McCain Campaign Agrees With CNBC Pundit: Americans Making $200,000 Are ‘Not Rich’
McCain Campaign Agrees With CNBC Pundit: Americans Making $200,000 Are ‘Not Rich’
Writing in Avenue, “a glossy, lifestyle magazine that chronicles the lives of Manhattan’s affluent and socially powerful,” CNBC’s Maria Bartiromo warns readers that under Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL), “the income tax is…in for a bump”:
Right now [it] is 35 percent, Obama wants to take that to 39 percent…We’re talking about people who make over $200,000. That’s not rich. So it’s actually going to impact more people than you may think.
$200,000 may not look like much from Bartiromo’s perch, where she is making a seven-figure salary and just received a whopping $500,000 for her book advance.
Michael Goldfarb, the newest member of Sen. John McCain’s (R-AZ) communications team, highlighted Bartiromo’s statements in the “Morning Update” on the official campaign blog, The McCain Report.
The McCain campaign’s perception of American incomes is woefully out of touch. An income of $200,000 places an American family firmly in the “rich” category:
– The 2006 census showed that an income of $174,012 put an American household within the top 5 percent of income earners.
– A report by the Citizens for Tax Justice estimates that in 2008, “only 3.2 percent of taxpayers will have adjusted gross income (AGI) greater than $200,000 and only 2.1 percent will have AGI over $250,000.”
– A 2007 Wall Street Journal article placed earners who make $277,000 in the top 1 percent of all income earners.
McCain’s fundamental misunderstanding of American incomes leads to his disastrous policies. His so-called “middle class tax relief” plan gives only 9 percent of its benefits to the bottom 80 percent of taxpayers, doling out 58 percent of the benefits to the top 1 percent.
McCain, of course, ranks as the eighth wealthiest U.S. senator, with an average net worth of $36.4 million.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
*sigh*
They’re a HELL of a lot richer than me.
June 10th, 2008 at 12:50 pmIt makes sense that with all their faux-populism, they’d eventually convince themselves that they ARE middle class, even with six-and-seven-figure incomes.
No wonder they’re so tone-deaf to the economic troubles facing MOST Americans.
June 10th, 2008 at 12:52 pmThe numbers don’t add up. Obama needs to shove these numbers directly up where McIIIrd’s sun don’t shine, and stay on top of the demented claims that Obama will raise taxes on the middle class. It’s pure BS, and thrown on the wall to see what sticks.
June 10th, 2008 at 12:54 pmSo, this is the great understanding that Johnny Boy has about not only US economy, but the US demographics.
Good to see a potential POTUS with about the same level of understanding and empathy as the current one!
June 10th, 2008 at 12:55 pmI could make 5 times what I make right now, and still be not rich?
Can I try it and find out?
please?
June 10th, 2008 at 12:57 pmHell, even $200,000 doesn’t buy much, these days.
June 10th, 2008 at 12:59 pm$200,000 is not rich? just what, pray tell, Grampy McNoBrain, what do you consider rich?????????????????????????????
June 10th, 2008 at 1:00 pmWhoa! I didn’t say 200,000 isn’t rich! I was just commenting on the price of things, these days!
June 10th, 2008 at 1:01 pmRUCerious should just say his name- Are you f@#king serious?
June 10th, 2008 at 1:01 pmCaption:
“Where is Busch, I want a hug.”
_AIO_
June 10th, 2008 at 1:02 pmHell, an average K Street lobbyist/whore can make that much in a few weeks! Just look at Lott and Norton and a few others!
It’s nothin’ I tell ya, nothin’.
June 10th, 2008 at 1:03 pmI wonder if Gramps gets his meds from Rush Limphead
June 10th, 2008 at 1:03 pmthen maybe I’m in the wrong profession!
June 10th, 2008 at 1:04 pmcause I wanna make $200,000+
June 10th, 2008 at 1:04 pmanyone know how much Gramps makes?
June 10th, 2008 at 1:06 pmKinda’ like his approach to Veterans Benefits . . . just come home, dump the old one and marry some rich one with MILLIONS, a jet, house and ll the FREE beer you want . . . don’t need any GI Bennies or College education for that. A son of an Admiral, with a lifetime of free health care, 3 squares and a cot, ever been “between opprotunities” – left “middle class” a LONG time ago . . .
June 10th, 2008 at 1:06 pmI’m wondering if McSame is really worth that much. Because that net worth comes mostly from his wife. I would be interested to know if Cindy had McSame sign a prenuptial agreement. Wouldn’t that be a hoot.
June 10th, 2008 at 1:06 pmdid you say he has a jet? hmmm…
June 10th, 2008 at 1:08 pmA son of an Admiral, with a lifetime of free health care, 3 squares and a cot, ever been “between opprotunities” – left “middle class” a LONG time ago . . .
You forgot the $58,000 a year he gets for being “disabled”. I wonder how many POW’s came home from the Hanoi Hilton and were awarded $58,000 a year in disability payments. I’m betting not many. I also wonder how many of the other POW’s were awarded 28 medals the same way McSame was.
June 10th, 2008 at 1:08 pmKinda like McCain is not old. 70 is the new 17 just like $200K is the new $45K.
June 10th, 2008 at 1:08 pmShows how out of touch the g.o.p. has become.
June 10th, 2008 at 1:09 pmSounds like McCant and the money honey were being…dare I say…ELITIST?
June 10th, 2008 at 1:11 pmThe median income in America is just under $45,000 per year. That is the average for the +/- 300 million Americans. To say that $200,000 is not rich is laughable. Only the wealthy would think like that. Any wonder why our middle class is disappearing? The TV ‘personalities’ all make much, much more than you and I, so to them, it is not rich – it would be a pay cut.
