- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: .
Posted on 7/28/20 at 2:42 pm to Taxing Authority
Posted on 7/28/20 at 2:42 pm to Taxing Authority
quote:
The math that says if you're in the top 4% of all income earners you are, in fact, rich, even if Jeff Bezos has a billion dollars.
For starters rich is not math. Middle class is not math either. There is no formal definition of rich or middle class that is accepted by everyone. Rich and middle class are subjective terms and therefore no math can prove you are part of those groups or not.
1
Posted on 7/28/20 at 2:44 pm to wackatimesthree
quote:This simply isn't true. (third column)
it's still true that middle class people pay a higher % of their income.
This post was edited on 7/28/20 at 2:45 pm
Posted on 7/28/20 at 2:45 pm to Taxing Authority
Oh God the tax the rich crowd came out to play lol
Posted on 7/28/20 at 2:47 pm to bod312
quote:Yeah. If you want to use "feelings" in stead of objective numbers, there's no use in having any conversation. Anyone can feel anything about anything.
For starters rich is not math. Middle class is not math either
quote:Nope. You could argue some gray area. But top 4% isn't one of those places.
Rich and middle class are subjective terms
Posted on 7/28/20 at 2:47 pm to wackatimesthree
quote:
And I think it wasn't what you expected because like the vast, vast majority of people who haven't done this for yourself, you are very myopic and it doesn't even occur to you to do something like change your name to become more successful. Instead your conclusion is, "Damn, my name is hard to pronounce, I guess I'm a victim."
You guys are the ones so eager to scream and play the victim.
You just cannot engage with the data and the simple fact that things outside of one's control have direct, material impacts on their outcomes in life. Period.
You are not disproving my point with your "just change your name idiot" meme. It does not change the data.
quote:
You didn't ask anyone to read the article, you listed bullet points and asked for responses to those. I did that.
Good job being pedantic. Real big brained move there.
quote:
There's a dullard around here alright, but it's not me.
Those who are the most confident tend to be the most ignorant. You are fully displaying your ignorant today friend.
Posted on 7/28/20 at 2:51 pm to Taxing Authority
quote:
Thanks for proving my point.
OP is talking about how he and his spouse make over $200K per year and don't feel upper class. Of course there's differences in perceiving what makes someone "upper class."
Posted on 7/28/20 at 2:53 pm to Steadmans Cheddar
quote:You were the one that brought up "income inequalty". Own it.
OP is talking about how he and his spouse make over $200K per year and don't feel upper class. Of course there's differences in perceiving what makes someone "upper class."
Posted on 7/28/20 at 2:54 pm to Taxing Authority
quote:
Yeah. If you want to use "feelings" in stead of objective numbers, there's no use in having any conversation. Anyone can feel anything about anything.
That is the whole point. There is no objective definition of middle class or wealthy or poor or anything. I would argue total assets are much more important than income in any 1 year. Who is more middle class, the OP (income of $200K with just as much in debt and just starting out) or an heir who has $1B in the bank but this year made $0 because the stock market was bad. By using income as the definition the heir would be poor, LOL. Where in the median of household wealth is -$150K ($205K in loans and $50K in assets)? Would that person be considered upper class?
quote:
Nope. You could argue some gray area. But top 4% isn't one of those places.
Top 4% of wealth or top 4% of income? Those are 2 different things. See above point. I can totally see how one feels "middle class" while making a good income early in their career because they have no assets built up yet. If you average $250K a year over the last 20 years, you probably won't feel middle class. If you have only worked 1 year and made $250K and have that much in loans, you sure feel middle class.
edit to add link to net worth %:
Net Worth Percentile Calculator
Takes about $2.8M (including home equity) to be top 4% in US (in 2017). I don't think the OP quite makes the cut considering he looks negative (but we obviously don't have his whole portfolio).
This post was edited on 7/28/20 at 3:03 pm
Posted on 7/28/20 at 2:56 pm to Steadmans Cheddar
quote:
$200K
We make a lot more than that, but again, it’s relative. For someone starting out, all I’m saying is you can’t say “well you have enough”. Maybe at this singular point at the beginning of my journey, no. I’m laid bare and found lacking.
I’m in month 2 of this earning potential. Last year we still paid $45k in taxes. It’s going to be worse this year now that my wife is working fulltime.
In 10 years, I’ll probably be typical person whose income is symptomatic of their wealth. Right now, yeah, I could probably use a cool $2400.00 for my investment portfolio.
