[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.

[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?

[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.

[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.

[an]

[quote=briansd1]If Republicans believe that, then let them sell it to the country.

But I expect the Democratic solution of letting the Bush tax cut expire for the richest Americans to be more palatable to the country and more likely to pass.

As flu said, let fairness be decided democratically.[/quote]
They don’t have to sell it to the country. They just have to do nothing.

[an]

[quote=bearishgurl]I understand, AN. Unfortunately, the world we live in doesn’t always operate the way we want it to.

btw: are you registered to vote in the upcoming General Election?[/quote]
I understand. Life sucks sometimes and sometimes, we don’t get what we want. That doesn’t mean you can’t have your own opinion. You don’t have to like what the world gives you. Like I said, the stalemate and going over fiscal cliff would do a lot to bring us back to balance.

Yes, I am registered to vote and will vote.

[an]

[quote=briansd1]AN, I’m talking progress towards the deficit since that’s the big worry.

There has to be progress somewhere to lowering the deficit.[/quote]
A bigger progress would be do nothing and let the entire Bush tax cut expire. After all, people were doing fine under Clinton before Bush’s tax cut.

[an]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=AN] I want to simplify the tax code, etc. I.E. I want something like Bowles-Simpson proposal.[/quote]

The problem with Simpson Bowles is that it wasn’t a proposal. It was an outline of a proposal. There weren’t really many details. Much like the Romney economic “plan”. “We’ll cut stuff” is not a plan.[/quote]
Then generate a proposal out of it. Is it really that hard?

[an]

[quote=briansd1]An all or nothing attitude is stupid because in the end you get nothing.

Human existence is about incremental progress.[/quote]
But neither of those choices are progress to me.

[an]

[quote=SK in CV]
This really shouldnt be such a hard concept. $250K a year IS the top 3%. It will also provide a much greater than middle class lifestyle in the vast majority of this country. Guess what, a nice house with new cars, and gym memberships, $100 dinners out, season tickets to baseball or football games, and nice vacations IS a wealthy lifestyle. There are a few spots in this country where income below the upper middle class can’t afford to live. That doesn’t make residents there middle class. It makes them wealthy.

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]
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]

With your $250k = top 3%, it’s not a concept, it’s pure data. top 5% is ~$150k and top 20% is ~$90k. Those are the data. Now, your argument is that, you’re in the top 3%, so quit bitching. Well, one can easily say you’re in the top 5%, so quit bitching and pay up. After all, is there that big of a difference between 3% and 5%? You can do all of these:
[quote=SK in CV][It will also provide a much greater than middle class lifestyle in the vast majority of this country. Guess what, a nice house with new cars, and gym memberships, $100 dinners out, season tickets to baseball or football games, and nice vacations IS a wealthy lifestyle. There are a few spots in this country where income below the upper middle class can’t afford to live. That doesn’t make residents there middle class. It makes them wealthy.[/quote] while making $150k. So, $150k is wealthy, so pay your fair share.

[an]

[quote=blake]Md. General Assembly OKs income tax increases for $100k earners

Coming soon to CA …[/quote]
Watch out folks, it’s getting quite slippery out there.

[an]

[quote=spdrun]But if you bought smart, you’d also be SAVING a significant amount of $ over renting the same residence.[/quote]
Yes, but that doesn’t change the fact that the money you spent on your primary resident is consumption and not investment.

[an]

[quote=SK in CV]$250K a year will get you a solid middle class lifestyle in San Diego, as it will in LA, Chicago, Seattle, and every other city you listed there. RSF is not a middle class community. Neither is Beverly Hills or Malibu. Even in NYC, that kind of money is decent. Better than decent in Brooklyn. Middle class doesn’t mean having everything your neighbor has.[/quote]
Exactly, $250k a year will get you a solid middle class lifestyle but according to some, $250k is the top 3%, the wealthy and should be taxed more. So, which is it, $250k = middle class or $250k is the wealthy? You can’t be called the wealthy if all you can afford is a middle class lifestyle, can you?

[an]

[quote=SK in CV]Some people will say that. That would be the people that say that the middle class doesn’t pay it’s fair share, and that those with higher incomes pay too much. Wait, they already are saying that. So which is better? Those that already want to tax those with lower incomes at a higher rate, or those that want to tax only those with higher incomes at a higher rate?[/quote]
Who said the middle class doesn’t pay their fair share? What’s your definition of the middle class?

Your choice suck. That’s like saying which would you rather have, sh!t or vomit. That’s a false choice and I choose neither. I want true tax reform. I want most deductions to go away, I want lower tax rate, I want to simplify the tax code, etc. I.E. I want something like Bowles-Simpson proposal.

[an]

[quote=briansd1]It’s income over $250,000, not all of it. People just don’t seem to understand the concept of marginal rates.[/quote]
Of course it’s income over $250k and it only hit 3% of the people. After that’s in the bag, what would stop them from saying, lets lower that to $150k when they need more money. That only affect a few more % of people. Those people are not middle class anyways. Then what would stop them from lowering it to $100k? That’s alost 2X the median income. It only affect another small % of people.

[Author]

Posts