June 10th, 2008 at 1:11 pmIf you make $200,000 in the Bay Area near San Francisco you’re NOT rich. Not ever close. With a good paying job you can just about afford a house, but if you have that much moola and live in the middle of the country you’re a Rockefella. There has to be some adjustment from state to state and area. We pay crazy taxes where we live and I’m not complaining about it, but that has to be factored in the equation.
June 10th, 2008 at 1:15 pmAnother gift to the Obama campaign.
Thanks, Grampy.
Sincerely,
June 10th, 2008 at 1:16 pmA poor student
It’s a Google!
June 10th, 2008 at 1:16 pmI’m not rich enough for a tax break, for God’s sake.
How rich does one have to be for a tax break nowadays?
You see how ridiculous this has become? McBush spouting his support for tax breaks, (this time around), while his net worth is over $36 million.
WTF would anyone worth $36 million know about economic struggles among America’s middle class?
June 10th, 2008 at 1:17 pmYeah, Grampy McSame thinks the “Haves” & the “Have More” need “Even More”, that’s straight from the Repukian playbook.
Don’t worry people, you can have their pocket lint as it trickles down their legs.
June 10th, 2008 at 1:21 pmtsawyer Says:
If you make $200,000 in the Bay Area near San Francisco you’re NOT rich.
Everything is relative. My friend makes very good money, but is always broke (Porsche 911, Ferrari Mondial, H3 Hummer, lots of vacations, etc…) My other friend does not do as well, but always has a few extra dollars to spend. We can either be frugal or not. Believe me, I could make do on $200k a year, no matter where I would live. You could too.
June 10th, 2008 at 1:21 pmBilbo Hussein Baggins Says:
I’m wondering if McSame is really worth that much. Because that net worth comes mostly from his wife. I would be interested to know if Cindy had McSame sign a prenuptial agreement. Wouldn’t that be a hoot.
I’m pretty sure there was a prenup, and this was why Cindy didn’t need to release her tax returns — or at least that was the McCain excuse.
Whether the money is technically “his” or not, he has access to everything it can buy, including 8 or 9 homes, the private jet . . .
When people like McCain say people making $200K aren’t rich, they mean it. When they say “rich” they mean themselves and their friends, the super-rich. These are people who don’t have to think twice about buying anything, whether it’s a house, furs, a yacht, a jet . . . people who “only” make $200K still have to budget and have to think hard about whether to buy the 750Li BMW or the Mercedes S600. McCain could buy both of them, for each home, and never notice.
June 10th, 2008 at 1:23 pmWell, they do have somewhat of a point. With the rising inflation and plummeting dollar over the last few years, $200,000 sure as heck ain’t as rich as it used to be.
June 10th, 2008 at 1:26 pmAll these arguments apply to Obama as well.
He’s ultra-wealthy by any measure, so you can’t claim that either candidate is more “in touch” than the other.
Same old politics, although they both have snazzy “change” mantras…
June 10th, 2008 at 1:26 pmMcCain in a speech in Washington accused Obama of seeking the single largest tax increase since World War Two while Obama, in a television interview, said he would increase taxes on the wealthy and on stock profits to pay for a middle-class tax cut of $1,000 a year.
“No matter which of us wins in November, there will be change in Washington. The question is what kind of change?” McCain told a conference for small businesses.
Obama told CNBC that he would raise taxes on Americans making $250,000 a year or more and raise the capital gains tax for those in higher income brackets while exempting small investors. He said the U.S. economy has been “out of balance for too long.”
“So the general principle of raising taxes on higher income Americans, like myself, and providing relief to those who haven’t benefited as much from this new global economy, I think, is a sound one,” Obama said.
MORE AND MORE BS from McIIIrd.
June 10th, 2008 at 1:32 pmThe disabled community never exists to these freaks.
June 10th, 2008 at 1:32 pmHell, even with a bachelors degree it’s hard tofind work when people see me with Lido.
I guess my 10$ monthly SS increase didn’t bump me into the rich class yet.
Yet these fools cry about class warfare.
S–W em all.
Time for rogers to tell us why mcsame is right,
3–2–1
tAKE CARE
tony and Lido
JT-
June 10th, 2008 at 1:34 pmYou won’t hear Obama arguing that he’s not rich, or that his taxes need to be lowered. You won’t find Bill Gates, Sr. arguing that either- just the opposite… you don’t have to be poor to be in touch with poverty in the U.S.A., just aware.
And Obama is most definetly more “aware” than McCain, in all kinds of ways…
JT Says:
All these arguments apply to Obama as well.
He’s ultra-wealthy by any measure, so you can’t claim that either candidate is more “in touch” than the other.
Nonsense. Although Obama has come in to a significant amount of money in the last year or two, primarily because of book sales, he simply does not have either the wealth or the history of entitlement that McCain has enjoyed.
Obama also isn’t the one making the claim that $200K isn’t “rich.” Try to keep up.
June 10th, 2008 at 1:36 pmObama wants to raise the capital gains tax rate from 15% to around 28 or 30%.
He overlooks the fact that the vast bulk of savings tied in long-term investments are held by middle-class Americans (yep, those who make less than $200k a year) and depend on those savings to fund their retirements.
More interestingly, EVERY Democratic president since JFK has endorsed or actually cut the capital gains tax rate. When the rate is cut, revenues to the U.S. treasury actually increase significantly, and the U.S. savings rate also increases (good for middle class jobs and the economy).
So, in a nutshell, Obama’s plan to raise the capital gains tax rate ignores established precedent in how a lower tax rate helps middle class Americans, increases the savings and investment rates, and previous Democrat leaders’ unified stance that a lower capital gains tax rate is GOOD.
