Originally Posted By: AP a.k.a. Kaiser D
Originally Posted By: docspud
For anyone here that thinks that 250K is rich, its not.


The only thing more ridiculous than that claim is for people to whine about the "fact".

Anyone making 250k a year that isn't rich (or, more accurately, wealthy) within a few years has a problem. I feel like I have a fairly high standard of living and I'm not ANYWHERE close to that number.

Less than 3% of people in the U.S. make more than $250k/year. If the top 3% isn't considered "rich", then where do you draw that line?

-AP


I am pretty sure that the majority who cry that $250,000 is not a good definition of wealthy will never see a year that good. And what’s so wrong with taxing them at the same level Clinton did, which BTW was a ton lower than we saw from 1950 - 1995. As I recall we prospered pretty well in that period. Under the "repressive" Clinton tax policy we did very well. How much better did we do after Bush cut taxes for his cronies? Oh yeah, we dove in the toilet under Bush. Yeah, let’s keep that up.

The Bush cuts coupled with two wars DID dramatically increase deficit spending. Now his ball washers say they are concerned about our growing debt. Where were they when Bush was spending and borrowing?


Edited by Dave Vedder (12/07/10 06:09 PM)
_________________________
No huevos no pollo.