Reply With Quote
useless postfreshmen
freshmen
useless postfreshmen
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 Motha in Trump now. Thanks, Mr. Obama.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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".
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.
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.
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?
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.
socialismLet the worker class rise again!
That isnt socialism, as much as you can pretend it is.socialism
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 ing second youre going to be a part of that group?!
Yeeeeah. You and me both, blueblood.
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.
Heh, mine is still only valued at 68k
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.Is that what you want? Do you really think for one ing second youre going to be a part of that group?!
Yeeeeah. You and me both, blueblood.
Humanity naturally tends toward aristocracy. The sooner you accept this and submit, the better off you will be.
B-B-B-Bingo.
it's just money...work hard, take what you can get, and shut up.
* Household
I'll work hard and take what I can get.
But ing 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.
an oligarchy? yeah right.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 ing second youre going to be a part of that group?!
Yeeeeah. You and me both, blueblood.
an oligarchy? yeah right.
http://www.lcurve.org/
Give it a shot then define oligarchy for me.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 ˝ 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 e 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 e 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 e that result in cuts in services for the rest of us? The horizontal e has the votes, but the vertical e 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 e. 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
Last edited by DarkReign; 01-29-2009 at 04:08 PM.
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?
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.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