June 10th, 2008 at 1:36 pmbelac
Yeah, and Obama didn’t get any sweetheart land or housing deals either. Ha, ha! You keep up and quit drinking the kool-aid.
June 10th, 2008 at 1:38 pmtsawyer-
June 10th, 2008 at 1:38 pmThe State of California has one of the nations lowest property tax rates (.48%) and rates approx. 14th nationwide regarding state income tax. The average CA income is $71,855 per year. Compare that to NY where property tax rate is (1.19%), the state is rated 7th (twice as high as CA) regarding state income tax with an average income of only $67,029 per year. Although I understand your arguement about living close to a city as opposed to living in the heartland but as a New Yorker I’d say you have nothing much to complain about. We have some of the highest tax rates, gas prices ($4.24) AND cigarette prices ($9 a pack in NYC) Try maintaining a house and two children on Long Island on an income of $50,000 (total family income of 95,000) and then try to tell me that an individual salary of $200,000 isn’t rich. There are many here (particularly in NYC) making far more than $200,000 but I’d sure like to try it for a while. If $200,000 isn’t rich anymore then I should be applying for food stamps.
JT Says:
——————————————————————————–
All these arguments apply to Obama as well.
He’s ultra-wealthy by any measure, so you can’t claim that either candidate is more “in touch” than the other.
Same old politics, although they both have snazzy “change” mantras…
June 10th, 2008 at 1:26 pm
What the hell are you talking about ?
Are you going to claim that someone who actually had to work for their money , which is also nowhere near the amount that losers like McStupid and Chimpy have , and didn’t inherit it or marry into it , do not understand the value of money and how hard is it to accumulate ?
Obama is supposedly the 46th – 50th wealthiest Senator at around 1.6 million net worth ; and that includes his retirement plan , securities , investments everything.
That comes nowhere near the same universe as $35 million…..Which includes a private , company owned jet.
June 10th, 2008 at 1:40 pmIn the 1992 campaign, since he was inheriting $250 billion deficits from GHWB, Bill Clinton said he would raise taxes on those earning $200k. Demi Moore said “he shouldn’t do that! It’s pretty hard to live on only $200k per year!”
If Obama wasn’t inheriting such massive deficits, he would not have to raise taxes.
June 10th, 2008 at 1:41 pmI know this is OT but…
The 35 ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT AGAINST GEORGE W. BUSH
http://chun.afterdowningstreet.org/amomentoftruth.pdf
(in detail)
June 10th, 2008 at 1:43 pmI’m not an expert on the economy (who is?) BUT
It seems like common sense; the out of control budget deficit, deficit spending and interest on the debt causes the Fed Government to issue more Treasury bonds which has a similar effect as printing money, it devalues the dollar which in turn….
contributes to higher oil prices (not to mention corn, rice, wheat, eggs, mlk etc.)which in turn……
makes America weaker and less economically competitive as a nation and hurts the American middle class.
The “pundits” seemed to have had no trouble at all asking military personnel, reserves and the National Guard to sacrifice life, limb, time with family, careers, mental health etc for America, in a war THEY promoted using propaganda BUT when people making over $200,000 are asked to pay an extra 4% in income tax they scream bloody murder.
Our economy is shaky right now because of the policies of the last 8 years. The party is over and it makes sense that the people who profited most from the biggest transfer of wealth in American history should contribute to paying the tab for that party.
June 10th, 2008 at 1:44 pmKeith Says:
——————————————————————————–
In the 1992 campaign, since he was inheriting $250 billion deficits from GHWB, Bill Clinton said he would raise taxes on those earning $200k. Demi Moore said “he shouldn’t do that! It’s pretty hard to live on only $200k per year!”
If Obama wasn’t inheriting such massive deficits, he would not have to raise taxes.
June 10th, 2008 at 1:41 pm
And that’s back when Moore was married to Bruce Willis , who had earned a then unheard of $40 million dollars for “Look Who’s Talking” alone ……….Guess it would be impossible for that stupid twit to live on 200 grand
June 10th, 2008 at 1:45 pmI’m so proud of myself. I stayed up and watched him discuss every single article to the very end and I am very moved by it all.
June 10th, 2008 at 1:46 pmJT @ #38
I don’t believe a single one of your claims.
June 10th, 2008 at 1:46 pmAnd I repeat: If Obama wasn’t inheriting such massive deficits, he would not have to raise taxes.
If you’re a freakin’ millionaire like McCain then I don’t suppose 200k a year would count as rich. But to the vast majority of Americans, the same Americans McCain has pledged to serve, that’s a lot of money.
But the real point isn’t the definition of rich, it’s what kind of country do we want and how will we pay for it. We’ve tried it the conservative way and it worked out very well…for them. Now we want to do it our way.
http://progressiveworldreview.com
June 10th, 2008 at 1:47 pmHey JT-
June 10th, 2008 at 1:47 pm“Obama told CNBC that he would raise taxes on Americans making $250,000 a year or more and raise the capital gains tax for those in higher income brackets while exempting small investors.”
Can you read or do you make an effort to be so uninformed. Go ahead and vote for McCant if you want. Like they say, “you can’t fix stupid”
MCMetal, when she refused to work for less than something like $10 million, they began calling her “Gimme Moore”.
June 10th, 2008 at 1:48 pmHere’s the thing Ms. Bartiromo,
Tax breaks for the corporations and the wealthiest people have impacted WAY more people than YOU think.
Like, the whole country.
cha cha cha @ 27: good one !
June 10th, 2008 at 1:49 pmto the best of his abilities, Bush should go get the book thrown at him along with his crook cronies and rot in Federal prison. Or maybe there own nice little heavily guarded hide-aways they keep secret from Americans off the US coast somewhere.
