Rstanley0312 1 #1 May 5, 2009 http://money.cnn.com/2009/05/04/news/economy/colvin_rich.fortune/index.htm?postversion=2009050512 Thoughts?Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it. Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000 www.fundraiseadventure.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #2 May 5, 2009 Quotehttp://money.cnn.com/2009/05/04/news/economy/colvin_rich.fortune/index.htm?postversion=2009050512 I'm in the demographic group in question. I live in a fairly run of the mill old house. It was built in the 1930's, and sits in a mixed neighborhood where about half the houses are single family and the other half are multi-family (either converted old houses or small apartment buildings where the old houses were torn down). The lots are small, which is typical for a city neighborhood like this. We have two bathrooms and 3 bedrooms--about 2500 square feet of living space. Our upstairs bathroom has an old clawfoot tub that's probably been there since the house was built, but no shower. The downstairs bathroom, where we shower, has a door that doesn't latch (it's a converted butler's pantry) and is a touch under 30 square feet (our shower is a two and a half foot square). My wife works a lot. She typically puts in about 60 or 65 hours a week, but is on call every weeknight, and some weekends. I run my own small business. I typically work between 8 and 12 (16 hour) days a month, with maybe 4 more total days of other administrative work spread around the rest of my month (crammed into spare moments, more accurately). In a good year, I make about a fifth of what my wife does. But I'm able to take care of the kids most of the time, so we save on childcare expenses. We don't belong to the country club (the YMCA is more our speed). We don't have new, fancy cars (our fanciest is our 5 year old Mini Cooper, the other one is an 8 year old Nissan Xterra). My kids don't go to a fancy private school (I think home schooling is probably going to be our best option, given the relative lack of quality in our local public schools), and they mostly wear clothes handed down to them by their cousins. According to the president, we're "rich" and need to pay more taxes. I sure don't feel rich.-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rstanley0312 1 #3 May 5, 2009 I am in the same group in question...... I really wonder why more do not comment on this. In particular those who think what Obama is doing is wonderful....... this article is well written and accurate to what is happening. Well Tom..... I guess "rich" just isn't what it used to be.Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it. Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000 www.fundraiseadventure.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #4 May 5, 2009 Quote I guess "rich" just isn't what it used to be. Everyone can (and will) be rich ... just as soon as we change the definition. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rstanley0312 1 #5 May 5, 2009 ...... niceLife is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it. Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000 www.fundraiseadventure.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skinnay 0 #6 May 5, 2009 Is it a major shock that people will exhaust their financial resources no matter how much they make? Of course the 250k group may not be "rich", but they have more options to sacrifice than households making 40k. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
alge 0 #7 May 5, 2009 Regardless of the economic climate and how you define the word "rich", I'm sure that the 5% highest income households could pay more than 22.8% of their adjusted income in taxes. Of course, the wholes used by "super-rich" should be fixed, as well. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Capt.Slog 0 #8 May 5, 2009 QuoteIs it a major shock that people will exhaust their financial resources no matter how much they make? Of course the 250k group may not be "rich", but they have more options to sacrifice than households making 40k. And fewer options than the "super rich", who appear to be paying at a lower rate. According to the article" "In 2006, the most recent year for which information is available, the average tax rate for the working rich was 22.8% - that is, after all was said and done, they ended up paying 22.8% of their adjusted gross income in income tax. The floor for being in the top 1% was an income of $388,806. That same year the average tax rate paid by the super-rich - the 400 filers with the highest incomes - was only 17.2%." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #9 May 5, 2009 QuoteQuoteIs it a major shock that people will exhaust their financial resources no matter how much they make? Of course the 250k group may not be "rich", but they have more options to sacrifice than households making 40k. And fewer options than the "super rich", who appear to be paying at a lower rate. According to the article" "In 2006, the most recent year for which information is available, the average tax rate for the working rich was 22.8% - that is, after all was said and done, they ended up paying 22.8% of their adjusted gross income in income tax. The floor for being in the top 1% was an income of $388,806. That same year the average tax rate paid by the super-rich - the 400 filers with the highest incomes - was only 17.2%." Quotelets talk $s how much did the super rich pay and how much did the working rich pay? