Good fact based WSJ article on who pays taxes in America

[briansd1]

It’s doesn’t matter what anybody thinks.

$250k is statistically wealthy. Policy should be made based on economic numbers, not emotions.

[SK in CV]

[quote=AN]
So, you must live a solid middle class life style in order to save a shit load of money while making $250k. So, are they middle class or wealthy? If $250k is wealthy, then why can’t they live a wealthy lifestyle AND save a shit load? BTW, with your logic, people making $150k can save a a lot of money (might not be a shit load like those making $250k, but still a lot) while living a solid middle class life style in San Diego as well. So, I guess with your logic, $150k is also wealthy. After all, those making $100k can live a wealthy life style and not save a shit load of money.[/quote]

With all due respect, you’re all over the place here.

If you live in SD and make $250K a year, you can live a great middle class lifestyle and save a shit load of money. (I know, I’ve done it.)

You can also spend all your money and live a pretty extravagant lifestyle.

When you get into the $150K a year is also wealthy, you lose me. I don’t know what you’re referencing. But I’ve lived on $150K (before taxes) a year too in the last 10 years, and paid for 2 kids in college, and saved a bit too.

[an]

[quote=SK in CV]With all due respect, you’re all over the place here.

If you live in SD and make $250K a year, you can live a great middle class lifestyle and save a shit load of money. (I know, I’ve done it.)

You can also spend all your money and live a pretty extravagant lifestyle.

When you get into the $150K a year is also wealthy, you lose me. I don’t know what you’re referencing. But I’ve lived on $150K (before taxes) a year too in the last 10 years, and paid for 2 kids in college, and saved a bit too.[/quote]
Me all over the place? You’re the one who’s all over the place. So, $250k is wealthy or not? Answer that simple question before we proceed.

[Anonymous]

There’s nothing wrong with debating policy, and having strong opinions on certain positions. I’ve got a few of my own.

But let’s not forget that for anyone making $250K per year, your marginal tax rate is basically a “first word problem.”

Words like “theft,” “tyranny,” and “punishment” really just don’t apply to someone in that situation.

I’ll answer the question you pose to SK:

$250K is “wealthy” as it’s easily in the top 10%. If you are making more than 90% of the population, you are wealthy. The reason it doesn’t “feel” wealthy to many is that the wealth curve is so steep: There’s huge differences between the top 10% vs. the top 1% vs. the top 0.1%

[CA renter]

[quote=AN][quote=SK in CV][quote=AN]So which is it?
[quote=SK in CV]If you live in San Diego, and make $250K a year and aren’t saving a shit load of money, you ARE living a wealthy lifestyle.[/quote]
or
[quote=SK in CV]$250K a year will get you a solid middle class lifestyle in San Diego…[/quote]
[/quote]
It’s both. The 2nd is included in the first.[/quote]
So, you must live a solid middle class life style in order to save a shit load of money while making $250k. So, are they middle class or wealthy? If $250k is wealthy, then why can’t they live a wealthy lifestyle AND save a shit load? BTW, with your logic, people making $150k can save a a lot of money (might not be a shit load like those making $250k, but still a lot) while living a solid middle class life style in San Diego as well. So, I guess with your logic, $150k is also wealthy. After all, those making $100k can live a wealthy life style and not save a shit load of money.[/quote]

If someone, even in San Diego, is making $250K, then they should be able to save AND live a comfortable lifestyle. If they’re not able to do this, they have a major spending problem. A household earning $250K is very much upper-middle-class (IMHO), even here.

[briansd1]

Just like if you live in a $1 million house, you live in a “rich” house compared to the rest of the population.

But there’s a huge difference between the $1 million house and a $10 million house.

$250k is wealthy… but if you make $300k, your incremental tax is only on $50k.

A person who makes $10 million would have to pay marginal tax on $9,750,000.

Sounds fair to me. That why we should have higher rates for higher earners.

[briansd1]

[quote=harvey]
But let’s not forget that for anyone making $250K per year, your marginal tax rate is basically a “first word problem.”

Words like “theft,” “tyranny,” and “punishment” really just don’t apply to someone in that situation.
[/quote]

I noticed that it’s generally the pitchfork peasants of the conservative movement, who listen to the likes of Rush Limbaugh, who make use of such bluster and hyperbole.

They’ll never see that kinda money but they get riled up for what?

[SK in CV]

[quote=AN]Me all over the place? You’re the one who’s all over the place. So, $250k is wealthy or not? Answer that simple question before we proceed.[/quote]

I’m pretty sure I’ve given you my answer on that a few times.

I think of wealthy as assets acquired rather than income. But $250K of annual income is sufficient to live a wealthy lifestyle. That would be a lifestyle better than 97% of the population.

[an]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=AN]Me all over the place? You’re the one who’s all over the place. So, $250k is wealthy or not? Answer that simple question before we proceed.[/quote]

I’m pretty sure I’ve given you my answer on that a few times.