June 10th, 2008 at 1:50 pmJT Says:
More interestingly, EVERY Democratic president since JFK has endorsed or actually cut the capital gains tax rate. When the rate is cut, revenues to the U.S. treasury actually increase significantly, and the U.S. savings rate also increases (good for middle class jobs and the economy).
Supply-siders like to make this claim, it’s just too bad about the data.
June 10th, 2008 at 1:50 pmoops, their
June 10th, 2008 at 1:51 pmBeing that the media “pundits” were the biggest supporters and “catapulted the propaganda” to con Americans into accepting the pointless occupation of Iraq which will ultimately cost at the LEAST 1 TRILLION DOLLARS and priceless in the damage that has been done to this country’s reputation,
June 10th, 2008 at 1:53 pmI propose that a pundit tax be placed on these parasitic con artists…say maybe 50% on $200,000-500,000 and then scale upward from there.
Tiny Dick Armey was just on CNBC , claiming that McShitstain is trying to understand some parts of the US economy , while Obama is clueless ; how’s that Contract With America you and the salamander penned coming along , DICK ?
June 10th, 2008 at 1:54 pmRaising the capital gains tax only affects you when you sell stock and get taxed on the appreciation.
June 10th, 2008 at 1:55 pmMost 401ks won’t be affected one little goddamn bit.
flavorino, make that $3 TRILLION War—the time of Stiglitz’s book.
June 10th, 2008 at 1:56 pmBack in 1994, Gingrich’s “Contract With America” swept our Democratic Congressman out and a GOP mouthpiece in. The new GOP representative, after relocating to Washington DC, noted in an interview that his new salary put him in the “lower class” (this was whatever representatives got paid at the time — around $150K or so). Flabbergasted, the interviewer asked him what he considered to be a “middle class” income, and he replied that would be around $350K to $700K a year.
This story quickly made the rounds back home, and the guy was seen as so far out of touch he was soundly defeated when he ran for re-election.
Now I see that he wasn’t alone in his thinking.
June 10th, 2008 at 1:56 pmIf JitteryTwit weren’t so enthralled by the reichwing talking points, he might just have an original thought. Once in a while. Maybe. Well, OK, it’s just an RNC mouthpiece.
JT wanna cracker?
June 10th, 2008 at 1:57 pmMcMetal, they’ve kinda forgotten that the Contract included a balanced budget and term limits.
June 10th, 2008 at 1:58 pm#58 Why did I write “time” when I meant “title”?
June 10th, 2008 at 1:59 pmOf course, Obama’s campaign didn’t link to a report that said a $200,000 annual income was not “rich”.
So no, these arguments do NOT apply to Obama.
Nice try, though.
…on second thought, it wasn’t even a nice try.
June 10th, 2008 at 1:59 pmObama was organizing in the streets of Chicago, while McCain was making hay with the Keating 5. Obama has “pulled himself up” through his own efforts while McCain has lived off his Military Family’s legacy and his rich second wife’s clout.
June 10th, 2008 at 2:00 pmNow it’s time for JT to try to reconcile his claim that a lower capital gains tax rate increases savings with the reality of our current abysmal savings rate. He can then explain how the middle class which holds most of its retirement savings in tax deferred plans (i.e. 401ks et al.) which gets taxed as ordinary income upon withdrawal, not at lower capital gains rates benefits from the lower rates. Thanks you gummitch for debunking the “lower capital gains rates increases revenues myth.” So who does benefit from a lower capital gains rate? First and foremost, people who have more wealth than can be shielded in tax deferred retirement accounts (like a lot of people in the $220k and up crowd). Second, people who can shield their wealth in such accounts because they didn’t earn it in the first place (think Paris Hilton). Finally, professional investors such as hedge fund managers who earn millions upon millions of dollars which they classify as investment income so they can use the lower tax rate. This is why Warren Buffet says he is voting Dem this year: he can’t see a reason why he should be taxed at a lower marginal rate than his secretary.
June 10th, 2008 at 2:02 pmDid you know that McCain finished 894th out of a class of 899 at Annapolis? So he’s not the sharpest knife in the drawer.
June 10th, 2008 at 2:03 pmHey JT, do you know what percentage of the population doesn’t have any capital gains you ignorant twit. Sure, leave the deficit and the global warming for today’s children to handle. Typical republiscum.
June 10th, 2008 at 2:04 pmIn Northern Michigan, yeah, yer pretty well off.
June 10th, 2008 at 2:04 pmIn San Francisco, yer lower middle class.
Response to:
I have never seen the rationale in the above argument. Being in touch is based upon how well you can empathize with others and understand their life. The amount of money that you may have will be a factor but is hardly determinative.
1. FDR was rich from the get go. However, he certainly had empathy and understood the plight of those who suffered in our nation during the depression. We can argue about his policies (most were effective and some were not) but no one could argue that he did not understand the lives and needs of those who were not as privileged. Indeed, at a time when many other countries turned to fascism because of economic problems, FDR inspired the nation to keep on a democratic path.
2. Obama and Edwards both came from working class backgrounds. Obama has only recently come into substantial money. However, his life experience, work as an organizer and service in the state legislature all benefited him. Edwards came from a working class family. Again, he struggled up through the ranks and the concerns that he speaks to reflect an understanding of those who are not as financially well off.
3. There are those who do not seem to get it. They confuse their wealthy lifestyle as the same as everyone else. I was an Air Force JAG and later civilian trial attorney litigating government contract cases. I remember as a relatively new trial attorney meeting with a JAG general who told me that the next time I was at SAC HQ I ought to have them present the command briefing for me. He obviously was out of touch with how those not of flag rank lived. When I went to a large corporation’s legal department after leaving the Air Force, people could not believe that I mowed my own lawn, painted the house and did many other chores that they hired out.
