Who Are The Super Rich?

Congress adjourned before getting to the Bush tax cuts because it is particularly volatile and these cretins have no spines so they could not take a chance on something that might cost them their jobs. Of course, if they did what their constituents wanted they might actually get reelected.

The Democrats had time for a Comedian to come in and waste time and money but had no time to work on the tax cut issue OR to even pass a budget.

The tax cut issue is contentious not only because of the Democrat definition of rich but also because of their idea that the rich can and should pay more. If you are an individual who makes more than $200,000 or a family that makes more than $250,000 congratulations, you are rich. Even though your largest single expense is likely to be your tax bill, they still want more from you. Even though you are nowhere near rich, they want to treat you as rich to get your money.

One of Obama’s neighbors explains it:

The biggest expense for us is financing government. Last year, my wife and I paid nearly $100,000 in federal and state taxes, not even including sales and other taxes. This amount is so high because we can’t afford fancy accountants and lawyers to help us evade taxes and we are penalized by the tax code because we choose to be married and we both work outside the home. (If my wife and I divorced or were never married, the government would write us a check for tens of thousands of dollars. Talk about perverse incentives.)

The piece is a good read and explains how people in this income bracket are not rich and how they cannot afford to pay more to the government, particularly when government is their single biggest expense.

The Democrats want to tax you to death and they want to run everything. Despite what the moron Robert Shrum says, Democrats will pay for this and will lose at least the House.

People are tired of being abused by government and they are going to make someone pay for this.

Many once safe Democrats are looking at dwindling poll numbers and many surprises could come in November’s election.

And that would be just fine.

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.



Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

20 Responses to “Who Are The Super Rich?”

  1. Darrel says:

    It’s really not that difficult. Perhaps if they draw you a picture and speak to you as if you are in kindergarten.

    D.
    ————–
    Here is the version for grownups.

    Excerpt:

    “The number of people reporting incomes of $200,000 or more but legally paying no federal income taxes skyrocketed in the second Bush term. A decade ago it was fewer than 1,500 taxpayers; in 2000 it was about 2,300. This high-income, tax-free group jumped to more than 11,000 in 2007 and then doubled in 2008 to more than 22,000.

    In 2008 nearly 1 in every 200 high-income taxpayers paid no federal income tax, up from about 1 in 1,500 in 1998.

    The share of high incomes that were untaxed increased more than sevenfold to one dollar of every $166.

    The Statistics of Income data on tax-free, high incomes severely understate economic reality because they exclude deferral accounts, including those of hedge fund managers with billion-dollar incomes who can legally report no current income and borrow against their untaxed gains to live tax free.”

    • Big Dog says:

      How many of the people cited were small business owners whose expenses drew down their taxable income? The fact remains that the people at the top pay far more in taxes than those at the bottom. The bottom use far more government services.

      The idea that a person making 200 or 250k is equivalent to those making billions is laughable. Though I bet the Clinton cronies running these hedge funds (his daughter was involved in them) pay a pretty penny in taxes.

      If you think having 200 or 250k makes you rich then you have no idea what rich is. These people, many small business owners, worked hard for thei money and deserve to keep as much of it as the guy who makes 60k. Let us abolish the income tax system and implement a flat tax or better yet, a consumption tax both of which are capped and cannot be changed without some super majority of Congress. This would let everyone pay either the same amount on income or taxes based on consumption. It would also force Congress to spend within its means.

  2. Mr. Ogre says:

    Jealous much, Darrel?

    • Big Dog says:

      Of course he is Ogre. He is a progressive who thinks he is entitled to the fruits of your labor.

    • Darrel says:

      After the basic necessities and a few extras if you’re so inclined, being “wealthy” or “rich” is a state of mind. I am exceedingly wealthy so being “jealous” has never an issue.

      • Blake says:

        Darrel- I have NEVER gotten a job from a poor man- the trickle down theory of prosperity DOES work- giving people other people’s money HAS NEVER WORKED- what part of that argument do you not understand?
        Should I put it into “Speak and Spell” mode for you?

  3. Adam says:

    “The Democrats had time for a Comedian to come in and waste time and money but had no time to work on the tax cut issue OR to even pass a budget.”

    That was a meeting of the House Judiciary Subcommittee and did not stop anyone from working on other issues, much less the tax cut issue.

    “If you are an individual who makes more than $200,000 or a family that makes more than $250,000 congratulations, you are rich.”

