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.
The highest bracket is for people who make more than $350K. The next highest is above $195K. (And one is only taxed 35 and 32% respectively on incomes above those thresholds, not the entirety of income)
If you don't have money to throw around even a little bit, then you aren't managing your money very well. I would then counter to say the same things that people on these threads say about the poor... Make better financial decisions and stop buying so much bling.
I'm not exactly sure which part of NY you are in, but in the NYC metro area, that kind of money doesn't make you wealthy. Not even close. Maybe if you are single you could be a little extravagant, but once you pay the high mortgage with the high property taxes, high state income tax (9%), retirement account, and 529s for each kid, there is not much left to throw around on "bling".
That was the ONE good thing he did in his entire 8 years in office.
I was being sarcastic YOU didn't get a tax break, only the top 2% of America's wealthiest did. But I was wondering why, if you thought you got a tax break, you're still whining about taxes???
eskmd"""What about the rest of us that the federal government considers "wealthy"? We are probably the LEAST represented of all groups. We have just enough money to be taxed at the highest bracket, but not enough to throw money around like it grows on trees. We have been getting hit with the AMT for years. We don't get any of the "rebates" others get. We pay most of the taxes, and instead of a "thank you" we have people telling us we are not doing enough. Most of us have worked our asses off to get where we are, while our friends were out partying and having a good time. I don't want sympathy. I just want you to stop asking for more of my hard earned money."""
I was being sarcastic YOU didn't get a tax break, only the top 2% of America's wealthiest did. But I was wondering why, if you thought you got a tax break, you're still whining about taxes???
I'm not really sure what you are talking about, and I'm not really sure whether or not I am in the top 2%, but I did get a tax break. If the top 5% only make $155K, that means that people in the top 5% are plain old, run of the mill, middle class around here. Actually, with school teachers making in the 90s, 155 is not so great for a family of 4 with 2 wage earners. In my area, a modest 1970s 4 bedroom split on 1/4 acre in a good school system will run you 800K-900K. Property taxes run around 20K-25K per year. That' what I get for living in a blue state. So as I said, that kind of money doesn't get you very far when all other bills are factored in, and the tax break was helpful.
Last edited by AnesthesiaMD; 01-25-2008 at 04:48 PM..
I'm not exactly sure which part of NY you are in, but in the NYC metro area, that kind of money doesn't make you wealthy. Not even close. Maybe if you are single you could be a little extravagant, but once you pay the high mortgage with the high property taxes, high state income tax (9%), retirement account, and 529s for each kid, there is not much left to throw around on "bling".
Perhaps you should just rent until you can afford to buy a home? That's what people do in LA. A person who makes only $350K in NYC can't afford a home there -- but you can afford a nice little retirement rental in Arkansas.
Perhaps you should just rent until you can afford to buy a home? That's what people do in LA. A person who makes only $350K in NYC can't afford a home there -- but you can afford a nice little retirement rental in Arkansas.
LOL. All I'm saying is that wealth is a relative term, and taxes are high enough already for most people. If you want to raise taxes on the truly wealthy, fine, but the government has to redefine what "wealth" is.
LOL. All I'm saying is that wealth is a relative term, and taxes are high enough already for most people. If you want to raise taxes on the truly wealthy, fine, but the government has to redefine what "wealth" is.
Look at it this way... If the government started taking more taxes from the "wealthy," maybe housing prices in the cities would be redefined. In other words, maybe housing prices would come down a little so people could actually afford to buy them? Either that, or maybe salaries would go up?
California has the most millionaires of any state. In the last few years, it's gotten so bad in some areas that less than 10% of the people could afford the MEDIAN priced home. Whole bunches of people in San Francisco, LA, New York City, Boston (and I'm sure a bunch of other places) are renters simply because they can't reasonably qualify to buy a home.
Now the government and the banks tried to create more homeowners by offering "no money down, negative interest, whatcha-wanna-pay-monthly" home loans -- but we see where that has gotten us.
So, maybe more taxes wouldn't be such a bad thing. If less wealthy people had real money, housing prices might fall a bit more.
AND, like the premise of my original post, only the rich have ANY money at all so they are the ones you HAVE to tax. Poor people are broke. They can't pay anymore. They are currently putting their extra tax money into their gas tanks.
The companies could not do it without the government's help. Do you still want to socialize everything in life and leave the companies to decide what to do with your money?
That's KIND OF the POINT. The companies do it with the gov't's help. Well who do you think lobbies the government to get these perks? Jack and Jill average?
Exactly, socializing things has proved to suck. Look at Canada's health care. Look at the DMV with all those long lines and crappy customer service.
Our health care system is nothing to write home about. In fact we spend twice as much as every comparable country, and do not have as good as outcomes.
As far as DMV... Hey, I don't wait on long lines. I get up bright and early, with my paperwork prepared, and it takes under 30 minutes.
I also would have figured the top 5% to bring in $1M a year.
That would be the top 1%.
Do you think it is appropriate to give away tax breaks to the top 1% when it is a massive amount of money that benefits a very small minority?
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.
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.
YOU didn't get a tax break, only the top 2% of America's wealthiest did. But I was wondering why, if you thought you got a tax break, you're still whining about taxes???