No, it all depends on what your background has been, how well you remember your own past and how well you associate with different economic classes. Guess what, while I was with private industry my salary and my wife’s earnings put us in the top 5%. When the company did well and I made some really good bonuses, I went up to the upper 2%. Yes, I did not like taxes anymore than anyone else. However, I knew exactly where I fell in the economic spectrum. I would not have minded additional tax burden to help out those who had not been as fortunate as I had been.
By the way, my family still mows the law, spreads the mulch, paints the house and all those other wonderful chores that my next door neighbors (plastic surgeon, aerospace exec, medical school dean) all have contracted out.
June 10th, 2008 at 2:06 pmBut remember when McCain said that no one in the room would be willing to pick lettuce for $50/hr. A reporter yelled ‘I’ll take it.’
June 10th, 2008 at 2:06 pmYo JTroll, if tax cuts increase personal savings, then why has the national savings rate been negative two out of the last three years? First time that’s happened since the Depression.
Might want to get some new talking points. Maybe try cardboard this time, instead of tissue paper.
June 10th, 2008 at 2:09 pmOf course it’s not these fcking idiots who are the elitists. No, it’s people who watch independent movies, eat organic food and drive foreign cars.
Open ass, insert head.
June 10th, 2008 at 2:13 pmKeith Says:
#58 Why did I write “time” when I meant “title”?
June 10th, 2008 at 1:59 pm
______
Perhaps cause it was correct at the time Stiglitz’ book came out. Lately I’ve been hearing $4 trillion.
June 10th, 2008 at 2:14 pmLefty, Obama is elitist because he knows what arugula is, donchaknow?
June 10th, 2008 at 2:16 pmtoaster, the Stiglitz-Bilmes study assumed a gradual drawdown. They did not factor in a surge and a perpetual war.
June 10th, 2008 at 2:17 pm>He overlooks the fact that the vast bulk of savings tied in >long-term investments are held by middle-class Americans
>(yep, those who make less than $200k a year)
Sorry pal, I smell BS.. cite?
June 10th, 2008 at 2:21 pmmeethinks JT’s decidedly uncited stats are brought to us courtesy of the Bill O Rilley school of “facts I just made up because they prove my point”
June 10th, 2008 at 2:24 pmbentley,
I’m saddened to hear about your plight. The unemployment rate for people with disabilities is simply terrible. Where this country has made progress in the employent rate of women and minorities, it has not done so in the case of the disabled.
Here’s hoping that a President Obama will improve the employment rate and workplace facilitation for people who need to earn a living just like the rest of America!
I say strengthen the Americans with Disabilities Act, because the disabled (or another way of putting it, enabled with special needs) are not less entitled to employment.
June 10th, 2008 at 2:24 pmTen years ago, 50% of Americans did not own one single share.
June 10th, 2008 at 2:28 pmIRA’s and 401K’s are tax-deferred.
Flat-taxers do not want investments taxed at all.
Ross Perot said he earned $200 million per year on his $2 billion and paid 7.5% federal tax (because he had a lot invested in tax-free bonds).
JT sez-
Ha, ha! You keep up and quit drinking the kool-aid.
I’m not trying to convince you… you are beyond help… please, I implore both you and McCain to keep demonstrating your lack of understanding and compassion to the American voter… we’ll see in November who they feel is more ‘in touch’
(I have a feeling that both you and McCain will want to be drinking something stronger than Kool-Aid on that night…)
June 10th, 2008 at 2:31 pmTommorow the old man will say if you make over poverty wages but under $50,000 you`ll be better off than most, grampy mcwars is way out of touch with middle amd lower income America and will never know what it`s like to pay $4.00 a gal for gas, $3.99 for milk or $3.00 for a loaf of bread.Old man johnny is a typical elitist because he has not got a clue what is going on in this country today with the occupation of Iraq, the recession that our economy is facing or the fact that Obama is going to kick his arse in November……
June 10th, 2008 at 2:34 pmSomeone said it above, and it’s true, it’s all relative. I make more than $200K, but I live in NYC, and also pay $3K for rent, plus state, city, and county taxes, and after taxes, doesn’t leave much left for disposable income. Oh, and don’t forget the $50K in student loans that need to be repaid, just so I could earn the $200K a year.
However, I did grow up in West Virginia and know for a fact that $200K is a lot more f-ing money than I would ever need there.
So, instead of pouncing on Grampa’s statements, why doesn’t anyone actually consider a solution that makes sense?
I can think of about 10 off the top of my head, but then again, I’m a lot smarter than most of you since you all think I’m rich, and must have gotten there somehow.
(Don’t even try to call me privelaged, b/c I’m not, I payed my ass through school w/ little to no help from mommy and daddy)
June 10th, 2008 at 2:38 pmaapatel11982 Says:
——————————————————————————–
I can think of about 10 off the top of my head, but then again, I’m a lot smarter than most of you since you all think I’m rich, and must have gotten there somehow.
June 10th, 2008 at 2:38 pm
You had me until this asinine statement. You’re so smart, but can’t manage not to shit all over yourself.
Now you can f_ck off.
June 10th, 2008 at 2:41 pmOh, I forgot to mention, I’ve already donated the maximum limit to Obama. My next donations will be to the DNC. Just so you know.
June 10th, 2008 at 2:42 pmaapatel11982 Says:
——————————————————————————–
Someone said it above, and it’s true, it’s all relative. I make more than $200K, but I live in NYC, and also pay $3K for rent, plus state, city, and county taxes, and after taxes, doesn’t leave much left for disposable income. Oh, and don’t forget the $50K in student loans that need to be repaid, just so I could earn the $200K a year.