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rstanley0312 1 #10 May 5, 2009 QuoteRegardless of the economic climate and how you define the word "rich", I'm sure that the 5% highest income households could pay more than 22.8% of their adjusted income in taxes. Of course, the wholes used by "super-rich" should be fixed, as well. That's the point though..... why do I have to? What gives anyone the right to take away from my family or future family especially when I am not living the high life by any means. I really do not get how that makes sense to anybody.Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it. Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000 www.fundraiseadventure.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #11 May 5, 2009 QuoteWhat gives anyone the right to take away from my family or future family … The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #12 May 5, 2009 You gave the government the right - by voting, didn't you? Who should pay for the running of the country, it's wars, it's research, it's shared amenities .... etc.... ? (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #13 May 5, 2009 QuoteI am not living the high life by any means. [Jedi Mind Trick]You are living the high life.[/Jedi Mind Trick]"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rstanley0312 1 #14 May 5, 2009 Ok really? Ya I know there are taxes and am not against them but I am against how much I get taxed and how many do NOT get taxed at all! Keep thinking that it makes things okay but the truth is those with the money will just take it elsewhere along with the jobs..... oh what a fun place the US will be then What did I just hear..... oh wait..... apparently I was wrong..... I am living the high life right now... I'm rich... you are right Butters Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it. Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000 www.fundraiseadventure.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #15 May 5, 2009 You wanted to know the source of the authority; I offered the source. Whether or not you agree with the Congress is something you ultimately must decide with your vote (or emigration).Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,998 #16 May 5, 2009 >Ok really? Ya I know there are taxes and am not against them but I am >against how much I get taxed and how many do NOT get taxed at all! The most equitable way to divide taxes would be to have everyone pay exactly the same amount. That would come to about $42,000 per taxpayer. Would you prefer this "more fair" tax? >but the truth is those with the money will just take it elsewhere along with >the jobs.... And you are free to move to these places, places that do not have all these expensive militaries, CDC's, highway systems, NTSB's etc. And that way you won't have to pay for them! Cool, ain't it? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #17 May 5, 2009 I appreciate your viewpoint, I really do. I also know that I'm going to get labeled as a limp-wristed pinko liberal elitist for writing what's below. Oh well, here goes anyway. Saying that you are not living the high life when you make over $250k is a little disengenuous. If by "the high life" you mean flying in private jets and dating Playboy bunnies, then no, you are probably not. But for most people in the world, income at your level is absolutely incredible (in the dictionary definition sense of the word). For that matter, disposable income at the level that we skydivers enjoy ($25 for a couple minutes entertainment) is beyond most people's wildest dreams. There are people in the shittiest parts of the world that would quite literally kill for $100. I'm not advocating that Americans lower our standard of living to match those experienced in Burkina Faso by any means. I make good money and I enjoy the benefits that offers. I just think that a little perspective doesn't hurt either. Please flame away, I can take it. - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #18 May 5, 2009 Quote What did I just hear..... oh wait..... apparently I was wrong..... I am living the high life right now... I'm rich... you are right Butters I'm glad you realized that ... I was about to use the Obama Mind Trick. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #19 May 5, 2009 QuoteRegardless of the economic climate and how you define the word "rich", I'm sure that the 5% highest income households could pay more than 22.8% of their adjusted income in taxes. Of course, the wholes used by "super-rich" should be fixed, as well. Top 5% numbers (CBO, 2006 data) Effective tax rate: 29% Share of tax liabilities: 44.7% How much more do you think they *should* be paying, since they already foot almost HALF the bill?