[quote=SK in CV][quote=AN]Who said anything about kissing up? Some of us are either afraid the definition of rich will drift downward from the $250k/year or who are annoyed that they’re being called rich even when they’re really not. $250k/year is barely middle class in some expensive cities.
The Dems loves to use millionaires for their example of wasteful rich people, then goes out and propose tax increase on those who make $250k/year.
[/quote]
That’s a ridiculous assertion. $250K a year is in the top 3% of income. There are a small handful of cities (NY, SF, others? I don’t know of any others.) that $250K a year doesn’t go near as far as it does in others. But nowhere is it barely middle class.[/quote]
This is exactly what I’m talking about. Once you get 3% in the bag, I can see, oh, we need more money, lets go for the top 5%, then 10%. After all, they’re rich and it’s only the top 5-10%. 90% of the people aren’t making that much money. They’re no where near middle class. It’ll only affect another handful of cities. This doesn’t affect the majority of cities and 90% of the people.
So, since there are only a handful of cities that have expensive cost of living, they don’t count then? Add in Irvine, LA, certain part of SD (if you hate traffic and want to live near work), Chicago, Seattle, Palo Alto, Sunnyvale, Cupertino, etc. to you handful of cities.
