Hey Biden, $250,000/year is NOT rich, you jackass, nor is it "fair" to tax them at 60%. I obviously want to say so much more about this, but I cannot type and I have 3 papers due Tuesday.
I think it definitely depends on where you live. Try living in NJ on less than 6 figures. My parents did it for years, barely getting by, nearly losing everything, having nothing, and cashing in everything, which is why they still have to work at 66 and 62. With the highest property taxes in the US + highest car insurance rates in the US + second-highest sales tax in nation + nation's highest cigarette tax + state/local tax burden that is the highest in the country, you cannot live comfortably in NJ making less than 6 figures.
Besides, all this aside, what is wrong with working hard and becoming rich?
Don't get me wrong; I am ghetto poor. I have some nice things, but I make less than $12K/year. The most I've made was as a teacher, and I made around $36K. Even if I finish a PhD, the chances of me getting a job, much less making a ton of money, are slim. Are there overpaid folks in the US? Absolutely. I just know how hard my brother and sister-in-law (who probably do reach the $250K threshold) work and have worked, as well as my parents (who probably don't reach the $250K threshold, but might), and I feel it's wrong to punish their hard work and success by forcing them to work for the government for free 60% of their work week. My family has worked long and hard without help to get what they have. The fair and patriotic thing is to let them enjoy the fruits of their labor.
$250,000 a year is more than I'll ever see, more than my parents ever saw combined, more money than anyone I ever knew made in a year. I'd say that's pretty wealthy.
so, b/c you and your parents never saw that money, it's fair to take (using Biden's terminology) money that people work hard to earn and give it to people who can't, for whatever reason, make that money? Bullshit.
You know I like and respect you, but I really disagree.
To be fair, I didn't argue Biden's point about taxing at 60%. I am not as skilled in economics to know what's appropriate. There is nothing wrong with working hard and getting a lot of money for it, but as a child of teachers who barely eked by on 2.5 salaries, I'm not too sympathetic for the plight of those who make boatloads of cash on pursuits that aren't in civil service and the like. Not when I see my parents struggling after a lifetime of hard work themselves.
I stand by my original point that $250,000 IS "rich".
I like and respect you too and I admire your passion.
My maternal grandparents were both teachers, as was my father. You know already that I was one, too. I respect and love the profession. My father switched careers (long, trauma-drama story) to give my brother and me a better life. Instead, they sacrificed, barely got by, nearly lost everything, had nothing, and cashed in everything, which is why they still have to work at 66 and 62. My mom worked 7 years literally shoveling shit in a pet store just to make ends meet. Now, after 20 years of struggling, they have some money and property, but, again, my parents worked for it all
( ... )
I find it interesting to hear different viewpoints on what threshold defines "rich." The wife and I together make just shy of $100,000 a year. To some of my friends, that's upper middle-class. To some of my other friends, that's very much working class.
I totally agree that geography plays a big part in defining what rich is. There's absolutely no way I could live in the northeast (or afford to try) and I can't figure out why more people aren't moving out of New Jersey. The tax burden is ridiculous.
Personally, I dig on a flat tax... but that's just me.
I think anything over or approaching $100,000 is rich, but I am was born and raised in poverty on a little Indian Reserve. People who think that much makes you rich aren't necessarily stupid.
Comments 8
(The comment has been removed)
Besides, all this aside, what is wrong with working hard and becoming rich?
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
Reply
You know I like and respect you, but I really disagree.
Reply
I stand by my original point that $250,000 IS "rich".
I like and respect you too and I admire your passion.
Reply
Reply
I totally agree that geography plays a big part in defining what rich is. There's absolutely no way I could live in the northeast (or afford to try) and I can't figure out why more people aren't moving out of New Jersey. The tax burden is ridiculous.
Personally, I dig on a flat tax... but that's just me.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment