Middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less?

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Testify**

It's okay, rich people here don't pay tax either.

**whembly**

Testify wrote:
It's okay, rich people here don't pay tax either.

uh huh... something like the top 25% of earners pays 85% of the taxes..

The real problem is the spending... taxation is small part (if at all) of the problem.

**Mannahnin**

Taxation and spending are both problems. You can't deal with the deficit seriously without addressing both, and dealing with healthcare.

**whembly**

Mannahnin wrote:
Taxation and spending are both problems. You can't deal with the deficit seriously without addressing both, and dealing with healthcare.

Yeah... that's true and it's a complicated issue.

Lowering taxes only won't fix the problem.

**Testify**

whembly wrote:
Testify wrote:
It's okay, rich people here don't pay tax either.

uh huh... something like the top 25% of earners pays 85% of the taxes..

The real problem is the spending... taxation is small part (if at all) of the problem.

The rich pay in tax roughly what their share of the national wealth is. The very very rich rarely pay tax.

Spending is high because of the recession. Given 2007 tax and spending levels, it'd be very easy to balance the budget.

**Jihadin**

Well if we file jointly we're over 220K after taxes. Dang I have to seriously think on voting for Romney now if its less tax for us if he wins.

**Mannahnin**

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/05/24/where-do-you-fall-on-the-income-curve/

Where Do You Fall on the Income Curve?
By CATHERINE RAMPELL

The Tax Policy Center has updated its figures on the income distribution in America, which we’d previously written about in a post about why most rich people don’t feel very rich. They have now crunched income levels for every single percentile, and the numbers refer to 2011 rather than 2010. So I’ve updated my chart on this subject.

The graph below shows how much income is earned by a household at any given percentile in the income distribution, based on these new numbers for 2011:

Incomes grow much, much faster at the top end of the income distribution than in the middle or at the bottom end. That is, the disparity in income between one percentile and a consecutive percentile is bigger among the very rich.

For example, the difference in income between a household at the 50th percentile and a household at the 51st percentile is $1,237 ($42,327 versus $43,564). But the difference in incomes between a household at the 98th percentile and the 99th percentile is $146,118 ($360,435 jumps up to $506,553).

The gaps become even wider at the extreme top of the income ladder: A family at the 99.5th percentile makes $815,868; its neighbor at the 99.9th percentile makes more than double that, at $2,075,574 a year.

In fact much of the rise in inequality over the last few decades has been because of the increasing inequality isolated among the very top members of the income distribution, as America’s wealthiest have pulled further and further away from their slightly less wealthy peers.

(Addendum: “Income” in this case refers to cash income, without energy assistance, imputed corporate income tax liability and the employer’s share of payroll taxes.)

Here are the figures they're drawing the graph from:
http://taxpolicycenter.org/numbers/displayatab.cfm?DocID=2879

**dogma**

Seaward wrote:

Median is not an average.

Yes, median is an average. People use "mean" and "average" interchangeably but "average" actually refers to a host of statistical measures that includes median.

They also generally mean "arithmetic mean" rather than just "mean". Which is unfortunate because a geometric mean is actually more useful when determining what middle class is, because it allows household size to be considered directly.

Seaward wrote:

I'd consider $250K to be upper middle class, myself, depending on cost of living in a given location. Probably goes a lot further in Bozeman, MT than it does in Arlington, VA.

I'll be in the top 8% this year, maybe the top 6% if my training business does well. I also live in Chicago, which has a very high cost of living. I am definitely not middle class though.

That said, I'm also single, which does affect things but I would still say that an average household (2.63 people) earning 200-250k per anum is not middle class; regardless of where that household happens to be. And it certainly isn't middle income.

**d-usa**

Seaward wrote:
Melissia wrote:
jordanis wrote:
if he says he wants to lower taxes on that income bracket who is getting hurt?
That depends on if you want the government to reduce the deficit or not.

For someone that claims that he wants to reduce the federal deficit, Romney's doing everything in his power to increase the federal deficit.

I was under the impression Romney had more or less signed on to Ryan's budget plan.

He signed on to his plan in the usual Romney fashion of "I have a plan, but I'm not going to say what the plan is, just trust me that it is there and it will work."

