "all men are created equal" nonsense applies to everyone. It really means that all landowning affluent white males are created equal. The rest of you exist to serve us.

Humanity naturally tends toward aristocracy. The sooner you accept this and submit, the better off you will be.

[DarkReign]

Some of the little people like this Mars fellow are enlightened enough to understand that people like me deserve to control all the wealth. America has gone on long enough with actually believing that this "all men are created equal" nonsense applies to everyone. It really means that all landowning affluent white males are created equal. The rest of you exist to serve us.

Humanity naturally tends toward aristocracy. The sooner you accept this and submit, the better off you will be.

B-B-B-Bingo.

[Bigzax]

it's just money...work hard, take what you can get, and shut up.

[Spurminator]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/66/Income-curve-%2410k.png

* Household

[Winehole23]

it's just money...work hard, take what you can get, and shut up.I'll work hard and take what I can get.

But bitching is still free, and I'll be damned if I'm giving that up just because it wears you out.



BTW, welcome back to the political forum, Bigzax. :D

[ClingingMars]

it's just money...work hard, take what you can get, and shut up.

+1

[ClingingMars]

That isnt socialism, as much as you can pretend it is.

What we are currently working toward (and may even be in) is an oligarchy.

Wherein, a small percentage of people in this country own all of its wealth (or close to).

Is that what you want? Do you really think for one fucking second youre going to be a part of that group?! :lmao

Yeeeeah. You and me both, blueblood.

an oligarchy? yeah right. :wakeup

[DarkReign]

it's just money...work hard, take what you can get, and shut up.


an oligarchy? yeah right. :wakeup


http://www.lcurve.org/


Poorest
The Income Distribution of the United States
(Visualized on the scale of a football field; income measured as stacks of $100 bills.)
How Does Your Income “Stack Up”?

Picture your annual income as a stack of $100 bills.
Do you make $25,000? Your stack of $100 bills is 1 inch high.
Do you make $100,000? Your stack of $100 bills is 4 inches high.
Do you make $1 million? Your stack of $100 bills is 3.3 feet high.
Do you make $1 billion? Your stack of $100 bills is over ½ mile high!
The U.S. Income distribution is not a “Bell Curve”…it is an “L-Curve”!

On the scale of the football field graph shown here the bottom 99% of the population measure their incomes in inches. The top 1% measure their incomes as stacks of $100 bills feet or even miles high! The total wealth of the few people in the vertical spike equals the total wealth of the rest of the population combined.

The L-Curve raises many questions. Why does the wealth (which we all help produce) go so disproportionately to the few at the top? Why, in a prosperous economy, is there so much poverty? Why has the lion’s share of the growth in recent economic booms, gone almost exclusively to those in the vertical spike while wages have stagnated?

Politically speaking, the L-Curve raises even more questions. Concentration of wealth produces concentration of power that is fundamentally incompatible with democracy. Why does our government give tax cuts to those on the vertical spike that result in cuts in services for the rest of us? The horizontal spike has the votes, but the vertical spike has the influence! They own the media. Your TV set is their pipeline into your brain! They set the agenda and the terms of debate. Furthermore, by the time you enter the voting booth all the “serious” candidates have been filtered and pre-selected by their ability to raise funds from those on the vertical spike. Those who can’t attract big money are marginalized.

The only way to make the government for the people is to make it of the people and by the people. That means we, the people, must wake up. We must wake up our neighbors! We must learn to talk to each other directly. We must bypass the media culture and rebuild true community. Democracy does not start in the voting booth. It starts by building a movement at the grass roots level that values people over profits. For more on the L-Curve and its implications, see: www.lcurve.org

Give it a shot then define oligarchy for me.

[BradLohaus]

According to Spurminator's chart around a quarter of the households in the US make over $75K per year. That means that there has to be more people making $75K per year than many people think.

As Dark Reign points out, the ultimate problem in the country, and the world, is the concentration of massive amounts of wealth in the hands of a handful of people. These people want the masses to think that a guy who makes $250K per year is in the elite... and greedy if he thinks that he pays too much in taxes. Who did the elite Communists tell the peasants to go after?

According to DR's link, in March of 2007 there were 946 billionaires in the US with $3.5 trillion in wealth. Well, I saw a show in MSNBC a few weeks ago that said that there are now about 1000 billionaires with close to $4 trillion in wealth.

US GDP is $14.3 trillion. So for all the talk about the top 1%, how about this stat: the top 0.0003% of the population owns 28% of the wealth. Is a person with $10 million of wealth even rich anymore?