However, I did grow up in West Virginia and know for a fact that $200K is a lot more f-ing money than I would ever need there.
So, instead of pouncing on Grampa’s statements, why doesn’t anyone actually consider a solution that makes sense?
I can think of about 10 off the top of my head, but then again, I’m a lot smarter than most of you since you all think I’m rich, and must have gotten there somehow.
(Don’t even try to call me privelaged, b/c I’m not, I payed my ass through school w/ little to no help from mommy and daddy)
June 10th, 2008 at 2:38 pm
If you are so much smarter than everyone else here , and also can think of 10 solutions off the top of that amazing coconut of yours , how come you didn’t post anything besides self-aggrandizing crap and chastising others for doing the same thing you did , jackass ?
June 10th, 2008 at 2:46 pmToo bad that school you “payed” your way through didn’t have a more rigorous English program. Then you may have actually convinced one or two of us that you’re a lot smarter.
June 10th, 2008 at 2:46 pmaapatel11982 Says:
——————————————————————————–
Oh, I forgot to mention, I’ve already donated the maximum limit to Obama. My next donations will be to the DNC. Just so you know.
June 10th, 2008 at 2:42 pm
How can you afford that if you’re truly not wealthy and having to pay for all those crying towels to boot ?
June 10th, 2008 at 2:47 pmaapatel11982 Says:
Someone said it above, and it’s true, it’s all relative. I make more than $200K, but I live in NYC, and also pay $3K for rent, plus state, city, and county taxes, and after taxes, doesn’t leave much left for disposable income. Oh, and don’t forget the $50K in student loans that need to be repaid, just so I could earn the $200K a year.
Oh, cry me a river. I make about one tenth of that, and still manage to pay a $1300 per month mortgage by myself. You could always move to Brooklyn, or one of the less expensive boroughs, and live just fine.
June 10th, 2008 at 2:50 pmralph the wonder llama Says:
——————————————————————————–
aapatel11982 Says:
I’m a lot smarter than most of you since you all think I’m rich, and must have gotten there somehow.
(Don’t even try to call me privelaged, b/c I’m not, I payed my ass through school w/ little to no help from mommy and daddy)
Too bad that school you “payed” your way through didn’t have a more rigorous English program. Then you may have actually convinced one or two of us that you’re a lot smarter.
June 10th, 2008 at 2:46 pm
And I am sorry to say that I have never been “privelaged” .
Privileged ; yes.
Privelaged ; no.
June 10th, 2008 at 2:52 pmbarfly Says:
——————————————————————————–
aapatel11982 Says:
Someone said it above, and it’s true, it’s all relative. I make more than $200K, but I live in NYC, and also pay $3K for rent, plus state, city, and county taxes, and after taxes, doesn’t leave much left for disposable income. Oh, and don’t forget the $50K in student loans that need to be repaid, just so I could earn the $200K a year.
Oh, cry me a river. I make about one tenth of that, and still manage to pay a $1300 per month mortgage by myself. You could always move to Brooklyn, or one of the less expensive boroughs, and live just fine.
June 10th, 2008 at 2:50 pm
Or 8 to 10 miles from NYC in Jersey , like where I live……….
June 10th, 2008 at 2:54 pmaapatel11982 Says:
Someone said it above, and it’s true, it’s all relative. I make more than $200K, but I live in NYC, and also pay $3K for rent, plus state, city, and county taxes, and after taxes, doesn’t leave much left for disposable income. Oh, and don’t forget the $50K in student loans that need to be repaid, just so I could earn the $200K a year.
You gross $16K a month and can’t afford $3K for rent? Maybe you should have taken an Econ course (along with some English courses).
June 10th, 2008 at 2:55 pmI say a progressive tax for people married or single making less than $75,000 and a flat tax for married or single over $75,000 works for me. I am a blue collar man who can barely afford gas to get to work, here in Detroit we have lousy public transportation,I do the grocery shopping and see the prices go up daily in some instances with fresh friut and veggies.A progressive tax will help people like me who live pay check to pay check.Blue collar America has shouldered the bulk of the tax load for this country since Reaganomics took hold shoved aside the anti- trust laws and his trickle down economics that has kept my wages stagnating for almost 30 years and don`t forget the Glass – Steagal Act which helped get this country into it`s finest mortgage crisis since the depression.old man johnny`s tax cuts for the wealthy will only keep blue collar people and lower income people footing the bill for the rich and powerful and i am sick and tired of it. A vote for the old man is a one vote closer to the POOR HOUSE. Vote for Obama in November.
June 10th, 2008 at 2:57 pmI saw Ms. Bartiromo on Bill Maher. She tried to explain economics or something about the economy and it was plain that she didn’t have any clue about either. If she is not rich, then she is way,way overpaid for what she doesn’t know! And she is way overpaid for reading words on the economy that she doesn’t understand!
June 10th, 2008 at 3:05 pmaaapatel’s rent is no more than 18% of his/her gross income.
The concern troll donated the max to Obama but is here defending McCain.
June 10th, 2008 at 3:11 pmaapatel1192 has a point so give him his due. The regional cost of living is something that current economic measures do not take into account. $200k in NYC is not the same as in Indiana, Illinois or Montana. It is something that may be worth looking into for a number of different areas such as qualification for federal aid programs to the poor and so forth. Even within a state there can be dramatic differences (SF versus Modesto CA) that are not taken into account. Aapatel is not poor or disadvantaged by living in NYC but it probably keeps him out of the top 5% in NYC or from being affluent.
June 10th, 2008 at 3:14 pmI posted before seeing gummitch’s post. Sorry about that.