    Of course you’re rich if you make $250,000 or more. You make more money than 98% of Americans. Of course when you’re just around the $250,000 mark you’re not “super rich” as the author and your post title seem to think someone out here thinks but you’re definitely “rich.”

    If the author is right on the edge of the $250,000 line his taxes will hardly go up. It’s not like when you reach the $250,000 mark you just get slammed with a new huge tax bill. We’re talking a few hundred dollars more a month.

    “The piece is a good read and explains how people in this income bracket are not rich and how they cannot afford to pay more to the government, particularly when government is their single biggest expense.”

    No, the article is just a bunch of crying and whining from a guy that already lives too far beyond his means and since he refuses to make tough choices about his money now he can’t stand the idea of getting stuck with a few hundred dollars more in taxes a month in the near future.

    You always rail against this image of the poor as people who have no money because they spend it on cars and TVs and cell phones. Yet, here is a wealthy man that does the same thing and is broke because of it and you give him a pass because the government is going to “abuse” him with slightly higher taxes?

    I have no sympathy for this man or his plight. Instead of waiting for Obama to come by he should go out and see a debt counselor. It’s time to get serious about paying down his debts and freeing up that burden.

    • Big Dog says:

      No, it is a guy who lives within his means as evidenced by his savings and his disposable income each month. What he contends is that he pays 100k to the government (not including other taxes he pays) and that this is his biggest expense. This is a problem when one considers how much money he sends to government and how much he is able to keep. It is very, very wrong. And as he said, if he were single he get money back.

      No, the article is just a bunch of crying and whining from a guy that already lives too far beyond his means and since he refuses to make tough choices about his money now he can’t stand the idea of getting stuck with a few hundred dollars more in taxes a month in the near future.

      A guy who lives within his means is called a whiner but those who spend more than they earn because the “deserve” a house that expensive or because the “deserve” cell phones, cable TV, two cars etc, are victims.

      If you make the money they claim you are not rich. Making more than 98% of the country does not make you rich. But along those lines, the top 1% of earners pay more taxes than the bottom 90%. This guy pays more taxes than most of the earners in this country and your ilk wants to take more of it.

      Explain by what authority you or anyone esle has to decide how much he should pay and explain how he should pay disproportionately more than others?

      Why does his success get punished?

      • Adam says:

        “No, it is a guy who lives within his means…”

        Maybe it’s just me. I don’t consider someone with more than a half million to 1 million dollars in debt
        “living within his means.” He is still spending on cable TV, cellphones, new cars, private schools, house cleaners and lawn care instead of working to pay down that debt. This guy has a serious problem and it goes well beyond a tiny increase in his taxes.

        “Explain by what authority you or anyone else has to decide how much he should pay…”

        I’m not sure what you mean really. I don’t decide. I vote for the folks that are granted the authority to decide the tax rates based on the Constitution of the US. Is that not correct?

        “Why does his success get punished?”

        The better question is why can he not afford a couple hundred extra dollars in taxes a month? The answer is because he can’t afford his current lifestyle, that’s why. I can’t feel sorry for this guy and say oh poor poor man, let’s lower his taxes so he pays less to the federal government and he has more of his own money grow more debt with.

        • Blake says:

          Adam, it is not only the income taxes he pays, but the state taxes, the property taxes, the capital gains taxes, taxes on his investments, city and state taxes on purchases, on and on, ad nauseum- so if you add all those taxes up, we are already being taxed at an exhorbitant amount.
          You need to remember- this is NOT THE GOVERNMENT’S MONEY- this is our money, and the idea of a surplus is ridiculous- the government should have only what it needs to survive, and give the rest of the money back to the people- you know, “tax cuts”?
          You see, the problem is that some people think that the “tax cuts” are a beneficient gesture of goodwill by the government, but it’s kind of like a mugger saying, here- I will give you back some of YOUR money- it really wasn’t his to give.

  4. Big Dog says:

    This guy has an expensive house (no doubt the Chicago market) and he did not have a corrupt friend to pay for it like Obama. Plenty of people have that much debt but live within their means because they can afford their house payments and their bills.

    Who the hell are you to decide this guy can or should pay a few hundred more? He already pays more than most people make in a year in income.

    As for voting for those who run the tax laws under the Constitution, does not that document discuss equal protection. Why is it Constitutional for one person to pay more in taxes than another when we are supposed to receive equal treatment under the laws?