Posted on 7/28/20 at 3:02 pm to Taxing Authority
quote:
You were the one that brought up "income inequalty". Own it.
I do own it.
Look at my first post in this thread. Under traditional definition of middle class (25th to 75th) percentile, you're upper class if you're making $53000 per year.
Income inequality has skewed that 75th percentile number lower each year. But, if you want to think of someone as making $53K as upper class, go ahead.
Easy yes or no question: Do you think it's accurate to call someone who makes $53k/year "upper class"?
Posted on 7/28/20 at 3:03 pm to bod312
quote:There is. You don't like it. But there is.
That is the whole point. There is no objective definition of middle class or wealthy or poor or anything.
quote:Anyone can feel poor. That's why rational people use math. Feelings won't fund the government.
I can totally see how one feels "middle class" while making a good income early in their career because they have no assets built up yet.
quote:Muh Feels!! Muh Feels!!
you sure feel middle class
The purpose of the tax code isn't to make anyone feel any particular emotion. If you want emotion-based government... I don't even know what to say.
Posted on 7/28/20 at 3:05 pm to DiamondDog
quote:
We make a lot more than that, but again, it’s relative. For someone starting out, all I’m saying is you can’t say “well you have enough”. Maybe at this singular point at the beginning of my journey, no. I’m laid bare and found lacking
I didn't bring you up to disparage your situation by any means. I think you feel the way a lot of folks do. You've correctly assessed that the strata of folks who earn about in your level but still get the bulk of their income from W-2 wages as opposed to K-1 payments is arguably the most disproportionately taxed group in the country.
Posted on 7/28/20 at 3:08 pm to Steadmans Cheddar
quote:Nope. Median income for 2019 was ~$75k.
Under traditional definition of middle class (25th to 75th) percentile, you're upper class if you're making $53000 per year.
quote:
Income inequality has skewed that 75th percentile number lower each year.
You aren't very good at math are you? Do you know what percentile means? quote:No. Why would someone below the median income be considered middle class. But we aren't talking about soomeone making $53k/yr. We're talking about someone in the top 5%.
Do you think it's accurate to call someone who makes $53k/year "upper class"?
Not sure why you're making up fallacious arguments for people.
This post was edited on 7/28/20 at 3:10 pm
Posted on 7/28/20 at 3:09 pm to Taxing Authority
quote:
There is. You don't like it. But there is.
What is the objective definition of every class based on money? I can find 10 different definitions in a quick google search and none of them offer any guarantee of appropriately defining classes of people in America.
quote:
rational people use math.
What math? Just saying math does not do anything. You have also shown 0 math unless you refer to reading a % off of a chart as math.
Posted on 7/28/20 at 3:11 pm to Taxing Authority
quote:
No. Why would someone below the median income be considered middle class. But we aren't talking about soomeone making $53k/yr. We're talking about someone in the top 5%.
Why would we be using income to define financial health when in reality it many times is not a good indicator of the financial health of a household?
Posted on 7/28/20 at 3:12 pm to bod312
quote:That's nice. If you had 100 people and one person has more income that 95 of the other people, would you call him "average"?
What is the objective definition of every class based on money? I can find 10 different definitions in a quick google search and none of them offer any guarantee of appropriately defining classes of people in America.
It's like calling an "A" student "average".
quote:See above. If you consider top 5% "avearge"... I'm not going to be able to help you. I can explain it to you (and have), but I can't understand it for you.
What math?
Posted on 7/28/20 at 3:13 pm to Taxing Authority
When did anyone say you have to be average to be in the middle class? The OP didn't call himself average or say he is at the median income level.
Posted on 7/28/20 at 3:15 pm to bod312
quote:
What is the objective definition of every class based on money? I can find 10 different definitions in a quick google search and none of them offer any guarantee of appropriately defining classes of people in America.
I think we can all agree that $200K income, which is top 5% in the country, is not "middle class" by any stretch and most certainly not in Lake Charles of all places.
Again, why do some many of your very well off folks want to be victims so damn bad?
Posted on 7/28/20 at 3:15 pm to bod312
quote:Who used to define financial health? I've already been over that. One can be financially unhealthy at any income level.
Why would we be using income to define financial health when in reality it many times is not a good indicator of the financial health of a household?
But we were talking about taxes. We don't tax "financial health". Nor could we. As noted it's a completely subjective measure.
Posted on 7/28/20 at 3:16 pm to bod312
quote:
When did anyone say you have to be average to be in the middle class?
You don't. Never said that. Top 5% isn't "average" by any objective measure, tho. 
Page 9 of 13
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News