Sure the cost of living is lower in WV, but then again, few people get the chance to make $200,000 in WV. $200,000 is not an unusual salary in NYC.
June 10th, 2008 at 3:15 pmaaapatel — ..I’m a lot smarter than most of you..
JMOHR, he does have a point outside of this arrogant claim. He stirred the pot with that. I’m not sure that a real Obama supporter would be here, on a progressive site, going on the offense against his own type in an election year.
Something’s fishy..
June 10th, 2008 at 3:20 pm>Something’s fishy..
no duh my friend..no duh…the right wing dead-enders know the only possible chance they have against obama is to crank up the slime machine 1000 percent..look for lots of “alleged” obama supporters trying to say things to piss people off…
they are going to try to “false flag” obama, amongst other things, and i pray Obamas and his machine is ready for all the nastyness thats coming..
June 10th, 2008 at 3:32 pmI’m sure appa…. would be fine with eliminating completely the cap on SS contributions then.
June 10th, 2008 at 3:45 pmAnd with the existing graduated tax brackets adjusted up to say, 40% for those making his salary. We don’t want to pass this deficit on to our kids and their kids to pay off, do we?
RU, aaapatel is smarter than our kids.. and our unborn kids.. and our progressive unborn kids.
June 10th, 2008 at 3:51 pmtsawyer Says:
If you make $200,000 in the Bay Area near San Francisco you’re NOT rich.
Everything is relative. My friend makes very good money, but is always broke (Porsche 911, Ferrari Mondial, H3 Hummer, lots of vacations, etc…) My other friend does not do as well, but always has a few extra dollars to spend. We can either be frugal or not. Believe me, I could make do on $200k a year, no matter where I would live. You could too.
“Making do” is not rich. I’m doing fine and I’m not complaning, I live in a 2 bedroom 1 bath house that’s been apraised at $1,200,000. That’s Marin county not Kansas City.
June 10th, 2008 at 4:05 pmA few things:
First, JMOHR, thank you for seeing past my inflammtory comments and pointing out that there is an arguement in there somewhere.
To McWars, there is no stirring the pot here. This is a my opinion, and I consider myself a staunch progressive. Secondly, I wasn’t supporting McCain. I was pointing out that simple blanket statements taken to either extreme for the sole purpose of discrediting your opponent accomplish nothing. This should be about solutions, not inane discourse.
I truly believe taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society (which is actually something said by one of the greatest republicancs ever). I also believe that free, quality education and healthcare is the birthright of everyone. However, these are all ideals, that need to be achieved in reality in which we live.
And to do so, we need to understand that the needs of people in certain parts of the country are far different. My $200K seems pretty meager to me, as someone elses $50K in Indianapolis is to him. But instead (and this is a critique of everyone across the spectrum), you take one comment from a man and explode on vitriolic diatribe without once condsidering he might be right about some people (This is about McCain, not me. My words are meaningless).
ap
(I don’t have spellcheck, so please excuse the errors)
June 10th, 2008 at 4:23 pmOnly 6% of people in the US make over 100,000 as a single person.
To say that 200,00 isn’t rich is …..elitist.
June 10th, 2008 at 4:50 pmgummitch Says:
You gross $16K a month and can’t afford $3K for rent?
That $16K gross, is about $7K net of taxes. So, after rent, 401K contributions, insurance, savings deposits, school loan payments and living expenses, it really doesn’t leave that much.
Second, I didn’t say I was poor, I merely stated that I’m not rich. I’m making do. My standard of living is great, but I’d like to be better sound financially than I am currently. Isn’t that what we’re all actually trying to do?
June 10th, 2008 at 5:02 pmYouCantHandleDaTruth Says:
Only 6% of people in the US make over 100,000 as a single person.
To say that 200,00 isn’t rich is …..elitist.
I’ll say it again, making $200,000 isn’t rich in NEW YORK CITY. What about if you’re a single 24 year old male making $200,000?
Fine, I guess I’m an elitist. Since, you know, I realize that I’ve been blessed and actually do what I can to give back. So be it for me, it’s in the form of donations to any number of charities and causes I believe in rather than donating the precious little free time I have. (Today is an exception, since I’m not that busy at work, and can’t leave yet).
June 10th, 2008 at 5:14 pmI $ 200 k isn’t that much, can I look forward to a raise in the minimum wage ?
June 10th, 2008 at 5:43 pmOf course it costs more to live certain places than others. But as gummitch pointed out, if you can’t live comfortably on 200k a year no matter where you choose to live, you’re doing something wrong.
The fact that almost 97% of Americans make do with less — most A LOT less, makes a mockery of that claim that $200k a year is not rich.
If you make $200k a year, and you think you’re not rich, maybe you ought to reconsider the state of this nation’s wealth, since half of the population lives on less than one-fourth of that amount.
June 10th, 2008 at 5:50 pmaapatel:
June 10th, 2008 at 7:07 pmThere’s a great passage in Tom Wolfe’s Bonfire of the Vanities about how to go broke when you’re making amillion dollars a year.
I can’t speak for the BayArea, but people who moan about how they’re not rich making .75m a year and living on the Upper West Side–
There’s plenty of housing just a subway ride away from the Metropolitain Museum of Art that are eminently affordable, on pleasant tree-lined streets. Forest Hills is quite delightful.
But knowing Manhattanites all my life, Their weirdly blind to this. The fact that, for the price of a studio on the UWS, you could afford rent on a townhouse, rent on a Manhattan parking place AND the Prius to park in it and still have enough money to save for the future.
If you’re making over $200,000 a year, you’re rich. If you make $200,000 a year and are living like a pauper because you’re living on the Upperr West Side, you’re not middle class–you’re just rich and mental.