[fyatuk]

According to Spurminator's chart around a quarter of the households in the US make over $75K per year. That means that there has to be more people making $75K per year than many people think.

That's kind of wrong. Where we're talking about is 75k filing single, or 150k filing jointly. The number posted earlier were Houshold, so they include multiple incomes per household. A couple filing jointly over 75 but less then 150 would show up there. So would a family pushed over 75k by their kids working, etc.

It's probably actually around 15-20% making 75k singly or 150k jointly, but that's just my own estimate.

[BradLohaus]

I can't find anything for $75K exactly, but I found this:

http://content.kiplinger.com/features/archives/2007/11/taxrank.html


The data also make it easy for you to know how your income stacks up against your fellow citizens. The newly-released numbers show that an income of $31,987 or more puts you in the top half of taxpayers. Earning a bit more than twice that much -- $64,702 -- earns you a spot among the top 25% of all wage earners. You crack the elite top 10% if you earn more than $108,904.

And $388,806 buys top bragging rights: Earn that much or more and you're among the top 1% of all American earners.

So a quarter of the workers in the US make over $64K per year. That's alot more than I thought. Load up on guns, because when the billionaire bankers launch the People's Revolution here they will send the poor after you.

[micca]

That's not it at all. We got into this economic mess because of people living beyond their means. And instead of people having their lifestyles reigned in by a recession as it should be, the government is borrowing more money (aka, living beyond its means) to give to people who borrowed too much money.

Where does it all end? I'm not being selfish. I care about about our country and I'd like for it to have some sort of reasonable future. Ah fuck it, just line up and get your monthly Obama rock the vote stimulus check, and don't come back here to bitch as inflation drives up the cost of consumable goods, you're paying $8 at the pump, and companies continue to lay off workers and raise the price of goods to pay for it all.

This has nothing to do with helping America in the long run. It's about the assholes in D.C. right now handing out money to try to ensure they stay in office, future consequences for this country be damned.

[micca]

This is pay off, and ward healing and is as old as tamany hall style politics, made famous in New York and yes Chicago.We the taxpayers are going to add to the Re-elect Obama fund wether we like it or not.The FALL OF THE ECONOMY AND CIVILISATION is fear mongering, that is why it is being pushed so quickly so no one really gets to look and evaluate and debate.The new deal didn't work and neither will this at least it didn't work for the working people, I'm sure it worked for some people though. Right about now alot of democrats are whispering under their breath "Oh Shit what have we done". but there egos won't allow them to admit they made a mistake, and the Emprorer doesn't have any clothes.
And so now we will be drowned in high flown talk, charts and graphs and erudite horse shit and lies, because Obama could eat their children and they'd call it chicken.

[ChumpDumper]

:lol you guys are bitter. Sorest losers ever.

[micca]

:lol you guys are bitter. Sorest losers ever.
that must be some of erudite horseshit i was talking about

[micca]

I can't find anything for $75K exactly, but I found this:

http://content.kiplinger.com/features/archives/2007/11/taxrank.html



So a quarter of the workers in the US make over $64K per year. That's alot more than I thought. Load up on guns, because when the billionaire bankers launch the People's Revolution here they will send the poor after you.

Excellent post

[LaMarcus Bryant]

LOLL, AHF you are so predictably transparent.

Most people at the bottom are going to throw that money back into the economy anyways, so big fucking deal. It's funny how when lawmakers slash taxes for the upper class, republicans consider it 'normal' and when they soup something up for the lower class, republicans consider it 'heresy'.

[SnakeBoy]

Most people at the bottom are going to throw that money back into the economy anyways, so big fucking deal.

I agree that if the goal is to get people to just run out and spend that $500 or $1000 then it should go to the very poorest people. I fail to see how that will do much for the overall economy.

[ClingingMars]

:lol you guys are bitter. Sorest losers ever.

forgive me for expressing a different opinion than the Messiah.

[ChumpDumper]

Every time you say "messiah" you prove my point.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

I agree that if the goal is to get people to just run out and spend that $500 or $1000 then it should go to the very poorest people. I fail to see how that will do much for the overall economy.

A small elite rule this entire planet. It's a proven provable fact. It was in their pockets' best interest to give money to "rich" people back in 2000, and it is in their best interest to give money to normal people now. Either way, the money always ends up back at the very top.

[Winehole23]

More holidays and festivals. Yay.


Can we please start to party?

[Duff McCartney]

What I've gathered from this thread in a nutshell is that....75k isn't shit. People who make 75k struggle with everything. They are so strapped for cash it isn't funny.