All Romney has said is that he likes the Ryan plan, but there are areas where they disagree, but the doesn't really know what they are because he hasn't really spend any time comparing them. But he likes the plan, except for the areas where they disagree, which he doesn't know what they are.

**Seaward**

d-usa wrote:

He signed on to his plan in the usual Romney fashion of "I have a plan, but I'm not going to say what the plan is, just trust me that it is there and it will work."

All Romney has said is that he likes the Ryan plan, but there are areas where they disagree, but the doesn't really know what they are because he hasn't really spend any time comparing them. But he likes the plan, except for the areas where they disagree, which he doesn't know what they are.

Well, hell, I apparently fell for exactly what the strategists must have been hoping everyone would fall for, then: "Romney picked Ryan, that must mean he'll use Ryan's budget."

**Melissia**

Ryan doesn't have a working budget, so it'd be hard to use it.

**ShumaGorath**

Seaward wrote:
d-usa wrote:

He signed on to his plan in the usual Romney fashion of "I have a plan, but I'm not going to say what the plan is, just trust me that it is there and it will work."

All Romney has said is that he likes the Ryan plan, but there are areas where they disagree, but the doesn't really know what they are because he hasn't really spend any time comparing them. But he likes the plan, except for the areas where they disagree, which he doesn't know what they are.

Well, hell, I apparently fell for exactly what the strategists must have been hoping everyone would fall for, then: "Romney picked Ryan, that must mean he'll use Ryan's budget."

He tries to imply that he's using Ryans budget but without touching medicare. Problematically, that makes the Ryan budget even less tenable (and it already can't work).

**Seaward**

ShumaGorath wrote:
He tries to imply that he's using Ryans budget but without touching medicare. Problematically, that makes the Ryan budget even less tenable (and it already can't work).

Medicare's become as much a third rail of American politics as social security. Which is a shame, as I believe they're both going to have to go.

**ShumaGorath**

Seaward wrote:
ShumaGorath wrote:
He tries to imply that he's using Ryans budget but without touching medicare. Problematically, that makes the Ryan budget even less tenable (and it already can't work).

Medicare's become as much a third rail of American politics as social security. Which is a shame, as I believe they're both going to have to go.

The entire American healthcare system is unsustainable, it and everything attached to it will eventually collapse or be cut. Obamacare was a bandaid, but without getting off of a system that requires insurance and private practices the costs are going to continue to skyrocket. The system has structural issues that strongly encourage corruption (mostly issues with middlemen between caregivers and patients).

**whembly**

ShumaGorath wrote:
Seaward wrote:
ShumaGorath wrote:
He tries to imply that he's using Ryans budget but without touching medicare. Problematically, that makes the Ryan budget even less tenable (and it already can't work).

Medicare's become as much a third rail of American politics as social security. Which is a shame, as I believe they're both going to have to go.

The entire American healthcare system is unsustainable, it and everything attached to it will eventually collapse or be cut. Obamacare was a bandaid, but without getting off of a system that requires insurance and private practices the costs are going to continue to skyrocket. The system has structural issues that strongly encourage corruption (mostly issues with middlemen between caregivers and patients).

Quick... let's go single-payor!

We're practically there already...

**ShumaGorath**

whembly wrote:
ShumaGorath wrote:
Seaward wrote:
ShumaGorath wrote:
He tries to imply that he's using Ryans budget but without touching medicare. Problematically, that makes the Ryan budget even less tenable (and it already can't work).

Medicare's become as much a third rail of American politics as social security. Which is a shame, as I believe they're both going to have to go.

The entire American healthcare system is unsustainable, it and everything attached to it will eventually collapse or be cut. Obamacare was a bandaid, but without getting off of a system that requires insurance and private practices the costs are going to continue to skyrocket. The system has structural issues that strongly encourage corruption (mostly issues with middlemen between caregivers and patients).

Quick... let's go single-payor!

We're practically there already...

We're not even close, that's why the system is going to destroy itself. Single payer works better in virtually every scenario (and that's how it has played out globally.) Private health insurance has no reason to exist and is purely a profit driven middleman built out of an archaic system of capitol insurance developed hundreds of years ago for factory machines. There is absolutely no reason it should have ever been applied to the American healthcare system and virtually every issue in the American health structure its root in the insurance pay system.

