114
   

Where is the US economy headed?

 
 
realjohnboy
 
  0  
Reply Wed 20 Apr, 2011 07:12 pm
@LionTamerX,
Hey, good to see you hanging around, LTX. You kind of went missing for awhile.
LionTamerX
 
  0  
Reply Wed 20 Apr, 2011 07:26 pm
@realjohnboy,
Quote:
Hey, good to see you hanging around, LTX. You kind of went missing for awhile.


I did ? I guess I must have missed that. Thanks though, and always good to see you hanging around as well.
roger
 
  0  
Reply Wed 20 Apr, 2011 07:29 pm
@LionTamerX,
Un huh. I guess you missed that. Glad you found us again.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  0  
Reply Wed 20 Apr, 2011 07:29 pm
From Salon:


The New York Times’ Economix blog makes an important and interesting point: "Rich people don’t realize they’re rich."

Pointing to what she dubs "the Middle Kingdom" effect, Catherine Rampell illustrates that most upper-income earners (the 6 percent of Americans in households earning over $250,000) do not see themselves as being part of the upper-income bracket.

The latest example is evident in a recent Gallup study, which found that 6 percent of Americans in households earning over $250,000 a year think their taxes are "too low." Of that same group, 26 percent said their taxes were "about right," and a whopping 67 percent said their taxes were "too high."

And yet when this same group of high earners was asked whether "upper-income people" paid their fair share in taxes, 30 percent said "upper-income people" paid too little, 30 percent said it was a "fair share," and 38 percent said it was "too much."

The numbers don’t add up, illustrating a glaring disconnect between how the wealthy consider their incomes relative to other Americans and the reality of their comparable wealth.

And Rampell notes one of the most problematic effects of the "Middle Kingdom" phenomenon:

As a result, people who are rich but not the richest -- in the $250,000 zone, say -- see they have more than lots of poor people, but also much less than a few very visibly rich people. Then they conclude they’re in the middle, so they must be middle class.

As a result, many Americans are misinformed about how reliant the country is on their tax contributions, and what kinds of additional sacrifices they might have to make to help get the nation’s fiscal house in order.
roger
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 20 Apr, 2011 07:35 pm
@plainoldme,
$250,000 is more or less upper middle.
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Apr, 2011 07:36 pm
@roger,
Quote:
the 6 percent of Americans in households earning over $250,000) do not see themselves as being part of the upper-income bracket.
roger
 
  0  
Reply Wed 20 Apr, 2011 07:56 pm
@plainoldme,
Huh? Why did you quote that?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Apr, 2011 08:09 pm
@plainoldme,
I would be surprised if any income group that has to pay taxes say it's too low.

Most complain it's too high; that's only a rational reaction to anybody who pays taxes. The only people who claim they can pay more in taxes are the very wealthy people like Bill Gates and Warren Buffett. They "want" to pay more in taxes, because they understand that the middle class are unable to pay more, and they also understand that increasing the national debt is bad for our country as a whole.
Irishk
 
  4  
Reply Wed 20 Apr, 2011 08:41 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Who wouldn't want to pay more in taxes? The government spends it so wisely.
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Apr, 2011 09:01 pm
@Irishk,
Laughing
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Apr, 2011 09:13 pm
@Irishk,
I love the fact that Obama has no problem using multi-thousand dollar bombs in a war we don't belong in while our children do with less teachers and supplies. That's real wise spending of our money; our roads are already so bad, they either fill it with temporary tar, or just leave all those pot holes. Who needs terrorists to attack our country? We're destroying it by implosion.
0 Replies
 
RABEL222
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Apr, 2011 09:34 pm
@H2O MAN,
No, that would be Bush.
H2O MAN
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 21 Apr, 2011 04:14 am
@RABEL222,


Proving once again that you are unable to conjure up an original thought... you are stuck on stupid.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Apr, 2011 08:09 am
@roger,
roger wrote:

$250,000 is more or less upper middle.


250k a year is not 'upper middle.' It is rich by any definition. At that rate of pay it is possible to amass a great deal of savings in just a decade, if you live within your means.

Cycloptichorn
H2O MAN
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 21 Apr, 2011 08:16 am
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:


250k a year is not 'upper middle.' It is rich by any definition.


That's pure unadulterated liberal progressive bullshit!

A couple earning $250K per year is NOT RICH... NOT EVEN CLOSE.
RABEL222
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Apr, 2011 09:17 am
@H2O MAN,
And dumb **** calls me stupid! I would post proof that 250 grand a year is in the rich catagory but it would only go over your head.
okie
 
  0  
Reply Thu 21 Apr, 2011 09:22 am
@H2O MAN,
H2O MAN wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
250k a year is not 'upper middle.' It is rich by any definition.

That's pure unadulterated liberal progressive bullshit!
A couple earning $250K per year is NOT RICH... NOT EVEN CLOSE.
If a couple started with nothing and then earned $250,000 per year, even if they spent none of it, which would of course be impossible, it would take them 4 thousand years to become billionaires counting their money together. I don't know anyone that has ever lived 4,000 years.
Cycloptichorn
 
  2  
Reply Thu 21 Apr, 2011 09:23 am
@RABEL222,
RABEL222 wrote:

And dumb **** calls me stupid! I would post proof that 250 grand a year is in the rich catagory but it would only go over your head.


You have nothing to prove to him, Rabel.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Apr, 2011 09:25 am
@okie,
okie wrote:

H2O MAN wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
250k a year is not 'upper middle.' It is rich by any definition.

That's pure unadulterated liberal progressive bullshit!
A couple earning $250K per year is NOT RICH... NOT EVEN CLOSE.
If a couple started with nothing and then earned $250,000 per year, even if they spent none of it, which would of course be impossible, it would take them 4 thousand years to become billionaires counting their money together. I don't know anyone that has ever lived 4,000 years.


Who gives a **** about being a billionaire?

You have no clue what 'wealthy' or 'rich' even mean, if you think measurements like that are what matter.

I should also point out that for couples, the top tax brackets - 'rich folks,' as defined by our system - start at 373k, not 250k.

Cycloptichorn
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Apr, 2011 09:28 am
@Cycloptichorn,
okie wants them to become billionaires while our deficit grows so that their children and grandchildren will be paying on that debt for the rest of their lives.

It only makes sense to conservatives, because even Facebook CEO told Obama yesterday at the town hall meeting that he'd be happy to pay more in taxes - and he's already a billionaire.

 

Related Topics

The States Need Help - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fiscal Cliff - Question by JPB
Let GM go Bankrupt - Discussion by Woiyo9
Sovereign debt - Question by JohnJD
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.12 seconds on 02/08/2025 at 09:54:03