A report by the Citizens for Tax Justice estimates that in 2008, “only 3.2 percent of taxpayers will have adjusted gross income (AGI) greater than $200,000 and only 2.1 percent will have AGI over $250,000.”
June 10th, 2008 at 7:09 pmObama will inherit a ultra huge debt from the Shrub and his crime family, I say take all of the Shrubs and his gangs money to help with the debt and have them work it off in orange coveralls……..
June 10th, 2008 at 11:50 pmpbg Says:
There’s plenty of housing just a subway ride away from the Metropolitain Museum of Art that are eminently affordable, on pleasant tree-lined streets. Forest Hills is quite delightful.
PBG, I don’t disagree with you at all.
Firstly, if I lived on the Upper West Side, I’d be saving a lot more money than I am, but I guess I only have myself to blame for that.
Second, I work far too hard and too long, to commute that far in the morning. The last thing I want to do when I leave my office in the middle of summer at 2 am, is wait for a subway train (or take a limo service), 30+ mins to my place where when I need to be back at 8 am. Convenience comes at a price.
I’m not complaining here, all I’m saying is, I work far too hard for my 200k and am already taxed at nearly 50% to support the welfare state (which I believe in), that I can’t afford to spend anymore. At this point, I’d like to have a little more.
And to all those above and you as well (i think, I’m kinda drunk, ok, really drunk), I’m going back to my earlier point, b/c I’ve stayed away from it for far too long. But you know what, I’ve always tested in the top 95% – 99% of any standardized test I’ve taken, and I’m, as ALMOST ALL OF YOU AGREE, in the top 6% of earners in this country. Can you seriously believe that that there is no correlation there?? Are you f-ing kidding me?
All I am saying is, tax me more when I F-ING MAKE MORE!!! Stop taking half of my money when I’m only in my early 20s. That’s the point that all of you have seem to have forgotten. When the day comes (and I surely hope it will) when I make $10+ million a year, you can have half of it. All I am saying is (and as Jay-Z so eloquently put it), CAN I LIVE?
Please, for the love of god, let me enjoy my early years, b/c they’ll soon be gone.
Drunk me, signing off….
June 11th, 2008 at 12:07 amMapleStreet Says:
I $ 200 k isn’t that much, can I look forward to a raise in the minimum wage ?
This is just mean, but you know what, f it:
Maybe if you educate yourself a little more (and yes, right now, it’s on you, so take some f-ing initiative), you’ll earn more than the minimum wage, and won’t have to worry about raising it.
Also, I just re-read my passage from above, and it was pretty damn good for being as drunk as I am.
June 11th, 2008 at 12:21 amThis is where the progressive agenda goes awry….
christopher wiwi Says:
I say a progressive tax for people married or single making less than $75,000 and a flat tax for married or single over $75,000 works for me. I am a blue collar man who can barely afford gas to get to work, here in Detroit we have lousy public transportation,I do the grocery shopping and see the prices go up daily in some instances with fresh friut and veggies.A progressive tax will help people like me who live pay check to pay check.Blue collar America has shouldered the bulk of the tax load for this country since Reaganomics took hold shoved aside the anti- trust laws and his trickle down economics that has kept my wages stagnating for almost 30 years and don`t forget the Glass – Steagal Act which helped get this country into it`s finest mortgage crisis since the depression.old man johnny`s tax cuts for the wealthy will only keep blue collar people and lower income people footing the bill for the rich and powerful and i am sick and tired of it. A vote for the old man is a one vote closer to the POOR HOUSE. Vote for Obama in November.
I am 100% with you and completely understand your situation, as I grew up in similar circumstances in a not to dissimilar area (the Ohio River Valley). I’m not saying I should have a tax break; I know that there are far too many out there that need them more than I. But please, don’t raise them anymore. Save that for my boss, and his boss, and his boss. You know, the ones you read about in the Wall Street Journal.
June 11th, 2008 at 12:38 amIs anyone going to comment or complain that I needed to enroll in more English courses, or perhaps a class in rhetorical writing, during my education? Or has everyone come to the realization that my grasp of this language might be equivalent or maybe, just maybe, even superior than ones own? (I know this is an arrogant rant, or at least the last sentence was, but, goddamn, I can’t help myself. I’m on a roll, and I’m starting to sober up).
June 11th, 2008 at 12:47 amJust in case JMORH might happen upon my idiotic rants: I just read your post 69, and you’re one smart, eloquent, accomplished person, you have the unequivocal respect of an ambitious young man who hopes to accomplish a fraction of what you have.
You sir, said it better than I could ever have, and I too, when I’m home with my parents, still do all of those things that you state in your last paragraph. AND I ENJOY IT!!!!!
June 11th, 2008 at 12:57 am$200k isn’t really all that much, just ask Laura Richardson.
June 11th, 2008 at 12:07 pmMy family makes well in excess of that amount and I can say we’re not rich. We probably live a similar life to many of the others on this thread, we just can afford it.
July 6th, 2008 at 9:21 pmAccording to the 2008 tax brackets, a person with an adjusted gross income of $200,000 will pay over $81,000 in Federal taxes alone. How much more does Obama want?
August 9th, 2008 at 9:26 amJMOHR-
That’s great that your family still does all that stuff themselves. By your comment, do you disapprove of your neighbor’s for hiring folks to do it? I’m sure the folks they hire are happy to have the work and the paycheck. And the idea that when you made more money you would have been happy to pay higher taxes ‘to help out’ is pretty silly. You want to help out? Keep those dollars you’d normally willingly give the wasteful bureaucracy and SPEND it so some other dude can make a living, not wait for a government handout.
August 9th, 2008 at 9:31 amOOPS! Miscalculated, make that over $51,000..still more than enough….
August 9th, 2008 at 9:38 am