The current medicare crises is a response to massively inflated healthcare costs which are massively inflated largely because the insurance payout system encourages hugely overcharging on care. The entire thing is a cottage industry designed around pulling as much money out of the insurance payer as is possible to make up for the uninsured and it's led to a society that doesn't get treated until health issues become chronic and extremely expensive because preventative care is unafordable under upper middle class.

**whembly**

ShumaGorath wrote:
whembly wrote:
ShumaGorath wrote:
Seaward wrote:
ShumaGorath wrote:
He tries to imply that he's using Ryans budget but without touching medicare. Problematically, that makes the Ryan budget even less tenable (and it already can't work).

Medicare's become as much a third rail of American politics as social security. Which is a shame, as I believe they're both going to have to go.

The entire American healthcare system is unsustainable, it and everything attached to it will eventually collapse or be cut. Obamacare was a bandaid, but without getting off of a system that requires insurance and private practices the costs are going to continue to skyrocket. The system has structural issues that strongly encourage corruption (mostly issues with middlemen between caregivers and patients).

Quick... let's go single-payor!

We're practically there already...

We're not even close, that's why the system is going to destroy itself. Single payer works better in virtually every scenario (and that's how it has played out globally.) Private health insurance has no reason to exist and is purely a profit driven middleman built out of an archaic system of capitol insurance developed hundreds of years ago for factory machines. There is absolutely no reason it should have ever been applied to the American healthcare system and virtually every issue in the American health structure its root in the insurance pay system.

The current medicare crises is a response to massively inflated healthcare costs which are massively inflated largely because the insurance payout system encourages hugely overcharging on care. The entire thing is a cottage industry designed around pulling as much money out of the insurance payer as is possible to make up for the uninsured and it's led to a society that doesn't get treated until health issues become chronic and extremely expensive because preventative care is unafordable under upper middle class.

I was referring to the amount of regulation and money that the govt puts in our current system...

It's possible that same about of effort/energy/$$$ that we put in the current system could fund a single payor system. *shrugs*

**ShumaGorath**

whembly wrote:
ShumaGorath wrote:
whembly wrote:
ShumaGorath wrote:
Seaward wrote:
ShumaGorath wrote:
He tries to imply that he's using Ryans budget but without touching medicare. Problematically, that makes the Ryan budget even less tenable (and it already can't work).

Medicare's become as much a third rail of American politics as social security. Which is a shame, as I believe they're both going to have to go.

The entire American healthcare system is unsustainable, it and everything attached to it will eventually collapse or be cut. Obamacare was a bandaid, but without getting off of a system that requires insurance and private practices the costs are going to continue to skyrocket. The system has structural issues that strongly encourage corruption (mostly issues with middlemen between caregivers and patients).

Quick... let's go single-payor!

We're practically there already...

We're not even close, that's why the system is going to destroy itself. Single payer works better in virtually every scenario (and that's how it has played out globally.) Private health insurance has no reason to exist and is purely a profit driven middleman built out of an archaic system of capitol insurance developed hundreds of years ago for factory machines. There is absolutely no reason it should have ever been applied to the American healthcare system and virtually every issue in the American health structure its root in the insurance pay system.

The current medicare crises is a response to massively inflated healthcare costs which are massively inflated largely because the insurance payout system encourages hugely overcharging on care. The entire thing is a cottage industry designed around pulling as much money out of the insurance payer as is possible to make up for the uninsured and it's led to a society that doesn't get treated until health issues become chronic and extremely expensive because preventative care is unafordable under upper middle class.

I was referring to the amount of regulation and money that the govt puts in our current system...

It's possible that same about of effort/energy/$$$ that we put in the current system could fund a single payor system. *shrugs*

We put fantastically more regulation and money into our system than any single payer system. All of that ludicrous complication that comes with having tens of thousands of different ways to pay in fifty states with their own stupid little laws requires a titanic amount of regulation that doesn't need to exist. Americas system is doing everything wrong in every place and our treatment statistics are falling like a rock while prices fly into the sky because the system is finally collapsing under it's own weight. You can't do healthcare privately anymore, it's just not tenable with modern medicine and the way globalized business works.