What I wouldn't give to make 75k right now. Shit I should be so lucky. I'd be able to pay my student loans in a fucking year. I'm sure my mom and stepdad would love to make 75k a year as well...if they did they probably wouldn't have lost their house to foreclosure.

Before you start bitching...it wasn't because they were living beyond their means. That house was bought for 90k and isn't even in a affluent part of San Antonio. The reason they lost it was because of a variable interest rate that inflated the mortgage cost from 700 which my mom and stepdad could afford. To near 2k a month.

My extended family is rather large and I don't think anyone in my family comes close to make 50k a year let alone 75k a year. I don't care what anyone says 75k a year is a shitload of money.

[Nbadan]

My extended family is rather large and I don't think anyone in my family comes close to make 50k a year let alone 75k a year. I don't care what anyone says 75k a year is a shitload of money.

People have a way of living up and beyond their means...if you were making $75K, you'd want 150K..

[Duff McCartney]

People have a way of living up and beyond their means...if you were making $75K, you'd want 150K..

I know...it's called greed. Sadly that's what our economic system has come to. That's what we've been taught from day one. Greed is good. And it is. To a certain extent.

[Nbadan]

I know...it's called greed. Sadly that's what our economic system has come to. That's what we've been taught from day one. Greed is good. And it is. To a certain extent.

...shhhhh...it's called capitalism, not greed...80% of earning are supposed to go to the top 5% earners....

[Kori Ellis]

It's ridiculous that some people in this thread are acting like $75,000 salary for one person is low unless you live in the middle of no where. In 2007, the estimated median household income was around $41K.

Anyway, I never get any money from any of these tax things, so I doesn't really matter to me personally if the level was $50K, $75K or $100K. But I think it's crazy to think that $75K is low or even average for a single individual.

[DarrinS]

It's ridiculous that some people in this thread are acting like $75,000 salary for one person is low unless you live in the middle of no where. In 2007, the estimated median household income was around $41K.

Anyway, I never get any money from any of these tax things, so I doesn't really matter to me personally if the level was $50K, $75K or $100K. But I think it's crazy to think that $75K is low or even average for a single individual.


For the record, I never said $75K was a low salary, just that it's not an extraordinary salary if you are a degreed professional. Sure, I make more than people with HS diplomas that work at Taco Cabana, but I also put in a shitload of effort to be where I'm at now. I grew up around John Jay HS, so it's not like I lived in the Dominion as a kid.

[Duff McCartney]

For the record, I never said $75K was a low salary, just that it's not an extraordinary salary if you are a degreed professional. Sure, I make more than people with HS diplomas that work at Taco Cabana, but I also put in a shitload of effort to be where I'm at now. I grew up around John Jay HS, so it's not like I lived in the Dominion as a kid.

I grew up around Jay as well. I graduated in 01. I think being a degreed professional and having a 75k salary is alot of money whichever way you cut it. Hell my cousin who went to a school that doesn't exist anymore and has a degree doesn't make 75k. Granted he is a teacher but still. I'm sure there's alot of people who have college degrees and are "professionals" that still don't make 75k a year.

[Spurminator]

Frankly $75K seems a bit high for the purpose of this stimulus. I'll take it, but it should probably be more like $35K. My $500 is going into savings. Sorry.

[Nbadan]

The tax system has always been about redistributing wealth, but it's also about providing benefits to the lowest wage earners that they should likely be getting at work anyway but aren't in states like Texas and other southern states which are net-tax income gainers...

[FreeMason]

A government big enough to give everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have.
-Thomas Jefferson

[balli]

A government big enough to give everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have.
-Thomas Jefferson

As somebody pointed out last time a conservative posted this quote; that was Gerald Ford, not Thomas Jefferson. Fail.

[LnGrrrR]

A phrase that I like by Jefferson...

"It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God."

Also...

"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear."

And one that fits today's mindset...

"It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it goes. A principle which if acted upon would save one-half the wars of the world."

[Winehole23]

"Indeed I tremble for my country (http://www.rasmusen.org/x/2007/07/22/jefferson-indeed-i-tremble-for-my-country-when-reflect-that-god/), when I reflect that God is just; that his justice cannot sleep forever:

"that considering numbers, nature and natural means only, a revolution of the wheel of fortune, an exchange of situation, is among possible events: that it may become probable by supernatural interference! The Almighty has no attribute which can take side with us in such a contest."

The context of course, is slavery.