    Would it be OK to send the poor who made bad decisions with their money to jail and let the rich who made bad decisions write off the debt? The 14th Amendment is certainly violated if rich people pay more. They do not get equal protection under the law.

    All you see is a guy who makes good money so he must be evil and deserve to pay more and more. How much is enough for you blood sucking progressives?

    How much will be too much before we end the madness?

    A good start will be in November.

    • Adam says:

      “Plenty of people have that much debt but live within their means because they can afford their house payments and their bills.”

      So under your definition you are living within your means if you can just barely afford the payments on the massive debt you’ve gone into?

      “All you see is a guy who makes good money so he must be evil and deserve to pay more and more. How much is enough for you blood sucking progressives?”

      I didn’t say he was evil. I just think he’s a crybaby. We all want to pay less in taxes. Some of us pay more than others. Big deal. I already pay more than most my age and my income because I’m self-employed, but that’s OK.

      “The 14th Amendment is certainly violated if rich people pay more.”

      No. Progressive tax rates do not violate the Equal Protection clause. There is nothing about equal protection under the law that states we must tax every person an equal percentage.

  5. Adam says:

    “The idea that a person making 200 or 250k is equivalent to those making billions is laughable.”

    Who said they were equivalent anyway?

    “If you think having 200 or 250k makes you rich then you have no idea what rich is. These people, many small business owners, worked hard for their money and deserve to keep as much of it as the guy who makes 60k.”

    There you go again spreading the myth that the 250k people are small business owners. They’re not. You know they’re not. We’ve been over this time and again. The very vast majority of small business owners make less than $200,000 and the biggest chunk of those that do make over that will only see income above $200,000 taxed.

    • Darrel says:

      “the lion’s share of taxable income comes from a small number of wealthy businesses. Out of 34.7 million filers with business income on Schedules C, E or F, 479,000 filers fall into the top two brackets, according to an analysis of projected 2009 filings by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center.

      The other 34.3 million – or 98.6% – would be unaffected…”

      Check out here where McConnell tries to pretend that it would hit 50% of small businesses, which he defines so broadly that it would include Obama… and George Soros. These people are not well. It’s almost as if… White America Has Lost Its Mind

  6. Big Dog says:

    Exceedingly wealthy, that is a good one. The goat business must be a good one.

    Only part of white America lost its mind. The part that voted for Obama out of white guilt.

    You and Adam blather about these so called tax statistics that come from the talking points. The Treasury sees it differently. The vast amount of taxes are paid by the small percentage of wealthy people.

    And Adam, Darrel compared the 200-250k people to billionaires.

    • Adam says:

      “And Adam, Darrel compared the 200-250k people to billionaires.”

      Compared? I can see no place where Darrel said someone making 200k is equivalent to a billionaire.

      • Big Dog says:

        When you are talking about who is rich and you discuss the 200-250k group and then discuss billionaire hedge fund managers, you are comparing the wealth of the two groups.

        • Adam says:

          Notice how you switched from “equivalent” to “comparing” to attack Darrel. There’s nothing wrong with comparing (or contrasting) things. That doesn’t necessarily make them “equivalent” in any way.

          You and your source claim liberals think 200-250k is “super rich” but you’re mistaken. We know the difference. You can’t help but distort what we have to say though because you want to be able to attack us as if we think the rich are evil, an unlimited source for taxing, or in Ogre’s case we’re somehow jealous. It’s silly.

          We’re talking about few percentage points increase in taxes that for most wealthy Americans will mean just a few hundred dollars extra month and for our economy a trillion more in tax revenue over several decades. The only folks that can’t handle such increases are those like your example that aren’t managing their money correctly to start with.

  7. Mr. Ogre says:

    Of course, Adam, that statement about a “few hundred dollars” netting “a trillion more” is simply false. That assumes a zero sum game, which is false, and it assumes that those who are charged more will not change their behavior, which is also completely false. Historically, when tax rates rise, tax revenue does not increase proportionally.

  8. Big Dog says:

    When you compare two items and note their similarities for the purposes of taxing you are saying that they are equal in their extent. They should all be taxed higher because they are rich. They are equal.

    A few percentage points to increase money FROM a person who owns it. See my post (after 4 today) with Jefferson’s words. Where is it fair to take MORE from those who earn more?

    And you claim it is a little amount and will not hurt them. It is also true that it will make no difference to the budget. It is a small amount compared to what is spent.

    Before you talk about forcefully TAKING money from people why don’t you consider cutting spending?