**whembly**

ShumaGorath wrote:

We put fantastically more regulation and money into our system than any single payer system. All of that ludicrous complication that comes with having tens of thousands of different ways to pay in fifty states with their own stupid little laws requires a titanic amount of regulation that doesn't need to exist. Americas system is doing everything wrong in every place and our treatment statistics are falling like a rock while prices fly into the sky because the system is finally collapsing under it's own weight. You can't do healthcare privately anymore, it's just not tenable with modern medicine and the way globalized business works.

That is the best summary around dude... kudos.

"I just might have to steal that..."

**AustonT**

Seaward wrote:
dogma wrote:

And he would still be obviously wrong to cite those numbers as relevant to those who draw middle income.

I'd consider $250K to be upper middle class, myself, depending on cost of living in a given location. Probably goes a lot further in Bozeman, MT than it does in Arlington, VA.

Of all the towns. I was going to disagree because I have always thought the cost of living was really high in Bozeman. Then I saw the cost of living in Arlington.

**Jihadin**

Anything near DC is insane high cost of living. Need to live across the bay bridge to make it even worth while.

**rockerbikie**

Wow... how out of touch from reality is Romney?

**AustonT**

rockerbikie wrote:
Wow... how out of touch from reality is Romney?

Roughly equal to an Australian Neo-Nazi I's sure.

**rockerbikie**

AustonT wrote:
rockerbikie wrote:
Wow... how out of touch from reality is Romney?
Roughly equal to an Australian Neo-Nazi I's sure.

I have already stated I am a conservative... I am not a neo-nazi. I have changed... I attented a Jewish Holocaust survivor's lecture in Syndey and I found out how I was... I like Jewish people, I am not a rascist. I want equality for all races but I am suspicous about muslims in my area.

**Jihadin**

I want equality for all races but I am suspicous about muslims in my area

Thats sterotyping because of the extremist. Possible hold over from a previous belief by your comment and Auston comment towards each other. The muslims in your area are more worried about the general population view on them.

**rockerbikie**

Jihadin wrote:
I want equality for all races but I am suspicous about muslims in my area

Thats sterotyping because of the extremist. Possible hold over from a previous belief by your comment and Auston comment towards each other. The muslims in your area are more worried about the general population view on them.

That's not the reason. In my area, there are a lot of Lebonese, Somalian, Yemenese and Turkish Gangs. So I get worried when hearing about Muslims, sure there are good Muslims. Also, many I don't like it how many Muslims in my area refuse prison reform in my area, I don't dislike muslims as a whole, I am just get a bit woried sometimes about the crime levels done by some of their youth.

**Jihadin**

Ahh those type of youngin's. Hell we were all young ourselves. You know what. Take a picture of the stupidity. Xeroz a the pic with a short explanation and put on the Walmart board or whatever you have. Their parents will go freaking bat crap crazy.....and they are a firm believer of house discipline. I thought my team witness a murder when dad beat the ever lovin crap out of his son for throwing a rock at us. Rock on armor sounds like a bullet hitting. We saw dad running up to us waving his arms palm open while we were looking for a shooter. Caught his son behind the wall that 20 meters away and literally spanked with hand first then a switch handed to him by another adult. All we could do was give a thumbs up. Terp later talked to him and we gave him a lidocain cream for his butt.

**rockerbikie**

Jihadin wrote:
Ahh those type of youngin's. Hell we were all young ourselves. You know what. Take a picture of the stupidity. Xeroz a the pic with a short explanation and put on the Walmart board or whatever you have. Their parents will go freaking bat crap crazy.....and they are a firm believer of house discipline. I thought my team witness a murder when dad beat the ever lovin crap out of his son for throwing a rock at us. Rock on armor sounds like a bullet hitting. We saw dad running up to us waving his arms palm open while we were looking for a shooter. Caught his son behind the wall that 20 meters away and literally spanked with hand first then a switch handed to him by another adult. All we could do was give a thumbs up. Terp later talked to him and we gave him a lidocain cream for his butt.

Might have to do that in the future. Thanks the the advice.

**Vulcan**

Immigrant families are really old world in disciplining their kids. If the kids are misbehaving, tell the parents. The parents will put a stop to it posthaste.