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #20 May 5, 2009 QuoteQuoteIs it a major shock that people will exhaust their financial resources no matter how much they make? Of course the 250k group may not be "rich", but they have more options to sacrifice than households making 40k. And fewer options than the "super rich", who appear to be paying at a lower rate. According to the article" "In 2006, the most recent year for which information is available, the average tax rate for the working rich was 22.8% - that is, after all was said and done, they ended up paying 22.8% of their adjusted gross income in income tax. The floor for being in the top 1% was an income of $388,806. That same year the average tax rate paid by the super-rich - the 400 filers with the highest incomes - was only 17.2%." Someone's info is bogus. Again, 2006 CBO info (top 1%) All Federal taxes: 31% Share of tax liability: 28.3% Number of households: 1.1 milMike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rstanley0312 1 #21 May 5, 2009 Quote>Ok really? Ya I know there are taxes and am not against them but I am >against how much I get taxed and how many do NOT get taxed at all! The most equitable way to divide taxes would be to have everyone pay exactly the same amount. That would come to about $42,000 per taxpayer. Would you prefer this "more fair" tax? >but the truth is those with the money will just take it elsewhere along with >the jobs.... And you are free to move to these places, places that do not have all these expensive militaries, CDC's, highway systems, NTSB's etc. And that way you won't have to pay for them! Cool, ain't it? I didn't say they would take themselves elsewhere I said they would take their money and jobs elsewhere!Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it. Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000 www.fundraiseadventure.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rstanley0312 1 #22 May 5, 2009 QuoteI appreciate your viewpoint, I really do. I also know that I'm going to get labeled as a limp-wristed pinko liberal elitist for writing what's below. Oh well, here goes anyway. Saying that you are not living the high life when you make over $250k is a little disengenuous. If by "the high life" you mean flying in private jets and dating Playboy bunnies, then no, you are probably not. But for most people in the world, income at your level is absolutely incredible (in the dictionary definition sense of the word). For that matter, disposable income at the level that we skydivers enjoy ($25 for a couple minutes entertainment) is beyond most people's wildest dreams. There are people in the shittiest parts of the world that would quite literally kill for $100. I'm not advocating that Americans lower our standard of living to match those experienced in Burkina Faso by any means. I make good money and I enjoy the benefits that offers. I just think that a little perspective doesn't hurt either. Please flame away, I can take it. Dan... I'm not mad at you and perspective is good! I know I am blessed and fortunate but I do get upset when things are deealt with the way they are as for Bill saying a tax of 42k to everyone.... I would love it! After all that's fair right? I am not opposed to helping those less fortunate... I do with my time and money on a regular basis and believe every person should but when it is taken and used poorly and lost in government... I hate it!Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it. Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000 www.fundraiseadventure.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #23 May 5, 2009 QuoteSomeone's info is bogus. Looks more like similar numbers are being analyzed in order to obtain different information.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,998 #24 May 5, 2009 >I didn't say they would take themselves elsewhere I said they would take >their money and jobs elsewhere! Fair enough! So I guess it's safe to say that they are fine with their _own_ taxes, then - and we should be reducing taxes on the jobs (i.e. the lower level employees) instead. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #25 May 5, 2009 QuoteQuoteSomeone's info is bogus. Looks more like similar numbers are being analyzed in order to obtain different information. Disagree - let's look at the article again: If all that those politicians mean by "rich" is the small portion of the population at the top of the economic heap, then households making over $250,000 is a fair definition: Only about 5% of U.S. households have annual incomes over $200,000. Incorrect. From CBO, 2006 info: Top 1%: Average Pre-tax income: $1,743,700 Top 5%: Average Pre-tax income: $564,200 Top 10% Average Pre-tax income: $366,400 Top Quintile: Average Pre-tax income: $248,400 So, we've got at least/b] 20% that are above the $200k that the article claims as being "working rich", not 5%. Back to the article: In 2006, the most recent year for which information is available, the average tax rate for the working rich was 22.8% - that is, after all was said and done, they ended up paying 22.8% of their adjusted gross income in income tax. Using their $200k number, the closest match is the top quintile. Effective tax rate: 25.8% (not 22.8 as claimed) Tax liability share: 69.3% Number of households: 23.6 million Back to the article: The floor for being in the top 1% was an income of $388,806. Actually, the floor for the top 1% (minimum adjusted income) was $332,300, so they're looking at a smaller fraction - how much smaller is impossible to say. That same year the average tax rate paid by the super-rich - the 400 filers with the highest incomes - was only 17.2%. As I said above, this very well *may* be possible, but is impossible to verify with the CBO data. The way the article is written, they make it look like only 400 people/families comprise the top 1%. Top 1% CBO data, 2006: Federal tax rate: 31.2% Tax liability share: 28.3% Number of households: 1.1 million Adding in 2006 census info, and you have 1% of all households paying 28% of the tax burden. If you drop down to the top quintile to match the article's $200k/year claim as closely as possible, and you have 23% of all households paying 69% of the tax burden.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
