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)
 
Old 09-15-2010, 07:17 AM
 
Location: Bradenton, Florida
27,232 posts, read 46,663,996 times
Reputation: 11084

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW View Post
I suggest reinstating the tax code of 1955 indexed for inflation. We were doing quite well during the fifties.
Okay with me...in '55, I wasn't paying any taxes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-15-2010, 07:37 AM
 
5,747 posts, read 12,054,634 times
Reputation: 4512
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sawdustmaker View Post
Broad brush that takes NO consideration for cost of living and lack of living off of others.
Once again, specific expenses aren't relevant, and the existence of billionaires doesn't preclude a $250k earner from being wealthy.

There's lots of conversation in this thread about how everything is relative, but I think the difference between those on the poles of this conversation is that some apparently weight those above you on the scale more heavily than those below you. In contrast, I strongly believe that it matters more how many are below you on the ladder.

If you're a millionaire living in Jupiter Island, FL, (home of billionaires) you're at the low end of the scale within that community certainly, and you'll probably struggle with your expenses compared to your neighbors, but that doesn't make you middle class. It simply means that you're living in very expensive housing. The fact that you can even afford to live in Jupiter implies that you are wealthy. Likewise, $250k in annual income is extremely well-off, wealthy even, compared to the rest of the nation.

The person who pointed out that her executive spouse friend must live in an executive-style house in order to succeed in his chosen career is distracted by details. Regardless of where the friend buys her detergent, that woman is wealthy.

Years ago, Jay Leno interviewed an up-an-coming star (whose name escapes me), and the conversation turned to cars. The star asked Jay his opinion about Ferarris, but then he expressed doubt about buying one, saying, "Everybody owns one." Jay, ever the pragmatist, gasped, then laughed, and then gently chided the star. He said something along the lines of "What are you talking about? The parking lots in Muncie, Indiana, aren't filled with Ferraris." I think some of the people here need a similar reality check.

Anyway, all of this is a good reason to make sure you choose your pond carefully.

As for taxes, I'll happily pay my extra $1300/yr. Seriously. Then, I'll go to the polls and vote for the people I think are most able to spend it wisely.

Last edited by formercalifornian; 09-15-2010 at 08:29 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-15-2010, 08:05 AM
 
15,092 posts, read 8,634,588 times
Reputation: 7432
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taboo2 View Post
Put up or SHUT UP. Republicans are in bed with big business. They screw the little guy the hardest AND longest. Show me the examples of specific corporations being caught funding offshore operations and explain to me how this matter when we are talking about PERSONAL TAXES and making $250,000.00 or more. And then show me WHO gave them a tax break.
How bout I put up, and you SHUT UP?

First, it's entirely relevant to call out idiots who advocate raising taxes on individual Americans making $250K, while pointing out how Corporations are paying NO TAXES but are in fact receiving Welfare (Bailouts) using those tax dollars. Furthermore, these Billionaire Bankers, and Corporations have been spending this money on overseas operations, and all you need to do is research the topic ...

GM Bailout Funds going to Brazil:

GM to Invest $1B of US Taxpayer Bailout Funds in *Brazil* | Ron Paul 2012 | Campaign for Liberty at the Daily Paul (http://www.dailypaul.com/node/82210 - broken link)

GM offshore outsourcing U.S. jobs | The Economic Populist

Bailout Funds Going to Foreign Banks:

Goldman reveals where bailout cash went - USATODAY.com

This is just the tip of the iceberg ... and I don't have time to educate you comprehensively ... that's your job, not mine.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taboo2 View Post
Oh it's true... and your buddy BUSH is the guilty party!

NewsBusters' Huston falsely claims Obama responsible for funding "Chinese hookers" study | Media Matters for America
[b]NewsBusters' Warner Todd Huston falsely claimed that President Obama funded a $2.6 million NIH grant to "help train Chinese prostitutes to 'drink responsibly on the job.' " In fact, the grant was awarded during the Bush administration.

Baier later added: "Last week, we told you about a similar study in Argentina, where American taxpayers are funding research to find the relationship between alcohol and risky behavior among homosexuals there." As Media Matters for America noted, a headline on The Fox Nation -- Fox News' purportedly bias-free website -- falsely claimed of that study: "Obama Spending $400K to Studying Drinking and Sex Habits of Gays in Argentina." In fact, the article to which The Fox Nation headline linked stated that the Argentina study began in September 2008, and according to NIH, much of the project's funding was allocated before Obama took office. Baier did not note the Bush administration's role in funding the Argentina study.

Even though we have BUSH to thank for this, you do realize that people TRAVEL to America from Africa? And that people IN AFRICA may have sex with Americans? Africa is NOTORIOUS for telling their people that AIDS is not from having SEX. IF those countries were not doing such harm to their own people by lying to them about how AIDS is contracted, there would be no need for America to fund this kind of education.

I happen to know people from China who came here for a better life, so I don't really have a problem studying the effects of alcohol while being forced to sell your body for money by some LOSER MAN who can't get a real job. Whether they study it here, or there (where the Yen goes MUCH farther then the dollar) it doesn't matter. Because it is a HUMAN STUDY case, not an AMERICAN ONLY STUDY.
First ... I'm not DELUDED by the Bush - Obama argument. They're both crooks and NEITHER are MY BUDDIES.

