Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-11-2014, 01:29 PM
 
41,110 posts, read 25,760,015 times
Reputation: 13868

Advertisements

What is a liberals definition of rich? Are we talking net worth, gross income, adjusted gross income, or taxable income? Sorry to bring in those terms but every American who files a tax return has to report those numbers (except for net worth) annually.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-11-2014, 01:43 PM
 
Location: Littleton, CO
20,892 posts, read 16,090,383 times
Reputation: 3954
Income is not the primary measure. Wealth is. I would consider anyone with mean household financial (non-home) wealth greater than $1.5 million to be "rich." That's about the top 20%.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2014, 01:46 PM
 
41,110 posts, read 25,760,015 times
Reputation: 13868
Quote:
Originally Posted by HistorianDude View Post
Income is not the primary measure. Wealth is. I would consider anyone with mean household financial (non-home) wealth greater than $1.5 million to be "rich." That's about the top 20%.
Obama who says "tax the rich" defined the rich as a single making $200k and a married couple making $250k a year. That is gross income (before taxes).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2014, 01:47 PM
 
22,768 posts, read 30,751,535 times
Reputation: 14746
Quote:
Originally Posted by petch751 View Post
What is a liberals definition of rich? Are we talking net worth, gross income, adjusted gross income, or taxable income?
net worth, no question about it. using income as a proxy for "rich" makes no sense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HistorianDude View Post
Income is not the primary measure. Wealth is. I would consider anyone with mean household financial (non-home) wealth greater than $1.5 million to be "rich." That's about the top 20%.
so maybe it was just how i was raised... but i never thought of the word "rich" as referring to the top 20%. Those would be the people i'd refer to as "wealthy." And there is a cavernous gap between wealthy and rich.

Rich, to me, is an extreme word. it is reserved for people who fly in private jets, own huge yachts, could afford to drive the most expensive (e.g. $200,000) cars, and own the most expensive real estate.

To me, even the "1%" (net worth of about 7 or 8 million) doesn't scratch the surface of "rich". the people in the forbes 500 would qualify, though.

Last edited by le roi; 03-11-2014 at 01:57 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2014, 01:48 PM
 
45,244 posts, read 26,477,444 times
Reputation: 25001
"Anyone who has more than me" - your garden variety liberal
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2014, 01:49 PM
 
3,537 posts, read 2,738,116 times
Reputation: 1034
Quote:
Originally Posted by le roi View Post
net worth, no question about it.

using income as a proxy for "rich" makes no sense.
Liquid Nw is probably a better measure.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2014, 01:50 PM
 
Location: Maryland
7,816 posts, read 6,398,418 times
Reputation: 9975
Anyone who has things that other people need, or anyone who has things that they think shouldn't be allowed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2014, 01:51 PM
 
Location: Littleton, CO
20,892 posts, read 16,090,383 times
Reputation: 3954
Quote:
Originally Posted by petch751 View Post
Obama who says "tax the rich" defined the rich as a single making $200k and a married couple making $250k a year.
Given the difficulty in actually measuring wealth, that's probably as good a surrogate as any other. The mean household income of that same top quintile is $226,200 per household.

But income is at best a rough estimate since some people with high income have little accumulated wealth, and some very wealthy people (thing Mitt Romney) recognize very little of their annual increase in wealth as income.

But you can only measure what you can actually measure.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2014, 01:56 PM
 
41,110 posts, read 25,760,015 times
Reputation: 13868
Quote:
Originally Posted by HistorianDude View Post
Given the difficulty in actually measuring wealth, that's probably as good a surrogate as any other. The mean household income of that same top quintile is $226,200 per household.

But income is at best a rough estimate since some people with high income have little accumulated wealth, and some very wealthy people (thing Mitt Romney) recognize very little of their annual increase in wealth as income.

But you can only measure what you can actually measure.
It is not a good surrogate. What if you are young and just starting out, paying off school debt you make good money but didn't have time to build wealth, you are screwed under Obama. If you were at it for many, many years you could have built wealth.

The wealthy will work around it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2014, 01:58 PM
 
22,768 posts, read 30,751,535 times
Reputation: 14746
Quote:
Originally Posted by petch751 View Post
It is not a good surrogate. What if you just started out, paying off school debt, and didn't have time to build wealth. If you were at it for many, many years you could have built wealth but not if you are just starting out.

You can make $200k which is very good income but you are screwed under Obama. The wealthy will work around it.
so i disagree strongly with Obama's contention that $250k/yr constitutes "rich."

but let's also be clear that the opposing party -- the Republicans -- want to eliminate capital gains and inheritance taxes, which are the government's primary means of taxing the (legitimately) rich.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top