I think of wealthy as assets acquired rather than income. But $250K of annual income is sufficient to live a wealthy lifestyle. That would be a lifestyle better than 97% of the population.[/quote]
Is it really that hard to answer yes or no?

[SK in CV]

[quote=AN][quote=SK in CV][quote=AN]Me all over the place? You’re the one who’s all over the place. So, $250k is wealthy or not? Answer that simple question before we proceed.[/quote]

I’m pretty sure I’ve given you my answer on that a few times.

I think of wealthy as assets acquired rather than income. But $250K of annual income is sufficient to live a wealthy lifestyle. That would be a lifestyle better than 97% of the population.[/quote]
Is it really that hard to answer yes or no?[/quote]

No, it’s pretty easy. Is it really that hard to understand my answer?

[Anonymous]

A $250K a year income can disappear as quick as you can say “pink slip.” I’ve never made anywhere near $250K a year, but if I did, I would save like hell because that job can vanish overnight leaving you with an income stream that looks more like the bottom 10%.
Real wealth is measured in tangible assets (including stocks, etc…), not in year to year income. $250K a year isn’t rich, it’s just real comfortable. However, if the person making $250K puts their mind to it, they can become rich very easily, but they must hold onto that job and invest wisely.

[an]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=AN][quote=SK in CV][quote=AN]Me all over the place? You’re the one who’s all over the place. So, $250k is wealthy or not? Answer that simple question before we proceed.[/quote]

I’m pretty sure I’ve given you my answer on that a few times.

I think of wealthy as assets acquired rather than income. But $250K of annual income is sufficient to live a wealthy lifestyle. That would be a lifestyle better than 97% of the population.[/quote]
Is it really that hard to answer yes or no?[/quote]

No, it’s pretty easy. Is it really that hard to understand my answer?[/quote]
If it’s pretty easy, then why not just answer yes or no? No, it’s pretty easy to understand what you’re trying to say, but I see you’re leaving yourself some room for future maneuvering and I was trying to pin down exactly what your view is on $250k income and whether it’s wealthy or not. You say wealth is assets, yet you also say $250k income is sufficient to live a wealthy lifestyle. How can one not be wealthy yet live a wealthy lifestyle? So, if I read it right, $250k income alone is not wealthy. Yet you support the tax on the wealthy with $250k as the cut off for minimum? Not to mention this tax is on income and not assets. So, if you make $250k but have negative assets (big student loans), are you wealthy or working poor? According to tax the rich and $250k limit, this group of people would be consider rich/wealthy.

[SK in CV]

[quote=AN]I see you’re leaving yourself room. So, if I read it right, $250k income alone is not wealthy. Yet you support the tax on the wealthy with $250k….[/quote]

I support a higher marginal tax rate on annual taxable income over $250K. If you’re married, have a couple kids and a house, have a job that pays you around $275K, and no other income, you probably wouldn’t be subject to the higher tax rate. Doesn’t really matter whether you call that rich, or wealthy or upper middle class. Make another $25K, and your taxes go up by less than a grand.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=Brutus]A $250K a year income can disappear as quick as you can say “pink slip.” I’ve never made anywhere near $250K a year, but if I did, I would save like hell because that job can vanish overnight leaving you with an income stream that looks more like the bottom 10%.
Real wealth is measured in tangible assets (including stocks, etc…), not in year to year income. $250K a year isn’t rich, it’s just real comfortable. However, if the person making $250K puts their mind to it, they can become rich very easily, but they must hold onto that job and invest wisely.[/quote]

Brutus, an employee often has no say as to whether and when they will be riffed, laid off or fired. This is why I don’t think it’s wise for young families with school-age children to voluntarily try to live on one income of an employee, no matter how much they make. While most of them tried to financially expand and “grow-into” the raises their “breadwinner” received by upgrading the size of their home and choosing it in what they believe to be a “better” school district, they are in reality just one paycheck away from default and possibly eventual BK. A family making these choices really needs two decent incomes for security and health coverage in case of unemployment or long-term illness of one of the parents and to be able to save money every month.

I think there are a lot of these families in financial distress only because they were unrealistic about the cost of real life and what could happen to them and NOT due to buying or taking out equity at the peak.

[an]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=AN]I see you’re leaving yourself room. So, if I read it right, $250k income alone is not wealthy. Yet you support the tax on the wealthy with $250k….[/quote]

I support a higher marginal tax rate on annual taxable income over $250K. If you’re married, have a couple kids and a house, have a job that pays you around $275K, and no other income, you probably wouldn’t be subject to the higher tax rate. Doesn’t really matter whether you call that rich, or wealthy or upper middle class. Make another $25K, and your taxes go up by less than a grand.[/quote]
What about two new-ish doctors making $400k, no kids, no house, but they have $400k in student loan? That extra few grand saved in taxes can help them pay off the student loans quicker and help them save to buy their first home.

Btw, it does matter what you call them, because that is exactly how proponent of the tax increase is selling it to the masses. They don’t say increase taxes ok the upper middle class.

[Author]

Posts