Secondly ... by attempting to justify these ludicrous spending programs for things like African pecker cleaning and teaching Chinese Hookers how to drink responsibly, you have IDENTIFIED YOURSELF. And NOTHING I could add about your liberal insanity could come as close to what you have already made clear.

If only the founding fathers had had the additional foresight to require minimum IQ levels as a qualifier for the 1st Amendment's freedom of speech, deathly silence would fall upon America, and you'd be the first forced to SHUT UP.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-15-2010, 08:10 AM
 
15,092 posts, read 8,634,588 times
Reputation: 7432
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenGene View Post
News flash - tax cuts need to be paid for. When something is paid for, money is spent. Everyone wants tax cuts, but no one wants to pay for them. If the conservative approach to deficits is to reduce spending, that must be an approach that totally ignores the impact on the deficit of more or extended tax cuts.


Change a few words around, and the same can be said for conservatives and tax cuts.


Good advice - but I prefer advice from people who practice what they preach ... which is why I tend not to believe our elected Republican officials.

Either extend the tax cuts for 97% of Americans, or let them expire as the tax-cut-fraud Republicans wrote into law. I'm like everyone else - I like paying less in taxes. But when I look at the cost (spending) of the tax cuts, and the increasing burden that places on all of us as well as future generations, I say (get ready for it - here comes my own opinion) let them all expire as the Republicans planned to have happen. Let them go back to pre-2001 levels ... when there was a budget surplus rather than deficit, when we had actually made a dent in the national debt, and when the economy was in much better shape.
Then call for it .... quit the childishness ... "Mommy Why Does He get that and I don't" nonsense.

I'm all for tax cuts for everyone ... and massive spending cuts. So long as they keep stealing our money, they'll keep on spending it on crap that doesn't do any of us an iota of good.

LISTEN ... it's not a REPUBLICAN or DEMOCRAT THING .... THEY ARE BOTH STEALING OUR MONEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If you haven't figured that out by now ... YOU KNOW NOTHING !!!!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-15-2010, 08:17 AM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,488,320 times
Reputation: 9618
Quote:
Originally Posted by Califreeman View Post
So upper middle class extends to the top 2% of wage earners?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swigchow View Post
I used to think I was middle class, but according to your definition I'm not even close. Oh poor me!
so you want to CLASSIFY people just by what a HOUSEHOLD brings in??????........is that what we are going to use to CLASSIFY in a society now????

hmmm a HOUSEHOLD, has a teacher making 115k....a city GARBAGEman making 125k, and a student making 20k...for a total of 260k...are we going to call that teacher, that garbageman, and that student RICH, and not middleclass or workingclass, because of a number that classified rich 50 years ago
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-15-2010, 08:20 AM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,488,320 times
Reputation: 9618
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenGene View Post
News flash - tax cuts need to be paid for. When something is paid for, money is spent. Everyone wants tax cuts, but no one wants to pay for them. .
no tax cuts...dont need to be paid for since they are not a PRODUCT... the SPENDING needs to be cut

just because you have an income (our governments tax) of 3 trillion...doesnt mean you have to SPEND 3 trillion....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-15-2010, 08:20 AM
 
Location: Bradenton, Florida
27,232 posts, read 46,663,996 times
Reputation: 11084
If it exceeds the MEDIAN income, it is rich.

Even if exceeds that figure by one dollar. But 250K is more than twice the median income, so it is without doubt "rich".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-15-2010, 08:22 AM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,488,320 times
Reputation: 9618
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenGene View Post
when there was a budget surplus rather than deficit, when we had actually made a dent in the national debt, and when the economy was in much better shape.
uhmm...there never was a true surplus

there was a PROJECTED BUDGET surplus, but since things were OFF BUDGET (just like under bush and his wars) the DEBT continued to climb


an education is a shame to waste
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-15-2010, 08:31 AM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,488,320 times
Reputation: 9618
Quote:
Originally Posted by TKramar View Post
If it exceeds the MEDIAN income, it is rich.

Even if exceeds that figure by one dollar. But 250K is more than twice the median income, so it is without doubt "rich".
so what does that make ...heck the MINIIMUM salery for the WORST player in the NFL is 310k...are you SERIOUSLY going to call a benchwarmer rich????


I'm sure a guy making 400k will say he is poor complared to bill gates and his BILLIONS...or the millioniares like John Kerry

250k is almost the median price of a house....NATIONWIDE......the median in the northeast is 260k...... http://www.realestateabc.com/outlook/overall.htm

just because SALARIES havent kept up with INFLATION doesnt mean we should still CLASSIFY based on 1955/1965 numbers.......average salary in 1966..6900...median house price 14k....about 50% right...use those numbers compared to the meadin house....the median salary SHOULD be 130k...not 50k



sorry but this is not 1955 , when 250k was rich...please get with the times...its 2010
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-15-2010, 08:33 AM
 
5,747 posts, read 12,054,634 times
Reputation: 4512
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero View Post
so what does that make ...heck the MINIIMUM salery for the WORST player in the NFL is 310k...are you SERIOUSLY going to call a benchwarmer rich????
Yes; however, I doubt he'll feel that way if the only people to whom he compares himself are those with multi-million dollar salaries.
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
Similar Threads

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